Bioresource Technology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biortech
Dipartimento di Scienze degli Alimenti, University of Teramo, 64023 Mosciano S. Angelo, Teramo, Italy
Dipartimento di Chimica, Ingegneria Chimica e Materiali, University of LAquila, Via Campo di Pile Ex Optimes, 67100 LAquila, Italy
LCME EA4164, University of Metz UFR SciFA, 1 Bd Arago, 57078 Metz Cedex 3, France
d
Pall Filtersystems GmbH, Werk Schumacher, D-74564 Crailsheim, Germany
b
c
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 19 January 2010
Received in revised form 30 March 2010
Accepted 31 March 2010
Available online 21 April 2010
Keywords:
Biomass gasication
Ni catalyst
Ceramic lter candles
Fluidized-bed
Tar analysis
a b s t r a c t
A bench-scale uidized-bed biomass gasication plant, operating at atmospheric pressure and temperature within the range 800820 C, has been used to test an innovative gas cleaning device: a catalytic lter candle tted into the bed freeboard. This housing of the gas conditioning system within the gasier
itself results in a very compact unit and greatly reduced thermal losses. Long term (22 h) tests were performed on the gasier both with and without the catalytic candle lter, under otherwise identical conditions. Analysis of the product gas for the two cases showed the catalytic ltration to give rise to
notable improvements in both gas quality and gas yield: an increase in hydrogen yield of 130% and an
overall increase in gas yield of 69% with corresponding decreases in methane and tar content of 20%
and 79%, respectively. HPLC/UV analysis was used to characterize the tar compounds.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The anticipated increase of fossil fuel prices and in particular
the perceived threat to the environment brought about by the
accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has resulted
in a fundamental review of energy policies over the last decade.
The great potential of biomass as a renewable and CO2 neutral
feedstock for energy production is now universally recognized.
Gasication is a technically mature thermal conversion process
for the production of combustible gases from solid fuels. Syngas
obtained in this way, appropriately conditioned and upgraded,
may be used for electricity generation by means of internal combustion engines, gas turbines, and (in the near future) fuel cells,
and also for the production of synthetic bio-fuels. Industrial plant
simplication and intensication could play an important role in
biomass applications in general and in particular in increasing
the feasibility of gasication processes.
Biomass steam gasication as a source of hydrogen and other
valuable gases provides a convenient energy vector for a wide
range of applications. The use of steam as a gasication agent gives
rise to an increase in fuel gas product yield as a result of reductions
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0861266893; fax: +39 0861266915.
E-mail address: srapagna@unite.it (S. Rapagn).
0960-8524/$ - see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2010.03.139
in both tar and char brought about by the steam reforming processes (Rapagn et al., 2000). Hydrogen and carbon monoxide
and a signicant amount of methane, carbon dioxide, steam and
nitrogen are always present in the producer gas, together with organic (tar) and inorganic (H2S, HCl, NH3, and alkali metals) impurities and particulates. The organic impurities comprise a range of
low to high molecular weight hydrocarbons which condense under
ambient conditions. They are known collectively as tar (Li and
Suzuki, 2009). Tar deposits can block gas coolers, engine suction
channels and also interfere with the performance of catalysts used
in the production of synthetic bio-fuels. In all cases, the presence of
tar means lower gas yields (Bangala et al., 1997). The product content of these undesirable contaminants can be reduced by careful
control of the operating conditions (temperature, biomass heating
rate, etc.), appropriate reactor design and suitable gas conditioning
systems (Van Paasen and Kiel, 2004). Characterization and quantication of tar produced during a gasication process enables an
assessment to be made of the relative ease or difculty of destroying it (Corella et al., 2002). Classication of tar under ve group
headings based on its solubility and condensability rather than
reactivity has been proposed by Devi et al. (2005).
Fixed bed gasiers have been traditionally employed for smallscale energy production. Operated under downdraft conditions
these can give rise to a relatively low tar content in the product
7124
7125
Fig. 1. Scheme of the uidized-bed gasier with a catalytic lter candle in its freeboard (A). Main constituent parts and dimensions of the catalytic ceramic lter (B).
Schematic view of the whole experimental rig (C).
Table 1
Biomass proximate and ultimate analysis.
Proximate analysis
% wt./wt. (as received)
Dry matter
Ash
Volatile matter
Fixed carbon
Elemental composition
% wt./wt. (dried at 105 C)
92.3
1.1
71.7
19.5
C
H
N
O
Cl
S
48.9
6.2
0.18
43.5
0.029
0.026
even in presence of 100 ppmv of H2S, suggesting that this contaminant does not cause irreversible deactivation of the catalyst in the
lter candle (Nacken et al., 2009).
The Ni catalyst used in the present application was lled into
the hollow-cylindrical space of a 398 mm long thermo-shock resistant silicon carbide (SiC) based hot gas lter element of 60 mm
outer diameter and 40 mm inner diameter and a porous inner tube
of 20 mm outer diameter closed with a perforated ceramic cup at
the bottom of the lter element (Fig. 1B). The perforated ceramic
cup itself is sticked onto a dense cylinder as bottom end of the lter
element. After catalyst lling the upper end of the lter element
was closed with a second perforated ceramic cup. Additionally, a
standard hot gas lter candle head was sticked onto the upper
7126
Table 2
Gasication operating conditions.
Gasication test number
II
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
60
8.0
11.2
8.50
No
90
9.0
12.0
8.44
Yes
56
9.0
12.0
8.96
Yes
120
6.0
11.2
6.60
Yes
120
6.0
12.0
6.33
Yes
160
4.5
9.0
3.82
Yes
120
5.5
6.0
6.20
Yes
180
6.0
5.0
6.18
Yes
240
6.0
5.0
5.99
Yes
230
6.0
5.4
5.96
Yes
was kept below 800 C by diluting the air with nitrogen where necessary. Periodic thermal regeneration by coke combustion of the
catalytic lter candle is only applied in this validation test rig.
For the large-scale application, efcient back-pulsing is foreseen
for dust cake removal.
2.4. Determination of tar content by Total Organic Carbon analysis
The condensate fraction recovered in the Erlenmeyer asks at
the end of each gasication run was weighted and the tar content
estimated by measurement of the Total Organic Carbon (TOC),
using naphthalene as the key component. This was done on a representative sample that was rst ltered, using a 0.45 lm pore
sizes lter, and then diluted with high purity distilled water. The
TOC content was measured by injecting the sample in a Shimadzu
TOC-VCPN Total Organic Carbon analyzer, operating the complete
catalytic oxidation at 680 C.
2.5. Characterization and quantitative analysis of tars by HPLC/UV
The samples recovered in accord with technical specication
CEN/TS 15439 were used to characterize the aromatic tar components. About 1 ml of the tar samples were diluted 10 times with
2-propanol HPLC gradient grade (Fisher Scientic, Loughborough,
Leicestershire, UK) and centrifuged for 10 min at 2000 rpm. The
20 ll of the samples were then injected in a HPLC apparatus (Hitachi Elite LaChrom L-2130). The system was equipped with an
UV-detector (Hitachi UV-detector L2400) set at 254 nm. The column used to permit the chromatographic separation of the tar fraction was a reversed phase C18, 150 4.6 mm (Alltech Apollo C18
5 lm), protected with a guard column.
A gradient elution was carried out using methanol (Fisher Scientic, Loughborough, Leicestershire, UK) and water as mobile
phase, at a ow rate of 1 ml/min; pure standard compounds were
used in order to characterize the tar aromatic prole (Rapagn
et al., 2010).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Gasication tests
The results of ten gasication runs are reported. Measurements
with (tests IIX) and without (test I) the catalytically active lter
candle in the gasier were performed; tests with the lter candle
were carried out consecutively in order to evaluate the catalyst
performance as a function of time. Altogether, the catalytic lter
candle was subjected to the gasication conditions for a total of
22 h. No damage to the candle and its ttings were found to have
occurred at the end of the trials.
The signicant parameters for each test, such as temperature,
gas yield, water conversion, composition of the puried syngas,
are given in Table 3. In all experiments, the steam:biomass mass
ratio was kept constant, and close to 1. The carbon mass balance
was checked for each test: in most catalytic gasication runs, the
ratio (C inC C out 100) is in the range of 2 3% (except tests IV and
in
7127
Table 3
Results of steam gasication tests with olivine bed inventory, without any lter element housed in the gasier (test I) or in presence of a catalytic lter candle (tests IIX).
Gasication test number
II
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
738
808
1.06
16.15
1.00
3.67
93.66
80.14
39.17
26.24
24.32
10.27
2.36
816
815
0.94
33.56
1.65
0.91
67.68
85.87
50.33
23.09
21.38
5.20
2.84
816
808
1.00
24.26
1.54
0.95
106.60
77.92
51.62
23.14
21.69
3.55
2.65
825
814
1.10
20.94
1.49
0.79
70.05
85.45
54.50
21.96
19.66
3.88
2.24
815
813
1.06
35.27
1.62
0.55
68.53
85.82
55.61
21.46
19.12
3.81
2.19
818
814
0.85
39.78
1.60
0.71
77.67
83.90
52.45
19.54
22.75
5.26
1.76
822
813
1.13
35.61
1.68
0.75
66.45
86.17
54.12
21.67
19.19
5.02
1.70
812
813
1.03
37.30
1.77
0.81
47.72
89.97
53.24
20.16
21.58
5.02
1.72
809
811
1.00
40.82
1.77
0.85
35.79
92.39
53.25
19.90
21.71
5.15
1.69
819
808
0.99
42.01
1.79
0.75
40.52
91.46
53.23
19.62
22.09
5.07
1.72
100
90
80
vol %, N2 free
70
60
H2
50
40
30
CO2
20
CO
10
CH4
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
time (min)
2500
3000
3500
4000
100
B
90
II
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
80
vol %, N2 free
70
60
H2
50
40
30
CO
20
CO2
10
CH4
0
0
10
12
time (h)
14
16
18
20
22
24
Fig. 2. Product gas composition in % by volume (N2 free basis) as a function of gasication time, without any lter candle in the gasier (test I) (A), and with the catalytic lter
candle in the gasier freeboard (tests IIX) (B).
for watergas shift reaction. As shown in Table 4, the water conversion obtained experimentally is quite close to this limiting reference value in almost all tests with the catalytic candle. This is a
noteworthy result as low water conversion is often considered a
drawback for steam gasication.
7128
Table 4
Water conversion achieved experimentally compared with the corresponding theoretical value.
Gasication test number
II
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
Theoretical value
Experimental value
43.19
16.15
46.10
33.56
44.74
24.26
42.31
20.94
43.29
35.27
45.72
39.22
43.78
35.98
43.89
37.30
44.63
40.82
44.80
42.01
Table 5
Percentage variation of the main gasication indicators, with respect to the blank test.
Maximum value
Average value
+79
85
76
+143
47
+38
+69
79
64
+130
20
+30
60
A
Pressure drop through the candle (cmH 2O)
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
2
Filtration velocity (cm/s)
60
B
Pressure drop through the candle (cmH 2O)
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
time (min)
Fig. 3. (A) Pressure drop across the catalytic lter candle with the reactor empty of particles; temperature levels: (d) 20 C, (h) 300 C, () 450 C, (s) 600 C, (N) 800 C. (B)
Pressure drop across the catalytic lter candle, as a function of time on test; average ltration velocity: (s) 2.25 cm/s test IV, (D) 2.19 cm/s test V, (d) 1.75 cm/s test VI,
(h) 1.72 cm/s test X.
7129
Fig. 4. Catalytic ceramic candle before and after the whole gasication test (22 h).
content in the gas are seen to have been reduced by 20% and 79%,
respectively, and tar production by 64%. In addition, the ammonia
concentration in the producer gas was found to have been reduced
by an order of magnitude, from 500 ppmv in the blank test to an
average value of 50 ppmv with the catalytic candle providing further conrmation of the activity of the reforming catalyst. The
presence of H2S in the product gas was also monitored. In all the
biomass gasication experiments its concentration remained below that found to be of negligible signicance in the preliminary
activity studies of the catalytic lter (100 ppmv).
1200
OH
Tol
Naph
Bph
Dpe
Fl
Phe
Anth
Flt
Pyr
800
400
II
IV
VII
VIII
IX
Fig. 5. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of tar produced during the gasication tests: phenol (uOH), toluene (Tol), naphthalene (Naph), byphenyl (Bph), diphenylether
(Dpe), uorene (Fl), phenanthrene (Phe), anthracene (Ant), uoranthene (Flt) and pyrene (Pyr).
7130
stable, though with a slight reduction in methane and tar conversion. The tar content in the product gas has been evaluated using
two different and independent methods, TOC and HPLC/UV, showing good agreement and consistent results. The latter technique is
also proposed for tar characterization.
Acknowledgements
References
0
I
II
IV
VII
VIII
IX
Fig. 6. Tar content values obtained using TOC (s) and HPLC/UV (d) analysis.
Bangala, D.N., Abatzoglou, N., Martin, J.P., Chornet, E., 1997. Catalytic gas
conditioning: application to biomass and waste gasication. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 36, 41844192.
Beenackers, A.A.C.M., 1999. Biomass gasication in moving beds, a review of
European technologies. Renew. Energy 16, 11801186.
Corella, J., Toledo, J.M., Aznar, M.P., 2002. Improving the modeling of the kinetics of
the catalytic tar elimination in biomass gasication. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41,
33513356.
Devi, L., Ptasinski, K.J., Janssen, F.J.J.G., van Paasen, S.V.B., Bergman, P.C.A., Kiel, J.H.A.,
2005. Catalytic decomposition of biomass tars: use of dolomite and untreated
olivine. Renew. Energy 30, 565587.
Di Carlo, A., Capuzzimati, F., Foscolo, P.U., 2009. A uid dynamic study of ne
particles behaviour in the uidized bed freeboard equipped with a lter candle.
Internal Report, 211517 UNIQUE EU FP7 Contract.
Engelen, K., Zhang, Y., Draelants, D.J., Baron, G.V., 2003. A novel catalytic lter for tar
removal from biomass gasication gas: improvement of the catalytic activity in
the presence of H2S. Chem. Eng. Sci. 58, 665670.
Gao, N., Li, A., Quan, C., 2009. A novel reforming method for hydrogen production
from biomass steam gasication. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 42714277.
Heidenreich, S., Nacken, M., Foscolo, P.U., Rapagn, S., 2008. Gasication Apparatus
and Method for Generating Syngas from Gasiable Feedstock Materials. PCT/
EP2008/003523.
Hofbauer, H., Knoef, H., 2005. Success stories in biomass gasication. In: Handbook
Biomass Gasication. BTG Biomass Technology Group, Enschede, The
Netherlands, pp. 115161.
Ising, M., Gil, C.J., 2001. Hunger gasication of biomass in a circulating uidized bed
with special respect to tar reduction. In: Proceedings of the First World
Conference on Biomass for Energy and Industry. James and James Science
Publishers Ltd., London, UK, pp. 17751778.
Li, C., Suzuki, K., 2009. Tar property, analysis, reforming mechanism and model for
biomass gasication an overview. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 13, 594604.
Ma, L., Baron, G.V., 2008. Mixed zirconiaalumina supports for Ni/MgO based
catalytic lters for biomass fuel gas cleaning. Powder Technol. 180, 2129.
Ma, L., Verelst, H., Baron, G.V., 2005. Integrated high temperature gas cleaning: tar
removal in biomass gasication with a catalytic lter. Catal. Today 105, 729
734.
Nacken, M., Ma, L., Engelen, K., Heidenreich, S., Baron, G.V., 2007. Development of a
tar reforming catalyst for integration in a ceramic lter element and use in hot
gas cleaning. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 46, 19451951.
Nacken, M., Ma, L., Heidenreich, S., Baron, G.V., 2009. Performance of a catalytically
activated ceramic hot gas lter for catalytic tar removal from biomass
gasication gas. Appl. Catal. B: Environ. 88, 292298.
Rapagn, S., Foscolo, P.U., Gibilaro, L.G., 1994. The inuence of temperature on the
quality of gas uidization. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 20, 305.
Rapagn, S., Jand, N., Kiennemann, A., Foscolo, P.U., 2000. Steam-gasication of
biomass in a uidized-bed of olivine particles. Biomass Bioenergy 19, 187197.
Rapagn, S., Gallucci, K., Di Marcello, M., Foscolo, P.U., Nacken, M., Heidenreich, S.,
2009. In situ catalytic ceramic candle ltration for tar reforming and particulate
abatement in a uidized-bed biomass gasier. Energy Fuels 23, 38043809.
Rapagn, S., Gallucci, K., Di Marcello, M., Matt, M., Foscolo, P.U., Heidenreich, S.,
Nacken, M., 2010. Characterisation of tar produced in the gasication of
biomass with in-situ catalytic reforming. Int. J. Chem. Reactor Eng. 8, A30.
Simeone, E., Hlsken, E., Nacken, M., Heidenreich, S., De Jong, W., 2010. Study of the
behaviour of a catalytic ceramic candle lter in a lab-scale unit at high
temperatures. Int. J. Chem. Reactor Eng. 8 (Paper A11).
Toledo, J.M., Corella, J., Molina, G., 2006. Catalytic hot gas cleaning with monoliths in
biomass gasication in uidized beds. 4. Performance of an advanced, secondgeneration, two-layers-based monolithic reactor. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45, 1389
1396.
Van Paasen, S.V.B., Kiel, J.H.A., 2004. Tar formation in a uidized bed gasier: impact
of fuel properties and operating conditions. Report ECN-C-04-013, pp. 158.