Fundamentals of Combustion & Gasification

EN 661: Renewable Energy Systems

Dr. Pankaj Kalita

Centre for Energy, IIT Guwahati
1
 Why Bioenergy?
BIOMASS
 Biomass refers to organic matter, commonly
of plant origin
 Lignocellulosic Biomass: mainly composed
of cellulose and hemicellulose (60-80 % dry
basis), lignin (10-25 %), and some extractives
and minerals
 Average composition C6H10O5
 Can be of a wide variety such as sawmill
dust, forest residues, agricultural residues,
municipal solid wastes, etc.
Advantages of biomass for energy
• Minimal pollutant generation
• Naturally regenerative
• Carbon neutral in nature
• Widely distributed across the globe
• Efficient waste utilization
• Multiple conversion technologies
• Simple conversion technologies
• Effective for developing countries
with high biomass potential
3
Biomass Sources

4
biomass energy conversion routes

5
 What is Combustion?
• Oxygen of air reacts with the combustible substances (fuel) resulting in the
formation of CO2 and H2O with release of heat,

C + O2 CO2 + 393.77 kJ/mol carbon

• The other combustion reaction is the oxidation of hydrogen in fuel to produce
steam
1
H 2 + O2 H2O + 742 kJ/mol H 2
2

 Complete oxidation of the fuel takes

place with release of heat
 Air requirement is more than
stoichiometric
6
Combustion OF Biomass

7
 STOICHIOMETRIC AIR Requirement
 The theoretical air required to complete combustion of fuel results from the
equation of stoichiometry of oxygen/fuel reaction.
 If combustion of a stoichiometric mixture is complete, then flue gas cannot
have neither fuel nor oxygen.
Stoichiometric equation for biomass:

C6H10O5 + 6 (O2 + 3.76N2) → 6CO2 + 5H2O + 22.56N2

Considering 21% of air is O2 and rest 79% is N2

Note:
For complete combustion to occur, air is always
allowed in excess of the stoichiometric
(theoretical) air requirement.

8
 COMBUSTION Chemistry

Fig: Van Krevelen diagram for coals, biomasses and

petroleum/biomass-derived products
Observations: (1) biomass contains more oxygen with
respect to carbon than in coal. This influences the
gasification process, as gasification is a partial oxidation, and
(2) fuels with high O/C ratio have a smaller heating value
than those with low O/C ratio. 9
 Applications of Combustion

10

Cooking Boiler Rocket propulsion

Steam engine Domestic heating

Brick kilns

I.C. engine Explosives Steel industries

 What is Biomass Gasification?
• Conversion of solid fuels into combustible gas mixture
called producer gas (CO + H2 + CH4) CH 4  2O2  CO2  2H 2O
• Involves partial combustion of biomass 1
CH 4  O2  CO  2 H 2
2
Four distinct process in the gasifier:
• Drying (upto 200 oC)
• Pyrolysis (Devolatilization) (up to
600 oC) Equivalence Ratio (0.2-0.4)

• Combustion (700-900 oC) F

 
 A  Actual
• Reduction (800 oC) ER 
F
 
 A  stoichio
Sub stoichiometric conditions
CH1.4O0.74 N 0.005  0.98  O2  3.76 N 2   CO2  0.7 H 2O  3.69 N 2

A / F  5.25 11
Gasification Chemistry

12
 History of gasification

 Discovered in 18th Century in England & France

 By 1850: “town gas” used for lighting lanterns in parts of
England
 World War I (1914-1918): small gasifiers were used to
operate vehicles, boats, trains, etc.
 World War II (1939-1945): more than 700,000 wood-gas
generators powered trucks, cars, and buses in Europe
 After 1945: wide spread availability of low cost oil, this
technology was pushed into oblivion
 In 1973: oil embargo and the subsequent global oil crisis,
gasification was again looked upon
 After 2000: biomass gasification gained further momentum
due to issues related to global warming, political instability
Fig: Gasifier operated vehicle (Germany-1946)
of oil producing countries and shift towards renewable and
carbon-neutral fuels

13
 Gasification Reactions
Four major gasification reactions:
• Involves a series of endothermic
reactions.
• Water-Gas reaction (partial oxidation of carbon
• Gasification yields combustible by steam )
gases: H2, CO, and CH4 through a
series of reactions. C + H2O H2 + CO - 131,38 kJ/mol carbon
• Boudouard reaction
CO2 + C 2CO - 172,58 kJ/mol carbon
• Shift Conversion
CO + H2O CO2 +H2 - 41,98 kJ/mol
• Methanation
C+ 2H2 CH4 + 74,90 kJ/mol carbon
This reaction can be accelerated by nickel-based catalysts at 1100 °C and 6 to 8 bar.
14
 Classification of gasifiers
Biomass Gasification
Gasifiers
Basis: scheme of interaction of gasifying agent and solid fuels

Fixed bed Entrained bed

Fluidized bed Operational issues:
Updraft − Slag mobility issues
− Refractory degradation
Bubbling Circulating
− Syngas cooler fouling and
Downdraft plugging

Crossdraft Basis: velocity of flow of gasifying agent

Operational issues:
− Bed agglomeration and defluidization
− Ash deposition and fouling
Operational issues:
− Slagging and bed agglomeration
− Syngas exit blockage
− Slag mobility issues and refractory
degradation
 Biomass Types of gasifiers
Gasification

a. Downdraft gasifier b. Updraft gasifier c. Crossdraft gasifier

d. CFB gasifier e. BFB gasifier f. Entrained flow gasifier

 Pilot Scale Project

CIRCULATING 50 kW CFB
FIXED BED
(DOWNDRAFT)
FLUIDIZED BED biomass gasifier at
(CFB) GASIFIER
GASIFIER IIT Guwahati

Multi-fuel capability is the advantage

Good control over power generation

• Cogasification, hydrodynamics and

heat transfer, Instrumentation and
• 3.5 kW downdraft biomass gasifier with control
experimental facility
• Green Energy initiatives at IITG 17
 Applications of gasification

Thermal needs ……. Alternative cooking gas, industrial applications, domestic

heating, etc.
Power generation……. Both CI and SI engines, gas turbines
Liquid fuel production……. Via Fischer Tropsch route.

18
 Combustion vs. gasification
Parameter Combustion Gasification
Oxidation Complete Partial
Equivalence
ER>1 ER=0.2-0.4
ratio
CO2, H2O
CO, H2
Effluent gases (non-
(combustible)
combustible)
Heat, power &
Utility Heat & power
liquid fuels
Conversion 20-25% to power 30%- 40%
efficiency

19
 Characterization of biomass

Why Characterization is required…?

Characterization
• Lignocellulosic biomass differs greatly in their physical, Techniques:
chemical and morphological properties which affect the
characteristics of the gasification process. • Ultimate analysis
• High heating value contribute to more energy recovery and • Proximate analysis
better system performance in terms of efficiency and economy. • Calorific value analysis
• Thermogravimetric
• Effective heat and mass transfer properties of fluidized beds
analysis
provide the possibility of using various types of biomass wastes
with different compositions and heating values.

20
 Ultimate & PROXIMATE ANALYSES

Ultimate analysis of biomass fuels

Fuel Elemental composition (wt%)

C H N S O
Sawdust 48.52 6.39 0.13 0.32 44.65
Rice husk 34.90 5.13 0.34 0.12 59.41
Bamboo 42.90 6.70 0.50 0.00 49.90
Dust

Proximate analysis of biomass fuels

Fuel Composition (wt%)

Volatile Fixed Ash Moisture Heating value
matter Carbon content (kJ/kg)
Sawdust 77.01 19.94 0.76 2.59 11305.85
Rice husk 60.04 20.12 16.28 3.56 11794.86
Bamboo 74.20 9.30 16.50 11.10 12468.04
Dust
21
 Thermogravimetric analysis
 1st and 2nd Reaction Zone are categorized based on the
degradation of hemicellulose, cellulose and lignin
 Maximum moisture removal takes place at about 80 °C
 Moisture loss took place up to 200 °C followed by pyrolysis
 Degradation of volatiles starts at around 180-205 °C 100
 Up to 400 °C, weight loss is about 85 % of the total volatile 80
matter 10 °C/min

Weight loss in %
60 30 °C/min
80 °C/min
Hemicellulose, Cellulose and Lignin are decomposed 40
at 150-300°C, 275-300 °C and 250-500 °C
20

100 5 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
-5

Degradation /min
80 Temperature, oC
Mass in %

-15
60 Mass in % -25
Fig. Comparison of mass degradation of rice husk
Degradation/min -35
40
-45
20
-55
0 -65
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Temperature oC
22
Fig.TG and DTG curves at 80 oC/min
 Characterization of Rice Husk
Table-1: Kinetic parameters for rice husk
Heating rate Kinetic parameters
(, Kmin-1) First reaction zone Second reaction zone
A (min-1) E (kJmol-1) n A (min-1) E(kJmol-1) n
10 12180 54.113 0.485 929.60 50.265 0.619
30 74120 58.839 0.518 1009.00 45.937 0.656
80 30570 51.917 0.360 339.52 37.053 0.676

Table-2: Proximate and ultimate analysis of rice husk Table-3: Cellulose, Hemicellulose and Lignin
content of rice husk
Ultimate analysis (in %) Proximate analysis in
(%) Cellulose Hemicellulose Lignin
C H N S O Cl VM FC Ash 0.313 0.243 0.143
35.10 4.80 0.29 <0.02 35.90 0.16 60.30 17.00 22.70

Table-4: Comparison of kinetic parameters of rice husk

Biomass Particulars First reaction zone Second reaction zone
Ozawa, Coats- Mansaray Present Ozawa, Coats- Mansaray Present
1965 Redfern, and Ghaly, result 1965 Redfern, and Ghaly, result
1964 1999 1964 1999

Rice husk Activation energy 82.9 77.4 142.7 58.839 38.5 28.1 14.3 45.937
(kJ mol-1)

Pre-exponential 3.72 x 108 5.6 x 107 1.18 x 1014 7.412 x 104 2.58 x 105 4.8 x 103 0.13 x 102 1.009 x103
factor (min-1)
Order of reaction --- --- 0.7 0.518 --- --- 0.2 0.656
Heating rate 30 K min-1 30 K min-1 20 K min-1 30 K min-1 30 K min-1 30 K min-1 20 K min-1 30 K min-1

Atmosphere used N2 N2 Pure air N2 N2 Pure oxygen air 23

oxygen
 Equilibrium Model Formulation

• Methodology
• Investigate the CHNSO

• By using CHNSO calculate chemical formula of the fuel

• Formulate the global chemical reaction

• Do the analysis of the model for various gasification temperature

• Investigate the equilibrium constants for shift and methane formation

reaction

• Resulting model will give 3 non linear simultaneous equation

• Solve the simultaneous equation by multi variable Newton-Raphson

• Calculate the HHV by using suitable correlation

24
 Equilibrium Model Formulation

Example:
Chemical Formula:
CH1.475O0.679 N 0.007025 S1.0758104

The global gasification reaction is

CH1.475O0.679  wH 2O  mO2  3.76mN2  x1H 2  x2CO  x3CO2  x4 H 2O  x5CH 4  3.76mN2

x1  1.84 x2  3.29 x3  1.495  0

0.0885 x12  x2  x3  1  0 3 simultaneous

equations
x1 x2  0.9235 x2  2 x2 2  0.6636 x1 x3  2 x2 x3  0

Solve the above equations by mN-R method

25
 Equilibrium Model Formulation

Formulation of multivariable Newton-Raphson method

In the multivariable Newton Raphson Approach, a starting point x , is assumed & corrections are made using

xi 1  xi  xi where xi   D 1 ( xi )  f ( xi ) and

 f1 f1 f1 

 
 x1 x2 x3 
1
 f 2 f 2 f 2 
D ( xi )   
 x1 x2 x3 
 f3 f3 f3 
 
 x1 x2 x3 
The final global gasification reaction will be,

CH1.475O0.679  0.337 H 2O  0.2568O2  0.965N2

 0.7306H 2  0.6269CO  0.329CO2  0.252H 2O  0.0445CH 4  0.965N2 26
 Equilibrium Model Formulation

Therefore percentage producer gas products are as follows

0.7306  2
% of H 2  100  2.225%
24.339  6.066  8.2176  27.02

0.6269  28
% of CO  100  26.74%
24.339  6.066  8.2176  27.02

% of CO2  21.84%

% of CH 4  1.08%

% of N2  41.16%
27
 Formulation for mass degradation
• Arrhenius rate expression: dX  
 E 

  Ae  RT  X n
m  mf dt
Non dimensional mass, X
mo  m f 4th Order Runge-Kutta
Substituting and taking logarithm, the above
expression becomes:
 E 
 dX  dT  
dm   m  mf  
1 E      Ae  RT 
Xn
ln     ln A   n ln   dT  dt 
  mo  m f  dt  RT  mo  m f 
 E 
Linearized form of the Equation: 
dX 1  RT  n
  Ae X  f ( X ,T )
dT 
y  B  Cx  Dz Multi-variable Regression
in spreadsheet
where dT
 =Heating rate
dt
y  ln{[1/(m  mf )][dm dt ]}
The temperature range is divided into ‘p’
x  1 ( RT ) parts with the interval ‘h’. By integrating
z  ln[(m  mf ) /(m  mf )] Tp1 Tp1
 dX 
B  ln A X (Tp 1 )  X (Tp )    dT 
 dT 
 X (T )dT
C  E Tp Tp

Dn ODE 45 in Matlab(R) was used 28

 Validation of mass degradation
• Comparison of Experimental 100
At 10 oC/min

Mass of the sample in %

and Numerical degradation 80

results 60

40 Experimental

• The predicted mass 20

Numerical

degradation results are well 0

comparable with experimental 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
results Temperature, oC

Fig.5.6 Comparison of experimental and numerical results at 10 oC/min

100 At 30 oC/min 100 At 80 oC/min

Mass of the sample in %

80

Mass of the sample in %

80
60
60

40 Experimental 40
Numerical
20 Numerical
20 Experimental
0 0
100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
Temperature, oC
Temperature, oC
Fig.5.7 Comparison of experimental and numerical results at 30 °C/min
Fig.5.8 Comparison of experimental and numerical results at 80 °C/min
29
 Example
A biomass gasifier is used to run a CI engine. The engine
operates in the dual-fuel mode with 85 % diesel
replacement. The gasifier engine system produces 360 kW
of power. Calculate the biomass feeding rate to the gasifier
if the efficiency of the engine is 36% and the CV of biomass
is 16500 kJ/kg. consider the efficiency of the gasifier is 0.77.

Input to the engine 1000 kW

Input to the gasifier = 850/0.77
= 1104 kW Producer gas

Biomass Gas cleaning

Gasifier Engine Power
unit
360kW
85%
Feed rate: Power supplied by 36%
1104/16500 gasifier 850 kW Diesel
Ans: 241 kg/h 15%
30
Bubbling fluidized bed gasifier

Novelty:
 High throughput
 Fuel flexibility
 Tolerates reasonably high moisture
 Less pollution (no NOx and SOx, less CO2) : due to low
temperature operation
Challenges:
 Complex process - for gas-solids multiphase flow,
chemical reactions, heat & mass transfer
 Complex operation - Precision control of operating
parameters is essentially needed
 Unequal pressure distribution across bed
 Hot spots, agglomeration, slugging in bed
 Elutriation of solid fines, loss of un-burnt fuel particles
from bed
 Fuel gas cleaning

31
Circulating fluidized bed gasifier

Novelty:
 Compact design and very high throughput
 Fuel flexibility: Use of inferior quality fuels can be used for fuel
gas generation
 High energy conversion ratio: Intense gas-solids mixing and
re-circulation of un-burnt or partially burnt solid particles
 Less pollution (no NOx and SOx, less CO2) : due to low
temperature operation
Challenges:
 Complex gas-solids flow phenomena
 Maintaining pressure balance in the loop and overall solids
circulation
 Solids movement through loop seal for continuous operation
 Maintaining uniform temperature along the height of fast bed
reactor
 Fuel gas cleaning, ash disposal etc.
32
 Dual Fluidized Bed Gasification

Syngas Flue gas

• In DFBG, the endothermic and exothermic processes
are decoupled into two fluidized beds which are
Hot Bed material
interconnected by circulating inert bed materials as a
carrier of heat.

• Steam is usually used as the gasification agent in the

Combustor
DFB gasifier, which produces syngas without

Gasifier
nitrogen dilution.

• The feedstocks for DFBG can be either coal,

biomass, or even waste materials like plastics Feedstock

• the advantage of DFB gasifier is the production of

high calorific value syngas without the need of Bed material + Char
capital-intensive air separation unit
Steam Ash Air

33
Dual Fluidized Bed Gasification of Solid Fuels
• DCFB features:
• Global solids circulation is controlled by primary reactor
fluidization only (eg. air staging)

• Secondary reactor can be optimized towards fuel conversion

• Inherent stabilization of global solids hold up due to the direct

hydraulic link between the reactors

• High potential for scale-up

• Optimized gas-solids contact compared to bubbling fluidized

beds

• Low reactor volume compared to bubbling fluidized beds (ie.

low solids inventory)

34
 integrated gasification combined cycle
(IGCC)

Advantages:

 High Efficiency
 Lower CO2 Emission & Ash Volume
 Fuel Flexibility
 Highly Reliable System
Conventional coal-based Integrated gasification combined
thermal plant cycle (IGCC)
35
IGCC
Commercial IGCC plants

USA:
− Southern California Edison's 100 MWe Cool Water Coal
Gasification Plant (1984-1988)
− Dow Chemical's 160 MWe Louisiana Gasification Technology Inc
(LGTI) Project (1987-1995)
− SG Solutions Gasification Plant (50-50 owned by Wabash River
Energy Ltd & Wabash Valley Power Assoc.) supplying syngas
fuel to Cinergy’s 262 MWe Wabash River Generating Station
(1995 - present) and currently using primary fuel of petcoke after
completing the coal demonstration
− Tampa Electric's 250 MWe Polk Power Station (1996-present)

Netherlands:
− NUON/Demkolec’s 253 MWe Buggenum Plant (1994-present)

Spain:
− ELCOGAS 298 MWe Puertollano Plant (1998-present)

Japan:
− Joban JPC Nakoso 250MW Air-blown IGCC demonstration plant

India:
− BHEL 125 MW IGCC power plant in Uttar Pradesh
36
Power to Rural Areas – The
Distributed Generation
Issue of Developmental Models

• Large power plants based grid extension.

• Small Power Packs in Stand-Alone Mode
• Decentralized Generation with increasing
• Small Power Plants in Grid Connected Mode
self-sufficiency for rural areas?
• Co-Generation of Charcoal and Electricity
• Main focus so far on grid extension but
need for an intelligent combination.

• For decentralized generation, biomass is

the key option.

37