Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/case-studies-in-chemical-
and-environmental-engineering

Case Report

Analysis of technological developments and potential of biomass

gasification as a viable industrial process: A review
Erdiwansyah a, c, Asri Gani b, *, M. Zaki b, Rizalman Mamat a, Muhammad Nizar d, S.M. Rosdi e,
Syaifuddin Yana f, R.E. Sarjono g
a
Centre for Automotive Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26600, Pekan, Malaysia
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, 23111, Indonesia
c
Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Serambi Mekkah, Banda Aceh, 23245, Indonesia
d
Department of Environment Engineering, Universitas Serambi Mekkah, Banda Aceh, 23245, Indonesia
e
Politeknik Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin, 23000, Dungun, Terengganu, Malaysia
f
Department of Economic Management, Universitas Serambi Mekkah, Banda Aceh, 23245, Indonesia
g
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Science, Indonesia University of Education, Bandung, 40522, Indonesia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: - They use technologies for the thermochemical conversion of substances for biomass, like pyrolysis, torrefaction,
Gasification gasification, and hydrothermal process. In recent years, the generation of synthetic gas has significantly devel­
Biomass oped. This is especially true when associated with the biomass gasification processes, primarily related to syngas
Energy from biomass
production. The review focuses on technologies for cleaning syngas, gasification processes, and simulation
Sustainable renewable energy
methods on procedure parameters. In conclusion, prospect growths and opportunities are investigated, and
Process of the industry
discussions culminate with the presentation of a novel hydrogen fabrication strategy predicated on utilizing a
modified combustion process that operates with such an air deficit.

1. Introduction production possible cannot be confirmed [14–16]. On the other hand,

GE has geological restrictions that can impact the use potential. Because
One of the primary challenges humanity faces is long-term energy GE’s availability depends on a series of geological constraints, its use can
disasters. More importantly, the climate change impacts can be reduced only be made possible when these conditions are satisfied, which places
by lowering emissions using sustainable and renewable fuels [1–3]. This a geographical limitation on the area where it can be generated [17–19].
is one of the primary challenges to be overcome to prevent humanity Among the different types of RE sources, biomass is the one that
from facing future energy disasters. Several technological possibilities stands out as an alternative to reduce the amount of pollution in the
are considered good replacements for conventional energy systems. environment and increase energy independence from fossil fuels.
These traditional energy systems depend on fossil fuel supply sources, Biomass consumes the potential to be used as a secondary source of fuel
including coal, oil, and gas [4–7]. Alternative and renewable energy to meet the energy grid’s requirements if production losses occur due to
sources include geothermal, aeolian, hydro, wave, solar, waste, biomass, the intermittent nature of alternative sources of RE, which are reliant on
etc., with varying availability, feasibility, and technology maturity environmental aspects [20–23]. The generation of products of chem­
[8–10]. However, out of the various possibilities that have been listed, icals, energy, or biofuels from biomass can be accomplished through
the one and only one that does not have any restriction associated with various conversion mechanisms involving thermochemistry [24–29].
its accessibility and availability is biomass fuel [11–13]. Intermittency is These processes include pyrolysis, torrefaction, gasification, hydro­
a characteristic inextricably linked to renewable energy (RE) sources, thermal liquefaction, and burning. This can be accomplished by using
such as those inextricably linked to climatic factors; geothermal energy biomass as a raw material. All these methods are presented as effective
(EG), which is limited in its useful applications due to geological con­ ways to transform various types of biomass into energy, biofuels, and
siderations; and other forms of RE. These sources may be unable to chemical compounds using solid, liquid, and gaseous intermediates
generate sufficient fuel during the climatic conditions that make this [30–32]. According to the research, combustion, and pyrolysis are two

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: asri_gani@usk.ac.id (A. Gani).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100439
Received 6 June 2023; Received in revised form 25 July 2023; Accepted 29 July 2023
Available online 2 August 2023
2666-0164/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

different processes from gasification, which can be distinguished by the liquefaction, and combustion are biomass’s primary thermochemical
amount of oxidant used in the process and the end products produced conversion processes [71–74]. Previous studies on thermochemical
[33–35]. The conversion of waste biomass into bioenergy through a processes revealed that the process’s trajectory and the factors of the
comprehensive thermochemical process has been reported in Ref. [25]. final product are affected by factors such as temperature, granulometry
The techno-economic feasibility of converting energy from waste of the material, heating rate, residence time, and the unique charac­
biomass through technical characteristics and application of teristics of the type of biomass used. The various thermochemical
thermo-chemical techniques is also discussed in their research. In gen­ techniques create end products, some listed in Fig. 1.
eral, energy conversion from biomass becomes more attractive and Fig. 1 shows carbonized char, liquefied pyrolysis products, and
efficient. released gas are the most common outcomes (gasification). Torrefaction,
Furthermore, Senneca mentioned the responses and the reaction also known as pre-carbonization, is a process that produces a substance
mechanisms. The study shows that pyrolysis could also take effect somewhere in the middle of biomass and char that has excellent power
without the oxidizing element. In contrast, combustion can only take outputs [75–77]. This material can be defined as torrefied biomass.
place when there is an excessive amount of oxygen present [36]. On the When a gasifying agent is present, biomass undergoes a thermochemical
other hand, quantities fall under the stoichiometric threshold re­ process that alters its molecular structure, leading to the production of
quirements when it comes to gasification. This is because the proportion primarily gaseous with a minor quantity of char, tar, and ash, which are
of carbon in the responses determines how much carbon is used [36–39]. further categorized by the nature of the gaseous substance employed
Torrefaction forms solid products, whereas pyrolysis results in the (steam, air, steam-oxygen, air-steam, or air with added oxygen)
development of liquid products [40–43]. The construction of reliable [78–82]. Synthesis gas, or syngas, is a gaseous product obtained by
results is high as torrefaction’s final product of interest. To use heat, gasifying biomass and other liquid fuels [83–85]. Carbon monoxide
combustion must first take place to produce gaseous by-products, pri­ (CO), hydrogen (H2), and carbon dioxide (CO2) are the three compo­
marily (CO2) and liquid (H2O) [44–46]. Gasification primarily aims to nents that makeup syngas [67]. It can produce biofuels and chemicals,
make gaseous energy products, specifically carbon dioxide, hydrogen, generate electricity through direct combustion, operates fuel cells if
and CO2 [47–51]. Since pyrolysis is the first step in gasification, which properly purified, and so on [86,87].
involves the preliminary breakdown of biomass materials takes place. In Because of the high price of alternative gassing substances and plant
addition, it plays an important part in the subsequent physical and security concerns, air gasifier is rarely used. Technology is the simplest
chemical changes; consequently, the two factors can be mixed [52–57]. way to see widespread use [88–90]. The fuel gas production with a low
The potential for gasification to be utilized in removing waste bio­ heating value by gasification with air ranges from 4 to 7 MJ/Nm3
masses is directly proportional to the significance that applications like [91–94]. According to estimates, a gasifier with oxygen and steam yields
gasification already have the potential for producing energy but not yet synthesis gas with a temperature between 10 MJ/Nm3 to 18 MJ/Nm3
for this purpose [58–60]. Thus, it helps solve an environmental issue [95]. Because of the high costs associated with using oxygen, biomass
connected to the final of these waste forms and implements an actual gasification with pure oxygen is impractical [96–98]. The gas proportion
circular economy [61–65]. Several studies have been conducted, the is dependent on the fuel gas employed and the feedstock being utilized
outcomes of which have been presented. An example of this would be [99–101]. Fig. 2 visually represents the stages that make up the gasifi­
the work presented by Ref. [66]. Several studies have been completed, cation process. Gasification, like a thermochemical conversion, is
giving some effects [67], compared the results of the exergy review capable of being defined and constrained by combustion and pyrolysis,
using the air-steam gasification of five different plant wastes. The as shown in Fig. 2. At the beginning of the gasification process, an
investigation of hydrogen generation from gasification and pyrolysis of endothermic process takes place, which results in the release of water
biomass has been discussed [68]. This study also discusses the emphasis and the beginning of the pyrolysis of the biomass [102–104]. The
on technical issues, mechanisms, and efficiency of hydrogen products. process’s first stage is called pyrolysis, in which pyrolytic char and
Gasification of food waste by varying H2 as an operating parameter volatiles are created [105–107]. Hydrocarbons, hydrogen, CO, CO2,
during the production process has been discussed [69]. The investiga­ pyrolytic tar, and water vapor are volatile substances [108]. Volatiles
tion was carried out by adding HCl, NaCl, and NaHCO3 at temperatures can also be classified as gases. During this time, the remaining material
of 300, 350, and 400 ◦ C, and the reaction durations used were 30, 45, is pyrolyzed and gasified by oxidizing the pyrolytic char to temperatures
and 60 minutes. Factors that may affect the process of producing between 800 ◦ C and 1000 ◦ C based on the formula and oxidation
hydrogen through steam gasification of lignocellulosic biomass have employed [109,110]. These pyrolytic products undergo numerous
been investigated [70]. Factors investigated include pressure, temper­ gaseous and solid-gas interactions following their initial decomposition
ature, gasifier design, and the steam-to-biomass ratio. In addition, there [111–113]. The gasification process produces varying results based on
are also other factors such as particle size, moisture, and catalyst are the quantity of gassing employees use; the relationships typically use the
analyzed thoroughly. steam-biomass ratio (SB) instead of the equivalence ratio (ER) for air
Meanwhile [67], examined the behavior of residues left over from and oxygen. Both percentages refer to the proportion of smoke to
wine production using the gasification process. Both types of research biomass. In Eqs. (1) and (2), we see a representation of the relationships
prove that the strategy proposed for the conversion and possible re­ that have been discussed [114–116].
covery of this kind of waste could be carried out. This study aims to
Oxygen [kg]/Biomass[kg]
conduct a bibliographic summary of the gasification of biomass. The ER = (1)
Oxygen stoichimetry[kg]/Ratio of Biomass[kg]
review focuses on the current state-of-the-art of various available re­
actors technologies and the benefits each one offers. Moreover, it pre­ [kg]
Flow of Steam
sents a comparative study of multiple outputs, and the objectives can be SB = [hkg] (2)
accomplished simultaneously. Examining syngas cleaning procedures is Flow of Biomass h

another topic covered, specifically the tar and particulate removal Fig. 3 shows the reaction used for the biomass gasification process.
methods. This study also dissects and analyzes the simulation software The initial gasification process will adjust biomass decomposition or
instruments and other recent innovations that can produce targeted pyrolysis so that charcoal and volatiles can be formed. After the initial
hydrogen gases. decomposition process, several gaseous reactions and gas solids can be
formed from the pyrolytic products [111]. The relationship at the time
2. Synthesis gas from gasification of biomass of the gasification process will be considered with the amount of use of
the gas being distributed. This process is adjusted to the equivalence
Torrefaction, pyrolysis, carbonization, gasification, hydrothermal

2
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

Fig. 1. The products from various biomass thermochemical processes [75–77].

Fig. 2. Steps involved in the gasification of biomass.

ratio of air or oxygen and the ratio of biomass vapor used. the advantages of using the gasifier.
The gas generated by a concurrent gasifier has slow levels of tar (less
3. An overview of the gasification process than one percent), a higher temperature of 70 ◦ C, and a greater number
of particles than the gas generated by a countercurrent gasifier [143]. An
The process of gasification can use various reactors [123–128]. experimental study used a concurrent fixed-bed gasifier by Refs. [139,
Fluidized-bed and fixed-bed reactors are frequently utilized [129–131]. 144,145]. Waste products from the wood industry fueled the gasifier.
Different reactor configurations are used in European, American, and According to the research findings, the gas consisted of 24% carbon
Canadian gasification techniques [132,133]. Both reactors stand out monoxide, 12% hydrogen, 14% carbon dioxide, 2% carbon monoxide,
regarding fixed-bed gasifiers using countercurrent or concurrent flows and 45% nitrogen. The air coefficient was 0.287. The evaporation of
[134–136]. While feeding the counterflow gasifier, O2/air is added to water, pyrolysis, burning, and gasifier of char were the processes
the bottom. The gassing agent can be raised from the side or the top of analyzed, as gaseous phase combustion, thermal cracking of tar, and
the concurrent gasifier while the dinner is brought in from the top. Fig. 4 heat transfer along the gasifier in a one-dimensional dynamic model of a
shows simplified representations of gasifiers operating in parallel and concurrent fixed-bed for gasifier [146–148]. The author examined how
against the air flow. Because nearly all of the tar is used up, approxi­ changing the air-to-fuel proportion affected the end product’s chemical
mately 99% of it, by the concurrent fixed bed gasifier, only a minimal make-up, thermal efficiency, and greenhouse gas emissions. BFB and
amount of tar removal is necessary for the gas [137–139]. This is one of CFB reactors use a fluidized-bed to create heat and reagents, two broad

3
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

Fig. 3. Reactions during gasifying biomass [117–122].

Fig. 4. Two ways of the gasification process within the confines of a reactor with a fixed bed [140–142].

categories that can broadly classify fluidized bed reactors [149–152]. with air was investigated by Refs. [166–168], who found that the
The BFB reactor designs operate with moderate fluidization maximum highest values of H2S were 0.023% when the hotness was 805 ◦ C, and
speed, resulting in the entrainment of fines and a short time residence the coefficient of air was 0.43. The study found that the highest levels of
for particles. HCl for herbaceous materials occurred at 847 ◦ C and an air coefficient of
In contrast, the reactors CFB manage with higher fluidization speeds 0.36. In comparison, the highest values of NH3 for woody materials
and the recirculation of solids [120]. The ambient fluidized bed gasifi­ occurred hotness of 815 ◦ C and a coefficient of air at 0.37. Prior to
cation process prototype was discussed, along with its experimental data cleaning, the H2S accumulation in a transmitted fluidized-bed reactor
and numerical simulations [153–155]. It was discovered that the gas that uses steam and temperature levels in both 850 ◦ C and 900 ◦ C were
had 17% carbon monoxide, 5% hydrogen, 15% carbon dioxide, 4% reported to be in the range of 130–170 parts per million (ppm) [169].
carbon monoxide, and 59% nitrogen by weight. The air coefficient was Before the reactor was cleaned, they found tar concentrations in the gas
found to be 0.3. They developed a model to investigate biomass gasifi­ ranging from 2 to 5 g/Nm3 before it was cleaned. We determined the
cation using steam in fluidized bed gasifiers [156–158]. The model highest amounts of tar that might be generated from the gasification of
considers combustion and gasification zones, which involve fluidization bagasse by using a gasifier with a fixed-bed reactor operating concur­
with smoke. An equilibrium model is used within each location to esti­ rently [170,171]. A total of 376.27 mg/m3 of dry producer gas with tar
mate the gas composition while minimizing free energy Gibbs. The was collected at 1040 ◦ C and the air coefficient at 0.26. The experiments
gasification process in the fluidized-bed reactor is illustrated in Fig. 5. were conducted in a gasifier with a fixed-bed reactor using pelletized
The gas components produced by various gasifiers and under varying bagasse as the fuel, and CaO was distributed throughout the bed [170].
conditions are broken down and summarized in Table 1. The indicators showed that the tar yield dropped from 349,281 to 123
The process conditions are subject to change depending on the goals mg/m3 of dry syngas when operating at 1040 ◦ C and air coefficient at
set and the components utilized. The gasification of different biomasses 0.26 with 2%, 3%, and 6% concentrations in the bed. When CaO was not

4
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

durable, and more reliable [187–189]. In biomass gasification, after

the gases have been cooled and sent through the cyclones to remove
particles, they are sent through a bag filter to achieve the highest
level of particle removal [190]. This is done to ensure that all par­
ticles are removed completely. These bag filters have an operating
temperature of about 130 ◦ C; under these circumstances, they can
draw anywhere from 70 to 95% of the particles and tar [178,191,
192].
2. Tar removal: Tar formation is one of the most significant obstacles to
the efficiency of gasification processes. Tar can condense around 350
and 400◦ Celsius, causing oxidization and accumulation on equip­
ment and duct walls [193,194]. Tar removal is one of the most
important aspects of gasification processes. The high tar content of
the gas can harm the catalytic functions [195–197]. In addition, tar
results in a significant loss of energy, which lowers the overall effi­
ciency of the process [198]. Primary methods are where the tar is
removed from within the gasifier itself; secondary methods are those
in which it is removed after the gasification process [199]. Removal
techniques can be broken down into these two groups depending on
the source of the tar. A study compared the gasifier of 15 kg of
non-heat-treated wood pellets and 15 kg of torrefied biomass pellets
[200]. The authors discovered that while traditional biomass pellets
resulted in tar formation of about 60 cl during gasification, torrefied
biomass pellets resulted in less than 5 cl tar formation. Torrefaction is
a process that is used to prepare biomass for gasification. It reduces
Fig. 5. The gasification process in a fluidized-bed reactor [159–161]. the number of volatile compounds, especially oxygenated additives,
which donate to tar formation during gasification. The authors cited
this distinction as the main cause for the study’s findings, so this
used, the analysis indicated 376.27 mg/m3 concentration levels of dry
description has been accepted. The torrefaction process serves as a
syngas. This contrasts with the results found when CaO was used. Cor­
preliminary step in the treatment of biomass. The presence of tar in
ella et al. [169] found that fluidized-bed gasifier’s gas only has tar levels
the gases generated during the gasification process is one of the
below 2g/Nm3 if the air coefficient is > 0.35, secondary air flows are
primary factors preventing the commercial viability of many
low-down compared to primary air, and biomass moisture is as low as
different biofuel production technologies [201–203]. Clogging and
possible. They investigated gasifying wood sawdust at 750 ◦ C to 900 ◦ C
the subsequent shutdown of operations are common results of tar
[172–174]. They found that the concentrations of NH3 in the gas ranged
polymers and evaporation in the exhaust system [204].
between 500 and 30,000 ppm. According to the research, the levels of
3. Consequently, gasification technology cannot advance toward
NH3 engagement in the gas generated in the fluidized-bed reactor
commercialization without removing tar from syngas [205,206].
ranged between 1100 ppm and 1700 ppm [175]. According to the study,
They published an article discussing the function of
nitrogen gases produced as a byproduct of the pyrolysis of sugarcane
oxygen-containing functional groups in biochar as a catalyst for
bagasse can be converted into NOx during the combustion process
steam-reforming tar [207,208]. In this paper, the authors highlight
[176].
the significance of biochar as a catalyst for de-tarring syngas
Syngas is a byproduct of biomass gasification, resulting in several
generated via pyrolysis or biomass gasification. The authors
pollutants in the final product [177–179]. Particles, tar, nitrogen com­
concluded that biochar’s catalytic destruction of tar was better
pounds, sulfur, chlorine, alkalis, and heavy metals are just a few of the
because H2O activation led to a higher concentration of functional
pollutants that contribute to these conditions. If these contaminants are
groups, especially aroma CO systems.
not removed, they can cause significant operational issues. The syngas
aims to determine if and how much cleaning is required. Gas purification
The main methods can be described as any measures taken during
is crucial for applications that produce synthetic fuels or hydrogen
the gasification to prevent tar formation in the gasifier or convert the
[180–182]. As such, the following techniques for purifying the gas could
one already produced [209–211]. It is necessary to optimize the working
be considered:
conditions to improve the overall quality of the gases produced [212].
The following are primary methods; 1) the appropriate choice of oper­
1. Elimination of Particles Cyclones is the most common equipment in
ating conditions; 2) the appropriate application of additives or catalysts
research and development of this sector [183]. Compared to other
during gasification; and 3) the appropriate gasifier design. When it
methods for purifying high-temperature gases, it offers the best
comes to treating the hot gases produced; as a result, secondary methods
overall value [184–186]. Its performance is better than competing
are utilized [59]. Chemical or physical treatments could fall into this
technologies like ceramic filters because it is easier to use, more

Table 1
Presents the syngas gas composition produced by various reactors and gassing agents [162–165].
Type of Gasifier H2/CO CO (%) Tar (g/m3) H2 (%) CO2 (%) N2 (%) H2O H2S (%) CH4 (%) Particles

Fluidized-Bed (Char) 0.36 67 0 24 4 1 3 1 0.02 NA

Fluidized-Bed 0.64 14 <10 9 20 51 NA NA 7 ↑
Fluidized-Bed (Switchgrass) 0.34 15 <1 5 17 57 NA NA 6 NA
Concurrent-Fixed-Bed 0.46 24 >10 11 9 53 NA NA 3 ↓
Countercurrent-Fixed-Bed 0.67 48 1 32 15 3 NA NA 2 ↓
CFB (Bark) 1 19.6 <1 20.2 13.5 42.9 Dry Low 3.8 NA

5
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

category [213]. The cracking of tar after it has been gasified. This can be conditions [124,235]. They studied the efficacy of an iron-based catalyst
done either by heat or chemicals used most frequently [58]. Cyclones, in reducing tar concentrations [236]. The authors proved its efficacy in
rotary particulate separators, cleaners, and filters are all mechanical cleaning and reducing tar by showing that these things are less affected
techniques used for physical methods (ceramics, electrostatics, baffles, by chlorine in the biomass and are less expensive than other catalysts
and fabrics) [214]. Fig. 6-7 illustrates high-level schematics for the two made with nickel. In addition, the authors demonstrated that the ma­
most common approaches to removing tar from surfaces (see Fig. 7). terials can clean and lessen tar. The process of thermal cracking, which is
Dolomite was investigated as a potential additive in primary or used for the treatment of tar, was also investigated in the same study.
secondary gas purification processes [216]. According to the study, the Since this procedure only reduced tar content by 10–20%, using an iron
secondary application of dolomite is slightly more effective than the catalyst in these circumstances is considered more effective because it
immediate application (dolomite in bed). The results of the gasification reduced tar content by approximately 60%. Steam reforming was car­
experiments using steam-oxygen blends demonstrated this improve­ ried out to investigate the elimination of tar during thermochemical
ment. The authors concluded that using dolomite as a secondary source processes, which primarily produced hydrogen [237–239].
was slightly more effective than using air or a steam-oxygen combina­ The authors focused solely on toluene’s inclusion in the tar, which is
tion as reducing agents. However, when the air was used instead of significant for several reasons components found in the greatest quantity
another oxidizing agent, there were no noticeable differences between and formed during an operation performed at very high temps. In
the procedures. Adopted different methods and a steam-oxygen combi­ addition, it seems to be an aromatic hydrocarbon that possesses good
nation can reduce tar content due to the high steam content in reactor stability and is reported in tar quite frequently. The impact of temp and
gases. Fossil fuel and naphtha are produced through a commercial combustion percentage on solvent thermal conversion products were
catalysis steam reforming process; calcined dolomite is added as a studied in a thermodynamic system simulation using a fixed-bed reactor
reactant to remove tar, making steam an ideal reactant [217–219]. A with a catalyst at the nickel base. The simulation was based on Gibb’s
catalyst for cracking tar must meet several criteria before it can be used. free energy. According to the findings of some studies, the chemical
The requirements include being effective for the process, cheap, readily composition of toluene changes at temperatures higher than 649.85 ◦ C.
available, and ideally non-toxic during deposition [220–222]. Several They looked into catalytic steam reforming to clean up synthesis gas by
studies show that calcined dolomite (CaxMg(1-x) O) satisfies these con­ lowering tar levels [240]. They used benzene, toluene, naphthalene,
ditions. High chlorine levels in biomass reduce its usefulness in catalytic anthracene, and pyrene as model constituents. Additionally, they used
cracking and raise the possibility of calcium chloride precipitation two distinct types of catalysts that were based on alumina and contained
(CaCl2) [223–225]. Because of its high surface area and oxides (CaO, 15% nickel. The results show that the order of the compounds’ reactivity
MgO) in its matrix, calcined dolomite is an effective catalyst in the tar is as follows: benzene > toluene > anthracene > pyrene > naphthalene.
reduction reaction [226–228]. A tendency toward the formation of coke was also present. According to
Regarding steam reforming, tar reduction can be accomplished with the information in this article, naphthalene is the substance best suited
dolomite-based and nickel-based triggers [217,229]. Activation loss is to be used as a model compound in replacing the tar molecule produced
the primary issue with Ni-based catalysts [230]. When the motivation is by biomass gasification.
put into the gasifier unprotected, it will most likely become inactive
[231]. Catalyst activity is severely diminished by the tar’s high con­ 4. Comparison process
centration [232].
Hydrogen-rich gas can be produced through biomass gasification 4.1. Purpose of the process
with a combustion combination. The large amounts of tar resulted in
hampered gasifying biomass on an industrial level. This tar has the The main purpose of torrefaction is to upgrade and enhance the
prospect of clogging valves and pipes [233,234]. Because the structure properties of biomass, making it more suitable for use in solid fuel ap­
of tar and the process by which it is formed are complicated, most plications (e.g., combustion or co-firing). Slow pyrolysis aims to produce
research simplifies tar formation only by considering the presence of a biochar, a carbon-rich solid residue, and bio-oil, a liquid product, from
few components, like toluene, naphthalene, and other aromatics. Then it biomass feedstock. Biochar is used for soil improvement, while bio-oil
uses this simplified proportion to analyze tar forming under various can be further processed into biofuels and chemicals. Fast pyrolysis is

Fig. 6. Primary methods for tar reduction [215].

6
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

Fig. 7. Secondary methods for tar reduction [215].

focused on producing a higher yield of bio-oil and less char compared to 4.6. Feedstock flexibility
slow pyrolysis. Bio-oil can be used for bioenergy or further upgraded
into valuable products. Gasification aims to convert biomass into a a. Torrefaction: Limited feedstock flexibility; typically works best with
synthesis gas (syngas), primarily composed of hydrogen (H2), carbon dry and uniform biomass.
monoxide (CO), and methane (CH4). Syngas can be used for electricity b. Slow Pyrolysis: Moderate feedstock flexibility but may require pre-
generation, heat production, or as feedstock to produce fuels and processing of certain feedstocks.
chemicals. c. Fast Pyrolysis: Moderate feedstock flexibility, with some limitations
based on moisture content and composition.
4.2. Reaction rate d. Gasification: Wide feedstock flexibility, capable of handling various
biomass types and even some waste materials.
a. Torrefaction: Relatively slow process with a longer residence time at
moderate temperatures (200-300 ◦ C). 4.7. Carbon sequestration potential
b. Slow Pyrolysis: Slow process with a moderate residence time at
higher temperatures (350-600 ◦ C). a. Torrefaction: Limited carbon sequestration potential as the solid
c. Fast Pyrolysis: Rapid process with a short residence time at very high product is mainly used for combustion.
temperatures (500-800 ◦ C). b. Slow Pyrolysis: High carbon sequestration potential due to the pro­
d. Gasification: Rapid process with a short residence time at high duction of stable biochar.
temperatures (>700 ◦ C). c. Fast Pyrolysis: Some carbon sequestration potential through biochar
production, but the focus is on producing bio-oil for energy
4.3. Product composition applications.
d. Gasification: Minimal carbon sequestration potential as most of the
a. Torrefaction: Produces a solid product with improved energy density carbon is converted into syngas or other products.
and grindability but limited production of liquid or gaseous by-
products. 5. Perspectives and developments of the future
b. Slow Pyrolysis: Produces biochar (solid), bio-oil (liquid), and syngas
(gaseous) as the main products. Most biomass gasification models can be divided into kinetic or
c. Fast Pyrolysis: Produces a higher yield of bio-oil (liquid) compared to equilibrium types [154,241,242]. Kinetic models use structures, chem­
slow pyrolysis, along with some biochar and syngas. ical reactions, and ratios to model a process over space and time [243,
d. Gasification: Produces syngas rich in hydrogen, carbon monoxide, 244]. These models are generally process-specific and offer crucial in­
and methane, along with some ash and tar as by-products. sights into reaction mechanisms and ways to accelerate a given function.
Otherwise, equilibrium models will foretell each compound’s highest
4.4. Application possible conversion and gas processing; however, these predictions will
be subject to the constraints of thermodynamics and mass transfer
a. Torrefaction: Solid fuel applications, such as co-firing in power [245–247]. These concepts do not predict the time needed to reach
plants or pellet production for residential heating. equilibrium or require any specifics regarding the system’s geometry. To
b. Slow Pyrolysis: Soil improvement, carbon sequestration, and bio­ model the gasification procedure, multiple authors made use of the
energy production through biochar and bio-oil utilization. Aspen Plus™ software. They simulated chemical equilibrium to model a
c. Fast Pyrolysis: Bioenergy production through bio-oil utilization, bio- fixed-bed gasifier [248]. In Fortran’s programming language, experi­
based chemicals, and biorefinery applications. mental data and writing subroutines were utilized [159,160,249]. An
d. Gasification: Electricity generation, heat production, biofuels, and algorithm for gasifying biomass in a fluid-bed reactor at ambient pres­
chemical synthesis. sure was developed. Gibbs-free electricity in a computer simulation of an
occurring fixed-bed reactor was minimized [121]. This model breaks the
4.5. Energy efficiency gasification process into parts, including drying, pyrolysis, oxidation,
and reduction. They performed a simulation of a gasification process
a. Torrefaction: Moderate energy efficiency due to the lower heating that was broken down into three stages: the first stage removes humidity
value of the solid product. for biomass; the second stage breaks down the biomass in its primary
b. Slow Pyrolysis: Moderate energy efficiency, with some energy components; and the third stage models the gasification interactions by
recovered from biochar and bio-oil. minimizing the amount of free energy Gibbs they produce [250–252].
c. Fast Pyrolysis: Moderate to high energy efficiency, with a focus on Rice was subjected to a simulation of the gasification process, which
higher bio-oil yields. considered the connections between mass, fuel, and chemical kinetics
d. Gasification: High energy efficiency, especially in combined heat and [253–255]. Sreejith and colleagues developed an equilibrium model for
power (CHP) applications, utilizing the produced syngas. gasifying wood with steam based on the principle of minimizing Gibb’s

7
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

free energy [256–258]. The simulations presented in the published Facilitate the implementation of large-scale demonstration projects
research looked at the possibility of cleaning gases using only cyclones to showcase the viability and benefits of biomass gasification. These
to separate liquids from condensate and separate liquids from solids, like projects can help build confidence among stakeholders and attract
water and tar [259–265]. further investments in technology.
Producing hydrogen has been proposed as a viable option for the
transformation, primarily focused on decarbonization [266–268]. This e. Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing:
is particularly true if hydrogen comes from a source other than fossil
fuels. Syngas can be produced through gasification, which has been Foster collaboration between academia, industry, and governments
suggested as a technology that can contribute to hydrogen production. to share knowledge and best practices. Encourage the establishment of
Because of this, resultant processes are required to separate the various technology clusters or networks to facilitate information exchange and
gases produced, especially H2 and CO. The syngas response then receives accelerate technology development.
these gases, which leads to the formation of more H2 and the expulsion
of CO2 [269–271]. It was also suggested that gasifiers could play a role f. Environmental Standards:
in generating carbon dioxide.
On the other hand, this method can be made much more straight­ Set strict environmental standards for gasification plants to ensure
forward if the gasifier stage is substituted with a combustion process that compliance with emission limits and proper waste management. Pro­
operates with an air deficit. The steps involved in the process are broken mote the use of advanced gas cleaning technologies to minimize envi­
down into their respective categories. In this manner, the gasification ronmental impacts.
operation is modified by a phase in which combustion occurs in an at­
mosphere with a low concentration of oxygen, which encourages the g. Integrated Energy Systems:
formation of flue gas high in CO but low in CO2 content. After that, the
gases produced by the combustion are put through a process that in­ Encourage the integration of biomass gasification with other energy
volves the CO being isolated and concentrated. This CO is then sent to systems, such as combined heat and power (CHP) plants. This integra­
the water gas shift reaction, which increases the production of H2. The tion can enhance overall energy efficiency and improve the economic
carbon dioxide produced as a byproduct of the water gas shift reaction is viability of biomass gasification projects.
first used in the drying zone before letting loose into the atmosphere.
The primary advantage of this approach is that it is theoretically simpler h. Capacity Building:
to design and control burning than the product gas, making it a viable
alternative for producing energy from biomass. Since combustion Invest in training programs and capacity-building initiatives to
equipment has advantages, each piece of equipment’s investment is develop a skilled workforce in biomass gasification technology. This will
another benefit. Sustainable and renewable hydrogen production costs help bridge the skills gap and support the operation and maintenance of
could be significantly reduced by using this method, which involves the gasification facilities.
utilization of residual biomass, which currently shows no prospect of
recovery. i. Market Development and Financing:

6. Policy and implication Facilitate access to financing options for biomass gasification pro­
jects, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. Develop market
Policy and Implications for the analysis of technological de­ mechanisms that provide a fair and competitive market for bioenergy
velopments and the potential of biomass gasification as a viable indus­ and bio-based products.
trial process can play a crucial role in fostering its adoption and
promoting sustainable energy solutions. Here are some policy recom­ j. Life Cycle Analysis:
mendations and implications based on the review:
Promote the use of life cycle analysis (LCA) to assess the environ­
a. Supportive Regulatory Framework: mental and social impacts of biomass gasification compared to con­
ventional fossil fuel-based processes. Incorporate the findings into policy
Establish a supportive regulatory framework that incentivizes the decisions to ensure sustainable development.
adoption of biomass gasification technologies. This could include Implementing these policies and implications can create an enabling
financial incentives, tax credits, or renewable energy mandates to environment for advancing and deploying biomass gasification as a
encourage industries to invest in biomass gasification projects. viable industrial process. It can significantly reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, enhance energy security, and promote a more sustainable and
b. Research and Development Funding: resilient energy future.

Allocate funding for research and development in biomass gasifica­ 7. Conclusions

tion technologies. Government agencies and private organizations
should collaborate to support innovation, improve process efficiency, The review highlights significant technological advancements in
and address challenges such as feedstock variability and gasification biomass gasification processes. These advancements have resulted in
plant scalability. improved efficiency, reduced emissions, and enhanced flexibility in
handling various biomass feedstocks. The development of new gasifi­
c. Feedstock Management: cation reactor designs, advanced control systems, and integrated gas
cleanup technologies has contributed to the progress of biomass gasifi­
Encourage sustainable feedstock management practices, such as cation. Biomass gasification offers a promising renewable energy source.
agroforestry and crop rotation, to ensure a steady and reliable supply of It enables the conversion of a wide range of biomass feedstocks, such as
biomass for gasification. Promote the use of waste and residual biomass agricultural residues, forest waste, and energy crops, into a versatile
to minimize competition with food crops. synthesis gas (syngas). Syngas can then be used for various applications,
including electricity generation, heat production, and biofuel synthesis,
d. Technology Demonstration Projects: reducing the dependence on fossil fuels. As a cleaner energy conversion

8
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

process, biomass gasification has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas [12] E.W. Gabisa, S.H. Gheewala, Potential of bio-energy production in Ethiopia based
on available biomass residues, Biomass Bioenergy 111 (2018) 77–87, https://doi.
emissions compared to traditional fossil fuel-based systems. With proper
org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2018.02.009.
gas cleaning technologies, emissions of particulates, sulfur compounds, [13] D. Zalazar-Garcia, A. Fernandez, L. Rodriguez-Ortiz, R. Rodriguez, G. Mazza,
and nitrogen oxides can be minimized, making it an environmentally Sustainable slow-pyrolysis simulation of 12 lignocellulosic bio-wastes: CO2
friendly option. emission, energy, and water consumption, in: IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci.,
IOP Publishing, 2022, 12008.
Despite its potential, biomass gasification still faces challenges. One [14] Y. Wang, J.M. Bielicki, Acclimation and the response of hourly electricity loads to
of the main challenges is the variability of feedstock quality, which can meteorological variables, Energy 142 (2018) 473–485, https://doi.org/10.1016/
affect gasification performance. Additionally, the high capital costs j.energy.2017.10.037.
[15] F. Apadula, A. Bassini, A. Elli, S. Scapin, Relationships between meteorological
associated with gasification plants and the need for large-scale opera­ variables and monthly electricity demand, Appl. Energy 98 (2012) 346–356,
tions can be barriers to widespread implementation. Integration of https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.03.053.
biomass gasification with other industrial processes can enhance its [16] Mahidin Erdiwansyah, R. Mamat, M.S.M. Sani, F. Khoerunnisa, A. Kadarohman,
Target and demand for renewable energy across 10 ASEAN countries by 2040,
overall viability. For instance, coupling gasification with combined heat Electr. J. 32 (2019), 106670, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TEJ.2019.106670.
and power (CHP) systems or using syngas to produce biofuels and bio- [17] C.R. Chamorro, M.E.B.T.R. M, in: E. S, E.S. Mondejar (Eds.), Geothermal Power:
based chemicals can improve the economic viability of the technol­ Technologies and Current Status, Elsevier, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-
0-323-90386-8.00019-X.
ogy. The success of biomass gasification as a viable industrial process [18] E. Barbier, Geothermal energy technology and current status: an overview,
will heavily depend on supportive policies and market incentives. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 6 (2002) 3–65, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-
Governments and industries need to invest in research and development, 0321(02)00002-3.
[19] E. Erdiwansyah, M. Mahidin, H. Husin, N. Nasaruddin, K. Khairil, M. Zaki,
provide financial incentives, and establish favorable regulatory frame­
J. Jalaluddin, Investigation of availability, demand, targets, and development of
works to promote the adoption of biomass gasification technologies. renewable energy in 2017–2050: a case study in Indonesia, Int. J. Coal Sci.
While various pilot and demonstration projects have shown the poten­ Technol. 8 (2021) 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40789-020-00391-4.
tial of biomass gasification, further scaling and commercialization ef­ [20] P. Malik, M. Awasthi, S. Sinha, A techno-economic investigation of grid
integrated hybrid renewable energy systems, Sustain. Energy Technol.
forts are necessary to make it a mainstream industrial process. Assessments 51 (2022), 101976, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2022.101976.
Collaborations between academia, industry, and government are crucial [21] J. Dean, R. Braun, M. Penev, C. Kinchin, D. Muñoz, Leveling intermittent
to accelerating the deployment of biomass gasification technology. renewable energy production through biomass gasification-based hybrid systems,
J. Energy Resour. Technol. 133 (2011).
[22] O. Siddiqui, I. Dincer, B.S. Yilbas, Development of a novel renewable energy
system integrated with biomass gasification combined cycle for cleaner
Declaration of competing interest production purposes, J. Clean. Prod. 241 (2019), 118345, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118345.
[23] A. Jareteg, D. Maggiolo, A. Larsson, H. Thunman, S. Sasic, H. Ström, Effects of
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial bed aging on temperature signals from fixed-bed adsorbers during industrial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence operation, Results Eng 8 (2020), 100156, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
the work reported in this paper. rineng.2020.100156.
[24] M. Patel, X. Zhang, A. Kumar, Techno-economic and life cycle assessment on
lignocellulosic biomass thermochemical conversion technologies: a review,
Data availability Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 53 (2016) 1486–1499, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2015.09.070.
No data was used for the research described in the article. [25] V. Duc Bui, H. Phuong Vu, H. Phuong Nguyen, X. Quang Duong, D. Tuyen
Nguyen, M. Tuan Pham, P. Quy Phong Nguyen, Techno-economic assessment and
logistics management of biomass in the conversion progress to bioenergy,
References Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 55 (2023), 102991, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.seta.2022.102991.
[26] A.M. Elgarahy, A. Hammad, D.M. El-Sherif, M. Abouzid, M.S. Gaballah, K.
[[1] B. Hejazi, Heat integration and waste minimization of biomass steam
Z. Elwakeel, Thermochemical conversion strategies of biomass to biofuels,
gasification in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor, Biomass Bioenergy 159 (2022),
techno-economic and bibliometric analysis: a conceptual review, J. Environ.
106409, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2022.106409.
Chem. Eng. 9 (2021), 106503, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.106503.
[2] M. Kagumba, M.H. Al-Dahhan, Impact of internals size and configuration on
[27] R.K. Mishra, V. kumar, P. Kumar, K. Mohanty, Hydrothermal liquefaction of
bubble dynamics in bubble columns for alternative clean fuels production, Ind.
biomass for bio-crude production: a review on feedstocks, chemical compositions,
Eng. Chem. Res. 54 (2015) 1359–1372.
operating parameters, reaction kinetics, techno-economic study, and life cycle
[3] S. Pandit, M. Sharma, S. Banerjee, B. Kumar Nayak, D. Das, S. Khilari, R. Prasad,
assessment, Fuel 316 (2022), 123377, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Pretreatment of cyanobacterial biomass for the production of biofuel in microbial
fuel.2022.123377.
fuel cells, Bioresour. Technol. (2022), 128505, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[28] A.T. Ubando, D.R.T. Rivera, W.-H. Chen, A.B. Culaba, A comprehensive review of
biortech.2022.128505.
life cycle assessment (LCA) of microalgal and lignocellulosic bioenergy products
[4] Erdiwansyah, Mahidin, H. Husin, Nasaruddin, M. Zaki, Muhibbuddin, A critical
from thermochemical processes, Bioresour. Technol. 291 (2019), 121837,
review of the integration of renewable energy sources with various technologies,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121837.
Prot. Control Mod. Power Syst. 6 (2021) 3, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41601-021-
[29] M.F.R. Michaga, S. Michailos, K.J. Hughes, D. Ingham, M. Pourkashanian, 10 -
00181-3.
techno-economic and life cycle assessment review of sustainable aviation fuel
[5] N. Abas, A. Kalair, N. Khan, Review of fossil fuels and future energy technologies,
produced via biomass gasification, in: R.C.B.T.-S.B. Ray (Ed.), Appl. Biotechnol.
Futures 69 (2015) 31–49, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2015.03.003.
Rev., Academic Press, 2021, pp. 269–303, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-
[6] M.H.M. Yasin, R. Mamat, A.F. Yusop, D.M.N.D. Idris, T. Yusaf, M. Rasul,
820297-5.00012-8.
G. Najafi, Study of a diesel engine performance with exhaust gas recirculation
[30] A. Weir, A. Jiménez del Barco Carrión, C. Queffélec, B. Bujoli, E. Chailleux, C.
(EGR) system fuelled with palm biodiesel, Energy Proc. 110 (2017) 26–31.
N. Uguna, C. Snape, G. Airey, Renewable binders from waste biomass for road
[7] A. Asadi, O.N. Kadijani, M.H. Doranehgard, M.V. Bozorg, Q. Xiong, M.S. Shadloo,
construction: a review on thermochemical conversion technologies and current
L.K.B. Li, Numerical study on the application of biodiesel and bioethanol in a
developments, Construct. Build. Mater. 330 (2022), 127076, https://doi.org/
multiple injection diesel engine, Renew. Energy 150 (2020) 1019–1029, https://
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127076.
doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.088.
[31] M.-K. Bahng, C. Mukarakate, D.J. Robichaud, M.R. Nimlos, Current technologies
[8] Erdiwansyah, R. Mamat, M.S.M. Sani, K. Sudhakar, Renewable energy in
for analysis of biomass thermochemical processing: a review, Anal. Chim. Acta
southeast asia: policies and recommendations, Sci. Total Environ. (2019),
651 (2009) 117–138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2009.08.016.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.273.
[32] J. Wei, M. Wang, G. Tang, M.A. Akhtar, D. Xu, X. Song, G. Yu, B. Li, H. Zhang,
[9] F. Manzano-Agugliaro, A. Alcayde, F.G. Montoya, A. Zapata-Sierra, C. Gil,
S. Zhang, Advances on in-situ analysis of char structure evolution during
Scientific production of renewable energies worldwide: an overview, Renew.
thermochemical conversion of coal/biomass: a review, Fuel Process, Technol. 230
Sustain. Energy Rev. 18 (2013) 134–143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
(2022), 107221, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2022.107221.
rser.2012.10.020.
[33] S. Verma, A.M. Dregulo, V. Kumar, P.C. Bhargava, N. Khan, A. Singh, X. Sun,
[10] E. Erdiwansyah, A. Gani, R. Mamat, M. Mahidin, K. Sudhakar, S.M. Rosdi,
R. Sindhu, P. Binod, Z. Zhang, A. Pandey, M.K. Awasthi, Reaction engineering
H. Husin, Biomass and wind energy as sources of renewable energy for a more
during biomass gasification and conversion to energy, Energy 266 (2023),
sustainable environment in Indonesia: a review, Arch. Environ. Protect. 48 (2022)
126458, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.126458.
57–69, https://doi.org/10.24425/aep.2022.142690.
[34] L.M. Quan, H. Kamyab, A. Yuzir, V. Ashokkumar, S.E. Hosseini,
[11] D.D. Guta, Assessment of biomass fuel resource potential and utilization in
B. Balasubramanian, I. Kirpichnikova, Review of the application of gasification
Ethiopia: sourcing strategies for renewable energies, Int. J. Renew. Energy
and combustion technology and waste-to-energy technologies in sewage sludge
Resour. 2 (2012) 131–139.

9
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

treatment, Fuel 316 (2022), 123199, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [56] N. Ripoll, M. Toledo, Hydrogen and syngas production from methane-acetylene
fuel.2022.123199. rich combustion in inert porous media burner, Results Eng 12 (2021), 100287,
[35] S. Zhou, H. Su, Z. Wu, X. Zhu, B. Yan, G. Chen, Numerical study on self-ignition https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2021.100287.
temperature of biomass gasified gas for the application of MILD combustion, Fuel [57] M. Bidabadi, M. Harati, Q. Xiong, E. Yaghoubi, M.H. Doranehgard,
Process. Technol. 236 (2022), 107417, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. P. Aghajannezhad, Volatization & combustion of biomass particles in random
fuproc.2022.107417. media: mathematical modeling and analyze the effect of Lewis number, Chem.
[36] C. Diyoke, N. Gao, M. Aneke, M. Wang, C. Wu, Modelling of down-draft Eng. Process. - Process Intensif. 126 (2018) 232–238, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gasification of biomass – an integrated pyrolysis, combustion and reduction cep.2018.03.006.
process, Appl. Therm. Eng. 142 (2018) 444–456, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [58] J. Ren, Y.-L. Liu, X.-Y. Zhao, J.-P. Cao, Biomass thermochemical conversion: a
applthermaleng.2018.06.079. review on tar elimination from biomass catalytic gasification, J. Energy Inst. 93
[37] N. Hanchate, S. Ramani, C.S. Mathpati, V.H. Dalvi, Biomass gasification using (2020) 1083–1098, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2019.10.003.
dual fluidized bed gasification systems: a review, J. Clean. Prod. 280 (2021), [59] L. Devi, K.J. Ptasinski, F.J.J.G. Janssen, A review of the primary measures for tar
123148, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123148. elimination in biomass gasification processes, Biomass Bioenergy 24 (2003)
[38] Q. Xiong, M.M. Yeganeh, E. Yaghoubi, A. Asadi, M.H. Doranehgard, K. Hong, 125–140, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(02)00102-2.
Parametric investigation on biomass gasification in a fluidized bed gasifier and [60] M. Cortazar, L. Santamaria, G. Lopez, J. Alvarez, L. Zhang, R. Wang, X. Bi,
conceptual design of gasifier, Chem. Eng. Process. - Process Intensif. 127 (2018) M. Olazar, A comprehensive review of primary strategies for tar removal in
271–291, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2018.04.003. biomass gasification, Energy Convers. Manag. 276 (2023), 116496, https://doi.
[39] X. Xiao, D.D. Le, K. Morishita, S. Zhang, L. Li, T. Takarada, Multi-stage biomass org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116496.
gasification in Internally Circulating Fluidized-bed Gasifier (ICFG): test operation [61] M. Klavins, V. Bisters, J. Burlakovs, Small scale gasification application and
of animal-waste-derived biomass and parametric investigation at low perspectives in circular economy, Environ. Clim. Technol. 22 (2018) 42–54.
temperature, Fuel Process, Technol. 91 (2010) 895–902, https://doi.org/ [62] S. Werle, S. Sobek, Gasification of sewage sludge within a circular economy
10.1016/j.fuproc.2009.08.009. perspective: a Polish case study, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26 (2019)
[40] A. Al-Rumaihi, P. Parthasarathy, A. Fernandez, T. Al-Ansari, H.R. Mackey, 35422–35432.
R. Rodriguez, G. Mazza, G. McKay, Thermal degradation characteristics and [63] E. Singh, R. Mishra, A. Kumar, S.K. Shukla, S.-L. Lo, S. Kumar, Circular economy-
kinetic study of camel manure pyrolysis, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 9 (2021), based environmental management using biochar: driving towards sustainability,
106071, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.106071. Process Saf. Environ. Protect. 163 (2022) 585–600, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[41] P. Parthasarathy, A. Fernandez, T. Al-Ansari, H.R. Mackey, R. Rodriguez, psep.2022.05.056.
G. McKay, Thermal degradation characteristics and gasification kinetics of camel [64] S.Y. Foong, Y.H. Chan, S.S.M. Lock, B.L.F. Chin, C.L. Yiin, K.W. Cheah, A.C.
manure using thermogravimetric analysis, J. Environ. Manag. 287 (2021), M. Loy, P.N.Y. Yek, W.W.F. Chong, S.S. Lam, Microwave processing of oil palm
112345, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112345. wastes for bioenergy production and circular economy: recent advancements,
[42] A. Fernandez, C. Palacios, M. Echegaray, G. Mazza, R. Rodriguez, Pyrolysis and challenges, and future prospects, Bioresour. Technol. 369 (2023), 128478,
combustion of regional agro-industrial wastes: thermal behavior and kinetic https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128478.
parameters comparison, Combust. Sci. Technol. 190 (2018) 114–135. [65] S. Arora, J. Jung, M. Liu, X. Li, A. Goel, J. Chen, S. Song, C. Anderson, D. Chen,
[43] A. Fernandez, A. Saffe, R. Pereyra, G. Mazza, R. Rodriguez, Kinetic study of K. Leong, S.H. Lim, S.L. Fong, S. Ghosh, A. Lin, H.W. Kua, H.T.W. Tan, Y. Dai, C.-
regional agro-industrial wastes pyrolysis using non-isothermal TGA analysis, H. Wang, Gasification biochar from horticultural waste: an exemplar of the
Appl. Therm. Eng. 106 (2016) 1157–1164, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. circular economy in Singapore, Sci. Total Environ. 781 (2021), 146573, https://
applthermaleng.2016.06.084. doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146573.
[44] Erdiwansyah, Mahidin, H. Husin, M. Faisal, Muhtadin, A. Gani, R.E. Sardjono, [66] M. Echegaray, D.Z. García, G. Mazza, R. Rodriguez, Air-steam gasification of five
R. Mamat, The modification of the perforated plate in the fluidized-bed regional lignocellulosic wastes: exergetic evaluation, Sustain. Energy Technol.
combustor to analyze heat convection rate and temperature, J. Combust. 2021 Assessments 31 (2019) 115–123, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2018.12.015.
(2021), 4084162, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/4084162. [67] R. Rodriguez, G. Mazza, A. Fernandez, A. Saffe, M. Echegaray, Prediction of the
[45] A.A. Khan, W. de Jong, P.J. Jansens, H. Spliethoff, Biomass combustion in lignocellulosic winery wastes behavior during gasification process in fluidized
fluidized bed boilers: potential problems and remedies, Fuel Process. Technol. 90 bed: experimental and theoretical study, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 6 (2018)
(2009) 21–50. 5570–5579, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2018.08.054.
[46] E. Erdiwansyah, M. Mahidin, H. Husin, M. Faisal, U. Usman, M. Muhtadin, [68] V.G. Nguyen, T.X. Nguyen-Thi, P.Q. Phong Nguyen, V.D. Tran, Ü. Ağbulut, L.
A. Gani, R. Mamat, Modification perforated plate in the fluidize-bed combustor to H. Nguyen, D. Balasubramanian, W. Tarelko, S.A. Bandh, N.D. Khoa Pham,
investigation of heat convection rate and temperature, Front. Heat Mass Transf. Recent advances in hydrogen production from biomass waste with a focus on
18 (2022). pyrolysis and gasification, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy (2023), https://doi.org/
[47] A. V Bridgwater, The technical and economic feasibility of biomass gasification 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.05.049.
for power generation, Fuel 74 (1995) 631–653, https://doi.org/10.1016/0016- [69] A.K. Koshariya, M.S. Krishnan, S. Jaisankar, G.B. Loganathan, T. Sathish,
2361(95)00001-L. Ü. Ağbulut, R. Saravanan, L.T. Tuan, N.D.K. Pham, Waste to energy: an
[48] H. Chen, D. Lu, J. An, S. Qiao, Y. Dong, X. Jiang, G. Xu, T. Liu, Thermo-Economic experimental study on hydrogen production from food waste gasification, Int. J.
analysis of a novel biomass Gasification-Based power system integrated with a Hydrogen Energy (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.05.221.
supercritical CO2 cycle and a Coal-Fired power plant, Energy Convers. Manag. [70] A.T. Hoang, Z. Huang, S. Nižetić, A. Pandey, X.P. Nguyen, R. Luque, H.C. Ong,
266 (2022), 115860, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115860. Z. Said, T.H. Le, V.V. Pham, Characteristics of hydrogen production from steam
[49] T. Detchusananard, K. Im-orb, P. Ponpesh, A. Arpornwichanop, Biomass gasification of plant-originated lignocellulosic biomass and its prospects in
gasification integrated with CO2 capture processes for high-purity hydrogen Vietnam, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 47 (2022) 4394–4425, https://doi.org/
production: process performance and energy analysis, Energy Convers. Manag. 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.11.091.
171 (2018) 1560–1572, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.06.072. [71] J. Shankar Tumuluru, S. Sokhansanj, J.R. Hess, C.T. Wright, R.D. Boardman,
[50] M.H. Doranehgard, H. Samadyar, M. Mesbah, P. Haratipour, S. Samiezade, High- A review on biomass torrefaction process and product properties for energy
purity hydrogen production with in situ CO2 capture based on biomass applications, Ind. Biotechnol. 7 (2011) 384–401.
gasification, Fuel 202 (2017) 29–35, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [72] W. Wang, C. Wen, C. Li, M. Wang, X. Li, Y. Zhou, X. Gong, Emission reduction of
fuel.2017.04.014. particulate matter from the combustion of biochar via thermal pre-treatment of
[51] Z. Khan, S. Yusup, M. Aslam, A. Inayat, M. Shahbaz, S. Raza Naqvi, R. Farooq, torrefaction, slow pyrolysis or hydrothermal carbonisation and its co-combustion
I. Watson, NO and SO2 emissions in palm kernel shell catalytic steam gasification with pulverized coal, Fuel 240 (2019) 278–288, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
with in-situ CO2 adsorption for hydrogen production in a pilot-scale fluidized bed fuel.2018.11.117.
gasification system, J. Clean. Prod. 236 (2019), 117636, https://doi.org/ [73] A. Knapczyk, S. Francik, M. Jewiarz, A. Zawiślak, R. Francik, Thermal treatment
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117636. of biomass: a bibliometric analysis—the torrefaction case, Energies 14 (2020)
[52] M. Faraji, M. Saidi, Hydrogen-rich syngas production via integrated configuration 162.
of pyrolysis and air gasification processes of various algal biomass: process [74] Y.J. Rueda-Ordóñez, K. Tannous, Drying and thermal decomposition kinetics of
simulation and evaluation using Aspen Plus software, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 46 sugarcane straw by nonisothermal thermogravimetric analysis, Bioresour.
(2021) 18844–18856, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.03.047. Technol. 264 (2018) 131–139, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.04.064.
[53] G. Kong, K. Wang, X. Zhang, J. Li, L. Han, X. Zhang, Torrefaction/carbonization- [75] F.L. Braghiroli, H. Bouafif, C.M. Neculita, A. Koubaa, Influence of pyro-
enhanced gasification-steam reforming of biomass for promoting hydrogen- gasification and activation conditions on the porosity of activated biochars: a
enriched syngas production and tar elimination over gasification biochars, literature review, Waste and Biomass Valorization 11 (2020) 5079–5098.
Bioresour. Technol. 363 (2022), 127960, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [76] F.L. Braghiroli, H. Bouafif, N. Hamza, B. Bouslimi, C.M. Neculita, A. Koubaa, The
biortech.2022.127960. influence of pilot-scale pyro-gasification and activation conditions on porosity
[54] R.B.W. Evaristo, R. Ferreira, J. Petrocchi Rodrigues, J. Sabino Rodrigues, G. development in activated biochars, Biomass Bioenergy 118 (2018) 105–114,
F. Ghesti, E.A. Silveira, M. Costa, Multiparameter-analysis of CO2/Steam- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2018.08.016.
enhanced gasification and pyrolysis for syngas and biochar production from low- [77] J. Gutiérrez, A. Rubio-Clemente, J.F. Pérez, Effect of main solid biomass
cost feedstock, Energy Convers. Manag. X. 12 (2021), 100138, https://doi.org/ commodities of patula pine on biochar properties produced under gasification
10.1016/j.ecmx.2021.100138. conditions, Ind. Crop. Prod. 160 (2021), 113123, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[55] Y. Roussel, P.-L. Billerot, R. Lemaire, P. Seers, Numerical study of the impact of indcrop.2020.113123.
tailored porous media design on syngas production from methane-rich [78] T.A. Lestander, F. Weiland, A. Grimm, M. Rudolfsson, H. Wiinikka, Gasification of
combustion, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j. pure and mixed feedstock components: effect on syngas composition and
ijhydene.2022.09.266.

10
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

gasification efficiency, J. Clean. Prod. 369 (2022), 133330, https://doi.org/ [101] J.-L. Zheng, Y.-H. Zhu, G.-T. Sun, Y.-Y. Dong, M.-Q. Zhu, Bio-oil gasification for
10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133330. production of the raw gas as ammonia syngas, Fuel 327 (2022), 125029, https://
[79] L. Gómez, G. Grasa, I. Martínez, R. Murillo, Performance study of a methanation doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125029.
process for a syngas obtained from a sorption enhanced gasification process, [102] K. Wang, H. Zhang, S. Chu, Z. Zha, Pyrolysis of single large biomass particle:
Chem. Eng. Sci. 267 (2023), 118291, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. simulation and experiments, Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 29 (2021) 375–382, https://doi.
ces.2022.118291. org/10.1016/j.cjche.2020.09.032.
[80] S. Dasappa, A.M. Shivapuji, in: D. Tuli, S. Kasture, A.B.T.-A.B.T. Kuila (Eds.), [103] H. Luo, X. Wang, X. Liu, X. Wu, X. Shi, Q. Xiong, A review on CFD simulation of
Chapter 12 - Biomass Gasification: Thermochemical Route to Energetic Bio- biomass pyrolysis in fluidized bed reactors with emphasis on particle-scale
Chemicals, Elsevier, 2022, pp. 305–332, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323- models, J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 162 (2022), 105433, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
88427-3.00022-2. jaap.2022.105433.
[81] M. Shahbaz, A. AlNouss, I. Ghiat, G. Mckay, H. Mackey, S. Elkhalifa, T. Al-Ansari, [104] X. Li, C. Yin, S. Knudsen Kær, T. Condra, A detailed pyrolysis model for a
A comprehensive review of biomass based thermochemical conversion thermally large biomass particle, Fuel 278 (2020), 118397, https://doi.org/
technologies integrated with CO2 capture and utilisation within BECCS networks, 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118397.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 173 (2021), 105734, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [105] Y. Yang, H. Shahbeik, A. Shafizadeh, N. Masoudnia, S. Rafiee, Y. Zhang, J. Pan,
resconrec.2021.105734. M. Tabatabaei, M. Aghbashlo, Biomass microwave pyrolysis characterization by
[82] Y.H. Chan, K.W. Cheah, B.S. How, A.C.M. Loy, M. Shahbaz, H.K.G. Singh, N. machine learning for sustainable rural biorefineries, Renew. Energy 201 (2022)
R. Yusuf, A.F.A. Shuhaili, S. Yusup, W.A.W.A.K. Ghani, J. Rambli, Y. Kansha, H. 70–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.11.028.
L. Lam, B.H. Hong, S.L. Ngan, An overview of biomass thermochemical [106] Z. Dong, X. Bai, D. Xu, W. Li, Machine learning prediction of pyrolytic products of
conversion technologies in Malaysia, Sci. Total Environ. 680 (2019) 105–123, lignocellulosic biomass based on physicochemical characteristics and pyrolysis
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.211. conditions, Bioresour. Technol. 367 (2023), 128182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[83] Y. Man, J. Feng, Effect of iron ore-coal pellets during reduction with hydrogen biortech.2022.128182.
and carbon monoxide, Powder Technol. 301 (2016) 1213–1217, https://doi.org/ [107] D. Neves, H. Thunman, A. Matos, L. Tarelho, A. Gómez-Barea, Characterization
10.1016/j.powtec.2016.07.057. and prediction of biomass pyrolysis products, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 37
[84] M.S. Valipour, M.Y. Motamed Hashemi, Y. Saboohi, Mathematical modeling of (2011) 611–630, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2011.01.001.
the reaction in an iron ore pellet using a mixture of hydrogen, water vapor, [108] E.M. Suuberg, W.A. Peters, J.B. Howard, Product composition and kinetics of
carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide: an isothermal study, Adv. Powder Technol. lignite pyrolysis, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 17 (1978) 37–46.
17 (2006) 277–295, https://doi.org/10.1163/156855206777213375. [109] A. Okati, M. Reza Khani, B. Shokri, E. Monteiro, A. Rouboa, Parametric studies
[85] C. Yilmaz, J. Wendelstorf, T. Turek, Modeling and simulation of hydrogen over a plasma co-gasification process of biomass and coal through a restricted
injection into a blast furnace to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, J. Clean. Prod. model in Aspen plus, Fuel 331 (2023), 125952, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
154 (2017) 488–501, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.162. fuel.2022.125952.
[86] H. Kurji, A. Valera-Medina, A. Okon, C.T. Chong, Combustion and emission [110] X. Zhu, Z. Wang, R. Ocone, H. Wang, MP-PIC simulation on CO2 gasification of
performance of CO2/CH4/biodiesel and CO2/CH4/diesel blends in a Swirl biomass in a pilot plant circulating fluidized bed gasifier, Fuel 332 (2023),
Burner Generator, Energy Proc. 142 (2017) 154–159, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 125992, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125992.
egypro.2017.12.025. [111] C. Lautenberger, C. Fernandez-Pello, Generalized pyrolysis model for combustible
[87] M.C. Lee, S. Bin Seo, J. Yoon, M. Kim, Y. Yoon, Experimental study on the effect of solids, Fire Saf. J. 44 (2009) 819–839, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
N2, CO2, and steam dilution on the combustion performance of H2 and CO firesaf.2009.03.011.
synthetic gas in an industrial gas turbine, Fuel 102 (2012) 431–438, https://doi. [112] A.Y. Snegirev, Generalized approach to model pyrolysis of flammable materials,
org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.05.028. Thermochim. Acta 590 (2014) 242–250, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[88] B. Acharya, I. Sule, A. Dutta, A review on advances of torrefaction technologies tca.2014.07.009.
for biomass processing, Biomass Convers. Biorefinery. 2 (2012) 349–369. [113] T. Rogaume, Thermal decomposition and pyrolysis of solid fuels: objectives,
[89] H.C. Ong, K.L. Yu, W.-H. Chen, M.K. Pillejera, X. Bi, K.-Q. Tran, A. Pétrissans, challenges and modelling, Fire Saf. J. 106 (2019) 177–188, https://doi.org/
M. Pétrissans, Variation of lignocellulosic biomass structure from torrefaction: a 10.1016/j.firesaf.2019.04.016.
critical review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 152 (2021), 111698, https://doi. [114] Q. Li, G. Song, J. Xiao, T. Sun, K. Yang, Exergy analysis of biomass staged-
org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111698. gasification for hydrogen-rich syngas, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 44 (2019)
[90] C. He, C. Tang, C. Li, J. Yuan, K.-Q. Tran, Q.-V. Bach, R. Qiu, Y. Yang, Wet 2569–2579, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.11.227.
torrefaction of biomass for high quality solid fuel production: a review, Renew. [115] S. Sezer, U. Özveren, Investigation of syngas exergy value and hydrogen
Sustain. Energy Rev. 91 (2018) 259–271, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. concentration in syngas from biomass gasification in a bubbling fluidized bed
rser.2018.03.097. gasifier by using machine learning, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 46 (2021)
[91] J. Ahrenfeldt, T.P. Thomsen, U. Henriksen, L.R. Clausen, Biomass gasification 20377–20396, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.03.184.
cogeneration – a review of state of the art technology and near future [116] P.-C. Kuo, B. Illathukandy, W. Wu, J.-S. Chang, Energy, exergy, and
perspectives, Appl. Therm. Eng. 50 (2013) 1407–1417, https://doi.org/10.1016/ environmental analyses of renewable hydrogen production through plasma
j.applthermaleng.2011.12.040. gasification of microalgal biomass, Energy 223 (2021), 120025, https://doi.org/
[92] R. Thomson, P. Kwong, E. Ahmad, K.D.P. Nigam, Clean syngas from small 10.1016/j.energy.2021.120025.
commercial biomass gasifiers; a review of gasifier development, recent advances [117] L. von Berg, A. Anca-Couce, C. Hochenauer, R. Scharler, Multi-scale modelling of
and performance evaluation, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020), 21087, https:// fluidized bed biomass gasification using a 1D particle model coupled to CFD, Fuel
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.05.160. –21111. 324 (2022), 124677, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.124677.
[93] F. Patuzzi, D. Basso, S. Vakalis, D. Antolini, S. Piazzi, V. Benedetti, E. Cordioli, [118] B. Das, A. Bhattacharya, A. Datta, Kinetic modeling of biomass gasification and
M. Baratieri, State-of-the-art of small-scale biomass gasification systems: an tar formation in a fluidized bed gasifier using equivalent reactor network (ERN),
extensive and unique monitoring review, Energy 223 (2021), 120039, https:// Fuel 280 (2020), 118582, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118582.
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120039. [119] A. Aghaalikhani, J.C. Schmid, D. Borello, J. Fuchs, F. Benedikt, H. Hofbauer,
[94] E. Bocci, M. Sisinni, M. Moneti, L. Vecchione, A. Di Carlo, M. Villarini, State of art F. Rispoli, U.B. Henriksen, Z. Sárossy, L. Cedola, Detailed modelling of biomass
of small scale biomass gasification power systems: a review of the different steam gasification in a dual fluidized bed gasifier with temperature variation,
typologies, Energy Proc. 45 (2014) 247–256, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Renew. Energy 143 (2019) 703–718, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
egypro.2014.01.027. renene.2019.05.022.
[95] H.-K. Seo, S. Park, J. Lee, M. Kim, S.-W. Chung, J.-H. Chung, K. Kim, Effects of [120] A. Gómez-Barea, B. Leckner, Modeling of biomass gasification in fluidized bed,
operating factors in the coal gasification reaction, Kor. J. Chem. Eng. 28 (2011) Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 36 (2010) 444–509.
1851–1858. [121] W. Doherty, A. Reynolds, D. Kennedy, The effect of air preheating in a biomass
[96] N. Wu, K. Lan, Y. Yao, An integrated techno-economic and environmental CFB gasifier using ASPEN Plus simulation, Biomass Bioenergy 33 (2009)
assessment for carbon capture in hydrogen production by biomass gasification, 1158–1167, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.05.004.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 188 (2023), 106693, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [122] A. Gagliano, F. Nocera, M. Bruno, G. Cardillo, Development of an equilibrium-
resconrec.2022.106693. based model of gasification of biomass by aspen plus, Energy Proc. 111 (2017)
[97] A. AlNouss, G. McKay, T. Al-Ansari, A comparison of steam and oxygen fed 1010–1019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.264.
biomass gasification through a techno-economic-environmental study, Energy [123] P. Sharma, B. Gupta, M. Pandey, K. Singh Bisen, P. Baredar, Downdraft biomass
Convers. Manag. 208 (2020), 112612, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. gasification: a review on concepts, designs analysis, modelling and recent
enconman.2020.112612. advances, Mater. Today Proc. 46 (2021) 5333–5341, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[98] N. Khallaghi, H. Jeswani, D.P. Hanak, V. Manovic, Techno-economic- matpr.2020.08.789.
environmental assessment of biomass oxy-gasification staged oxy-combustion for [124] M. Ajorloo, M. Ghodrat, J. Scott, V. Strezov, Recent advances in thermodynamic
negative emission combined heat and power, Appl. Therm. Eng. 196 (2021), analysis of biomass gasification: a review on numerical modelling and simulation,
117254, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.117254. J. Energy Inst. 102 (2022) 395–419, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2022.05.003.
[99] S. Ma, C. Dong, X. Hu, J. Xue, Y. Zhao, X. Wang, Techno-economic evaluation of a [125] A. Bhavanam, R.C. Sastry, Biomass gasification processes in downd raft fixed bed
combined biomass gasification-solid oxide fuel cell system for ethanol production reactors: a review, Int. J. Chem. Eng. Appl. 2 (2011) 425.
via syngas fermentation, Fuel 324 (2022), 124395, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [126] A. Chanthakett, M.T. Arif, M.M.K. Khan, A.M.T. Oo, Performance assessment of
fuel.2022.124395. gasification reactors for sustainable management of municipal solid waste,
[100] A. AlNouss, G. McKay, T. Al-Ansari, Production of syngas via gasification using J. Environ. Manag. 291 (2021), 112661, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
optimum blends of biomass, J. Clean. Prod. 242 (2020), 118499, https://doi.org/ jenvman.2021.112661.
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118499.

11
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

[127] O. Bourguig, A. Ramos, K. Bouziane, M. Asbik, E. Monteiro, A. Rouboa, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Tran. 124 (2021), 105270, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Performance assessment of the co-gasification for sustainable management of icheatmasstransfer.2021.105270.
municipal solid waste: Moroccan Case, Energy Rep. 8 (2022) 1530–1540, https:// [152] A. Blaszczuk, M. Pogorzelec, T. Shimizu, Heat transfer characteristics in a large-
doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.09.029. scale bubbling fluidized bed with immersed horizontal tube bundles, Energy 162
[128] D.-J. Lee, Gasification of municipal solid waste (MSW) as a cleaner final disposal (2018) 10–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.08.008.
route: a mini-review, Bioresour. Technol. 344 (2022), 126217, https://doi.org/ [153] W.-X. Peng, S.-B. Ge, A.G. Ebadi, H. Hisoriev, M.J. Esfahani, Syngas production by
10.1016/j.biortech.2021.126217. catalytic co-gasification of coal-biomass blends in a circulating fluidized bed
[129] M. Yang, S.M. Mousavi, H. Fatehi, X.-S. Bai, Numerical simulation of biomass gasifier, J. Clean. Prod. 168 (2017) 1513–1517, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gasification in fluidized bed gasifiers, Fuel 337 (2023), 127104, https://doi.org/ jclepro.2017.06.233.
10.1016/j.fuel.2022.127104. [154] M.I. Hassan, Y.T. Makkawi, A hydrodynamic model for biomass gasification in a
[130] J. Manu, V. Madav, Numerical modeling of rice husk gasification in fluidized bed circulating fluidized bed riser, Chem. Eng. Process. - Process Intensif. 129 (2018)
gasifier for sustainable biofuel production, Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 39 (2022), 148–161, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2018.05.012.
102429, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2022.102429. [155] Z. Liu, W. Peng, M. Motahari-Nezhad, S. Shahraki, M. Beheshti, Circulating
[131] N.A. Samani, R.K. Thapa, B.M.E. Moldestad, M.S. Eikeland, Evaluating the fluidized bed gasification of biomass for flexible end-use of syngas: a micro and
impacts of temperature on a bubbling fluidized bed biomass gasification using nano scale study for production of bio-methanol, J. Clean. Prod. 129 (2016)
CPFD simulation model, IFAC-PapersOnLine 55 (2022) 618–623, https://doi.org/ 249–255, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.076.
10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.164. [156] Biomass steam gasification — an extensive parametric modeling study, Fuel
[132] M. Balat, M. Balat, E. Kırtay, H. Balat, Main routes for the thermo-conversion of Energy Abstr. 43 (2002) 197, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6701(02)85812-X.
biomass into fuels and chemicals. Part 1: pyrolysis systems, Energy Convers. [157] G. Schuster, G. Löffler, K. Weigl, H. Hofbauer, Biomass steam gasification – an
Manag. 50 (2009) 3147–3157, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. extensive parametric modeling study, Bioresour. Technol. 77 (2001) 71–79,
enconman.2009.08.014. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(00)00115-2.
[133] N.L. Panwar, R. Kothari, V. V Tyagi, Thermo chemical conversion of biomass – [158] S.A. Zaman, D. Roy, S. Ghosh, Process modeling and optimization for biomass
eco friendly energy routes, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 1801–1816, steam-gasification employing response surface methodology, Biomass Bioenergy
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.024. 143 (2020), 105847, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105847.
[134] J.R.C. Rey, D.T. Pio, L.A.C. Tarelho, Biomass direct gasification for electricity [159] P. Kaushal, R. Tyagi, Advanced simulation of biomass gasification in a fluidized
generation and natural gas replacement in the lime kilns of the pulp and paper bed reactor using ASPEN PLUS, Renew. Energy 101 (2017) 629–636, https://doi.
industry: a techno-economic analysis, Energy 237 (2021), 121562, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.09.011.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121562. [160] M. Puig-Gamero, D.T. Pio, L.A.C. Tarelho, P. Sánchez, L. Sanchez-Silva,
[135] J.A. Ruiz, M.C. Juárez, M.P. Morales, P. Muñoz, M.A. Mendívil, Biomass Simulation of biomass gasification in bubbling fluidized bed reactor using aspen
gasification for electricity generation: review of current technology barriers, plus, Energy Convers. Manag. 235 (2021), 113981, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 18 (2013) 174–183, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. enconman.2021.113981.
rser.2012.10.021. [161] J. Fatema, T. Ahmed, M.M. Islam, M.N. Sakib, A.M.S. Chowdhury, P. Haque,
[136] M. Asadullah, Barriers of commercial power generation using biomass Gasification of kitchen wastes in an updraft fluidized bed gasifier and simulation
gasification gas: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 29 (2014) 201–215, of the process with Aspen Plus, J. Clean. Prod. 371 (2022), 133670, https://doi.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.074. org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133670.
[137] J.D. Martínez, K. Mahkamov, R. V Andrade, E.E. Silva Lora, Syngas production in [162] P.C. Munasinghe, S.K. Khanal, in: A. Pandey, C. Larroche, S.C. Ricke, C.-
downdraft biomass gasifiers and its application using internal combustion G. Dussap, E.B.T.-B. Gnansounou (Eds.), Chapter 4 - Biomass-Derived Syngas
engines, Renew. Energy 38 (2012) 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Fermentation into Biofuels, Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2011, pp. 79–98,
renene.2011.07.035. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385099-7.00004-8.
[138] Gas cleaning for IC engine applications from fixed bed biomass gasification, Fuel [163] P.C. Munasinghe, S.K. Khanal, Biomass-derived syngas fermentation into biofuels:
Energy Abstr. 42 (2001) 37, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6701(01)80422-7. opportunities and challenges, Bioresour. Technol. 101 (2010) 5013–5022,
[139] A. Kumar, Experimental investigation of a dual stage ignition biomass downdraft https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.12.098.
gasifier for deriving the engine quality gas, Ain Shams Eng. J. 14 (2023), 101912, [164] V. Subramani, S.K. Gangwal, A review of recent literature to search for an
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2022.101912. efficient catalytic process for the conversion of syngas to ethanol, Energy Fuels 22
[140] C. Di Blasi, Modeling wood gasification in a countercurrent fixed-bed reactor, (2008) 814–839.
AIChE J. 50 (2004) 2306–2319. [165] J.P. Gujar, B. Modhera, A review on catalytic conversion of biodiesel derivative
[141] J.P. Tagutchou, F. Mermoud, E. Martin, S. Salvador, A new experimental glycerol to bio-olefins, Mater. Today Proc. (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Continuous Fixed Bed Reactor to characterise wood char gasification, Fuel 89 matpr.2022.09.418.
(2010) 3320–3329. [166] C. Zhou, L. Chen, C. Liu, J. Wang, X. Xing, Y. Liu, Y. Chen, L. Chao, J. Dai,
[142] G. Teixeira, L. Van de Steene, E. Martin, F. Gelix, S. Salvador, Gasification of char Y. Zhang, M. Yu, Y. Yuan, B. Yao, Y. Li, Interconnected pyrolysis and gasification
from wood pellets and from wood chips: textural properties and thermochemical of typical biomass in a novel dual fluidized bed, Energy Convers. Manag. 271
conversion along a continuous fixed bed, Fuel 102 (2012) 514–524, https://doi. (2022), 116323, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116323.
org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.05.039. [167] J.W. Chew, W.C.Q. LaMarche, R.A. Cocco, 100 years of scaling up fluidized bed
[143] E. Virmond, J.D. Rocha, R. Moreira, H.J. José, Valorization of agroindustrial solid and circulating fluidized bed reactors, Powder Technol. 409 (2022), 117813,
residues and residues from biofuel production chains by thermochemical https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2022.117813.
conversion: a review, citing Brazil as a case study, Braz. J. Chem. Eng. 30 (2013) [168] S. Huang, S. Wu, Y. Wu, J. Gao, Structure characteristics and gasification activity
197–230. of residual carbon from updraft fixed-bed biomass gasification ash, Energy
[144] B. Pandey, P.N. Sheth, Y.K. Prajapati, Air-CO2 and oxygen-enriched air-CO2 Convers. Manag. 136 (2017) 108–118, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biomass gasification in an autothermal downdraft gasifier: experimental studies, enconman.2016.12.091.
Energy Convers. Manag. 270 (2022), 116216, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [169] T. Pröll, H. Hofbauer, H2 rich syngas by selective CO2 removal from biomass
enconman.2022.116216. gasification in a dual fluidized bed system — process modelling approach, Fuel
[145] Z.A. Zainal, A. Rifau, G.A. Quadir, K.N. Seetharamu, Experimental investigation Process. Technol. 89 (2008) 1207–1217, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
of a downdraft biomass gasifier, Biomass Bioenergy 23 (2002) 283–289, https:// fuproc.2008.05.020.
doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(02)00059-4. [170] C.A. Jordan, G. Akay, Effect of CaO on tar production and dew point depression
[146] A. Akbarian, A. Andooz, E. Kowsari, S. Ramakrishna, S. Asgari, Z.A. Cheshmeh, during gasification of fuel cane bagasse in a novel downdraft gasifier, Fuel
Challenges and opportunities of lignocellulosic biomass gasification in the path of Process. Technol. 106 (2013) 654–660, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
circular bioeconomy, Bioresour. Technol. 362 (2022), 127774, https://doi.org/ fuproc.2012.09.061.
10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127774. [171] C.A. Jordan, G. Akay, Occurrence, composition and dew point of tars produced
[147] H. Tian, Y. Wei, S. Cheng, Z. Huang, M. Qing, Y. Chen, H. Yang, Y. Yang, during gasification of fuel cane bagasse in a downdraft gasifier, Biomass
Optimizing the gasification reactivity of biochar: the composition, structure and Bioenergy 42 (2012) 51–58, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.03.014.
kinetics of biochar derived from biomass lignocellulosic components and their [172] N. Ünlü, S. Özdoğan, Entrained flow Co-gasification of torrefied biomass and coal,
interactions during gasification process, Fuel 324 (2022), 124709, https://doi. Energy 263 (2023), 125864, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125864.
org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.124709. [173] R. Timsina, R.K. Thapa, B.M.E. Moldestad, M.S. Eikeland, Computational particle
[148] Z. Xiao, S. Wang, M. Luo, J. Cai, Combustion characteristics and synergistic fluid dynamics simulation of biomass gasification in an entrained flow gasifier,
effects during co-combustion of lignite and lignocellulosic components under oxy- Chem. Eng. Sci. X. 12 (2021), 100112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel condition, Fuel 310 (2022), 122399, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cesx.2021.100112.
fuel.2021.122399. [174] A. Hanel, V. Dieterich, S. Bastek, H. Spliethoff, S. Fendt, Entrained flow
[149] H. Liu, A. Elkamel, A. Lohi, M. Biglari, Computational fluid dynamics modeling of gasification-based biomass-to-X processes: an energetic and technical evaluation,
biomass gasification in circulating fluidized-bed reactor using the Energy Convers. Manag. 274 (2022), 116424, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Eulerian–Eulerian approach, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52 (2013) 18162–18174. enconman.2022.116424.
[150] A. Cubero, A. Sánchez-Insa, N. Fueyo, The effect of particle polydispersion in a [175] T. Pröll, I.G. Siefert, A. Friedl, H. Hofbauer, Removal of NH3 from biomass
gasifier bed dynamics using Eulerian-Eulerian models, Fuel Process. Technol. 198 gasification producer gas by water condensing in an organic solvent scrubber,
(2020), 106216, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.106216. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44 (2005) 1576–1584.
[151] Y. Huang, Z. Bao, L. Duan, Y. Duan, Bed-to-tube heat transfer characteristics with [176] F. Kazanc, R. Khatami, P. Manoel Crnkovic, Y.A. Levendis, Emissions of NO x and
an immersed horizontal tube in the pressurized fluidized bed at high temperature, SO2 from coals of various ranks, bagasse, and coal-bagasse blends burning in O2/
N2 and O2/CO2 environments, Energy Fuels 25 (2011) 2850–2861.

12
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

[177] P.J. Woolcock, R.C. Brown, A review of cleaning technologies for biomass-derived activity, Bioresour. Technol. 316 (2020), 123938, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
syngas, Biomass Bioenergy 52 (2013) 54–84, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biortech.2020.123938.
biombioe.2013.02.036. [202] K. Ding, Y. Wang, S. Liu, G. Lin, S.S.A. Syed-Hassan, B. Li, X. Hu, Y. Huang,
[178] V. Marcantonio, L. Del Zotto, J.P. Ouweltjes, E. Bocci, Main issues of the impact of S. Zhang, H. Zhang, Volatile-char interactions during biomass pyrolysis: insight
tar, H2S, HCl and alkali metal from biomass-gasification derived syngas on the into the activity of chars derived from three major components, J. Anal. Appl.
SOFC anode and the related gas cleaning technologies for feeding a SOFC system: Pyrolysis 159 (2021), 105320, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2021.105320.
a review, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 47 (2022) 517–539, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [203] R. Kaur, B.B. Krishna, A. Kumar, T.B.T.-R. M, in: E. S, E.S. Bhaskar (Eds.), Biomass
ijhydene.2021.10.023. Pyrolysis, Elsevier, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-90386-8.00031-
[179] S. Kumar, R.M. D, M.A. V, A. Ramanathan, Bio-Ethanol production from syngas- 0.
derived biomass: a review, Mater. Today Proc. 46 (2021) 9989–9993, https://doi. [204] Y. Liu, M. Paskevicius, H. Wang, C. Fushimi, G. Parkinson, C.-Z. Li, Difference in
org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.04.106. tar reforming activities between biochar catalysts activated in H2O and CO2, Fuel
[180] R. Rauch, J. Hrbek, H. Hofbauer, Biomass gasification for synthesis gas 271 (2020), 117636, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117636.
production and applications of the syngas, Adv. Bioenergy Sustain. Chall. 3 [205] D. Buentello-Montoya, X. Zhang, J. Li, V. Ranade, S. Marques, M. Geron,
(2015) 73–91. Performance of biochar as a catalyst for tar steam reforming: effect of the porous
[181] D.A. Quintero-Coronel, Y.A. Lenis-Rodas, L. Corredor, P. Perreault, A. Bula, structure, Appl. Energy 259 (2020), 114176, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
A. Gonzalez-Quiroga, Co-gasification of biomass and coal in a top-lit updraft fixed apenergy.2019.114176.
bed gasifier: syngas composition and its interchangeability with natural gas for [206] X.-B. Wang, S.-Q. Yang, C. Xu, H.-D. Ma, Z.-H. Zhang, Z.-Y. Du, W.-Y. Li, Effect of
combustion applications, Fuel 316 (2022), 123394, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. boron doping on the performance of Ni/Biochar catalysts for steam reforming of
fuel.2022.123394. toluene as a tar model compound, J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 155 (2021), 105033,
[182] D. Antolini, S. Piazzi, L. Menin, M. Baratieri, F. Patuzzi, High hydrogen content https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2021.105033.
syngas for biofuels production from biomass air gasification: experimental [207] Y. Liu, M. Paskevicius, H. Wang, G. Parkinson, J.-P. Veder, X. Hu, C.-Z. Li, Role of
evaluation of a char-catalyzed steam reforming unit, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 47 O-containing functional groups in biochar during the catalytic steam reforming of
(2022) 27421–27436, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.06.075. tar using the biochar as a catalyst, Fuel 253 (2019) 441–448, https://doi.org/
[183] P.-B. Fu, F. Wang, X.-J. Yang, L. Ma, X. Cui, H.-L. Wang, Inlet particle-sorting 10.1016/j.fuel.2019.05.037.
cyclone for the enhancement of PM2. 5 separation, Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 [208] Y. Liu, M. Paskevicius, H. Wang, G. Parkinson, J. Wei, M. Asif Akhtar, C.-Z. Li,
(2017) 1587–1594. Insights into the mechanism of tar reforming using biochar as a catalyst, Fuel 296
[184] S.Z.S. Al Ghafri, C. Revell, M. Di Lorenzo, G. Xiao, C.E. Buckley, E.F. May, (2021), 120672, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.120672.
M. Johns, Techno-economic and environmental assessment of LNG export for [209] E.B. Machin, D.T. Pedroso, N. Proenza, J.L. Silveira, L. Conti, L.B. Braga, A.
hydrogen production, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j. B. Machin, Tar reduction in downdraft biomass gasifier using a primary method,
ijhydene.2022.11.160. Renew. Energy 78 (2015) 478–483, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[185] A. Bhaskar, R. Abhishek, M. Assadi, H.N. Somehesaraei, Decarbonizing primary renene.2014.12.069.
steel production : techno-economic assessment of a hydrogen based green steel [210] A. Fazil, S. Kumar, S.M. Mahajani, Gasification and Co-gasification of paper-rich,
production plant in Norway, J. Clean. Prod. 350 (2022), 131339, https://doi.org/ high-ash refuse-derived fuel in downdraft gasifier, Energy 263 (2023), 125659,
10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125659.
[186] F. Mueller-Langer, E. Tzimas, M. Kaltschmitt, S. Peteves, Techno-economic [211] A. Fazil, S. Kumar, S.M. Mahajani, Downdraft co-gasification of high ash biomass
assessment of hydrogen production processes for the hydrogen economy for the and plastics, Energy 243 (2022), 123055, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
short and medium term, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 3797–3810, https:// energy.2021.123055.
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.05.027. [212] M. Siedlecki, W. de Jong, Biomass gasification as the first hot step in clean syngas
[187] I.L. Motta, N.T. Miranda, R. Maciel Filho, M.R. Wolf Maciel, Biomass gasification production process – gas quality optimization and primary tar reduction measures
in fluidized beds: a review of biomass moisture content and operating pressure in a 100 kW thermal input steam–oxygen blown CFB gasifier, Biomass Bioenergy
effects, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 94 (2018) 998–1023, https://doi.org/ 35 (2011), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.05.033. S40–S62.
10.1016/j.rser.2018.06.042. [213] Q. Ji, S. Tabassum, S. Hena, C.G. Silva, G. Yu, Z. Zhang, A review on the coal
[188] S. Du, J. Wang, Y. Yu, Q. Zhou, Coarse-grained CFD-DEM simulation of coal and gasification wastewater treatment technologies: past, present and future outlook,
biomass co-gasification process in a fluidized bed reactor: effects of particle size J. Clean. Prod. 126 (2016) 38–55, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
distribution and operating pressure, Renew. Energy 202 (2023) 483–498, https:// jclepro.2016.02.147.
doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.11.073. [214] Y. Shen, K. Yoshikawa, Recent progresses in catalytic tar elimination during
[189] J. Kang, L. Zhao, W. Li, Y. Song, Artificial neural network model of co-gasification biomass gasification or pyrolysis—a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 21
of petroleum coke with coal or biomass in bubbling fluidized bed, Renew. Energy (2013) 371–392, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.062.
194 (2022) 359–365, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.05.096. [215] M.L. Valderrama Rios, A.M. González, E.E.S. Lora, O.A. Almazán del Olmo,
[190] K.R. Cummer, R.C. Brown, Ancillary equipment for biomass gasification, Biomass Reduction of tar generated during biomass gasification: a review, Biomass
Bioenergy 23 (2002) 113–128, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(02)00038- Bioenergy 108 (2018) 345–370, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
7. biombioe.2017.12.002.
[191] M.K. Karmakar, P. Chandra, P.K. Chatterjee, A review on the fuel gas cleaning [216] J. Corella, M.-P. Aznar, J. Gil, M.A. Caballero, Biomass gasification in fluidized
technologies in gasification process, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 3 (2015) 689–702. bed: where to locate the dolomite to improve gasification? Energy Fuels 13
[192] A.H. Alaedini, H.K. Tourani, M. Saidi, A review of waste-to-hydrogen conversion (1999) 1122–1127.
technologies for solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) applications: aspect of gasification [217] N. Gao, J. Salisu, C. Quan, P. Williams, Modified nickel-based catalysts for
process and catalyst development, J. Environ. Manag. 329 (2023), 117077, improved steam reforming of biomass tar: a critical review, Renew. Sustain.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117077. Energy Rev. 145 (2021), 111023, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111023.
[193] V.S. Sikarwar, M. Zhao, P. Clough, J. Yao, X. Zhong, M.Z. Memon, N. Shah, E. [218] E. Quiroga, B. Cifuentes, J. Moltó, N. Ortuño, J. Conesa, A. Davó-Quiñonero,
J. Anthony, P.S. Fennell, An overview of advances in biomass gasification, Energy M. Cobo, Integration of steam gasification and catalytic reforming of
Environ. Sci. 9 (2016) 2939–2977. lignocellulosic biomass as a strategy to improve syngas quality and pollutants
[194] J. Dai, K.J. Whitty, Chemical looping gasification and sorption enhanced removal, Waste Manag. 147 (2022) 48–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gasification of biomass: a perspective, Chem. Eng. Process. - Process Intensif. 174 wasman.2022.05.012.
(2022), 108902, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2022.108902. [219] G. Xu, P. Yang, S. Yang, H. Wang, B. Fang, Non-natural catalysts for catalytic tar
[195] C. Wang, M. Zhang, Z. Han, D. Bai, W. Duo, X. Bi, A. Abudula, G. Guan, G. Xu, conversion in biomass gasification technology, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 47 (2022)
Pilot verification of a two-stage fluidized bed gasifier with a downer pyrolyzer 7638–7665, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.12.094.
using oxygen-rich air, Fuel 307 (2022), 121816, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [220] H. Li, Y. Wang, N. Zhou, L. Dai, W. Deng, C. Liu, Y. Cheng, Y. Liu, K. Cobb,
fuel.2021.121816. P. Chen, R. Ruan, Applications of calcium oxide–based catalysts in biomass
[196] X. Zeng, F. Wang, H. Li, Y. Wang, L. Dong, J. Yu, G. Xu, Pilot verification of a low- pyrolysis/gasification – a review, J. Clean. Prod. 291 (2021), 125826, https://doi.
tar two-stage coal gasification process with a fluidized bed pyrolyzer and fixed org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125826.
bed gasifier, Appl. Energy 115 (2014) 9–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [221] B. Li, C.F. Magoua Mbeugang, Y. Huang, D. Liu, Q. Wang, S. Zhang, A review of
apenergy.2013.10.052. CaO based catalysts for tar removal during biomass gasification, Energy 244
[197] X. Zeng, R. Shao, F. Wang, P. Dong, J. Yu, G. Xu, Industrial demonstration plant (2022), 123172, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.123172.
for the gasification of herb residue by fluidized bed two-stage process, Bioresour. [222] Z. Chen, D. Wang, H. Yang, Y. Zhang, Y. Li, C. Li, J. Yu, S. Gao, Novel application
Technol. 206 (2016) 93–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.01.075. of red mud as disposal catalyst for pyrolysis and gasification of coal, Carbon
[198] P. McKendry, Energy production from biomass (part 3): gasification technologies, Resour. Convers. 4 (2021) 10–18, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crcon.2021.01.001.
Bioresour. Technol. 83 (2002) 55–63, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(01) [223] F. Pinto, R.N. André, C. Carolino, M. Miranda, P. Abelha, D. Direito, N. Perdikaris,
00120-1. I. Boukis, Gasification improvement of a poor quality solid recovered fuel (SRF).
[199] J. Han, H. Kim, The reduction and control technology of tar during biomass Effect of using natural minerals and biomass wastes blends, Fuel 117 (2014)
gasification/pyrolysis: an overview, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 12 (2008) 1034–1044, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.10.015.
397–416, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2006.07.015. [224] F. Pinto, H. Lopes, R.N. André, I. Gulyurtlu, I. Cabrita, Effect of catalysts in the
[200] K. Manatura, J.-H. Lu, K.-T. Wu, H.-T. Hsu, Exergy analysis on torrefied rice husk quality of syngas and by-products obtained by co-gasification of coal and wastes.
pellet in fluidized bed gasification, Appl. Therm. Eng. 111 (2017) 1016–1024, 2: heavy metals, sulphur and halogen compounds abatement, Fuel 87 (2008)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.09.135. 1050–1062, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2007.06.014.
[201] Y. Huang, S. Liu, M.A. Akhtar, B. Li, J. Zhou, S. Zhang, H. Zhang, Volatile–char [225] F. Pinto, H. Lopes, R.N. André, I. Gulyurtlu, I. Cabrita, Effect of catalysts in the
interactions during biomass pyrolysis: understanding the potential origin of char quality of syngas and by-products obtained by co-gasification of coal and wastes.

13
Erdiwansyah et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8 (2023) 100439

1. Tars and nitrogen compounds abatement, Fuel 86 (2007) 2052–2063, https:// [249] M. Singh, S.A. Salaudeen, B.H. Gilroyed, A. Dutta, Simulation of biomass-plastic
doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2007.01.019. co-gasification in a fluidized bed reactor using Aspen plus, Fuel 319 (2022),
[226] Catalytic decomposition of biomass tars: use of dolomite and untreated olivine, 123708, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123708.
Fuel Energy Abstr. 46 (2005) 161–162, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6701(05) [250] S. Begum, M.G. Rasul, D. Akbar, A numerical investigation of municipal solid
81067-7. waste gasification using aspen plus, Procedia Eng. 90 (2014) 710–717, https://
[227] Z. Zhao, N. Lakshminarayanan, S.L. Swartz, G.B. Arkenberg, L.G. Felix, R. doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.11.800.
B. Slimane, C.C. Choi, U.S. Ozkan, Characterization of olivine-supported nickel [251] N. Ramzan, A. Ashraf, S. Naveed, A. Malik, Simulation of hybrid biomass
silicate as potential catalysts for tar removal from biomass gasification, Appl. gasification using Aspen plus: a comparative performance analysis for food,
Catal. Gen. 489 (2015) 42–50, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcata.2014.10.011. municipal solid and poultry waste, Biomass Bioenergy 35 (2011) 3962–3969,
[228] M. Cortazar, L. Santamaria, G. Lopez, J. Alvarez, M. Amutio, J. Bilbao, M. Olazar, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.06.005.
Fe/olivine as primary catalyst in the biomass steam gasification in a fountain [252] D.K. Singh, J. V Tirkey, Modeling and multi-objective optimization of variable air
confined spouted bed reactor, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 99 (2021) 364–379, https://doi. gasification performance parameters using Syzygium cumini biomass by
org/10.1016/j.jiec.2021.04.046. integrating ASPEN Plus with Response surface methodology (RSM), Int. J.
[229] J. Ashok, N. Dewangan, S. Das, P. Hongmanorom, M.H. Wai, K. Tomishige, Hydrogen Energy 46 (2021) 18816–18831, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
S. Kawi, Recent progress in the development of catalysts for steam reforming of ijhydene.2021.03.054.
biomass tar model reaction, Fuel Process. Technol. 199 (2020), 106252, https:// [253] K.G. Mansaray, A.E. Ghaly, A.M. Al-Taweel, F. Hamdullahpur, V.I. Ugursal,
doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.106252. Mathematical modeling of a fluidized bed Rice Husk gasifier: Part II-model
[230] C. Li, D. Hirabayashi, K. Suzuki, Development of new nickel based catalyst for sensitivity, Energy Sources 22 (2000) 167–185.
biomass tar steam reforming producing H2-rich syngas, Fuel Process. Technol. 90 [254] K.G. Mansaray, A.E. Ghaly, A.M. Al-Taweel, V.I. Ugursal, F. Hamdullahpur,
(2009) 790–796, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2009.02.007. Mathematical modeling of a fluidized bed rice husk gasifier: Part III-Model
[231] G. Guan, M. Kaewpanha, X. Hao, A. Abudula, Catalytic steam reforming of verification, Energy Sources 22 (2000) 281–296.
biomass tar: prospects and challenges, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 58 (2016) [255] K.G. Mansaray, A.M. Al-Taweel, A.E. Ghaly, F. Hamdullahpur, V.I. Ugursal,
450–461, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.316. Mathematical modeling of a fluidized bed rice husk gasifier: Part I-Model
[232] L. Devi, M. Craje, P. Thüne, K.J. Ptasinski, F.J.J.G. Janssen, Olivine as tar removal development, Energy Sources 22 (2000) 83–98.
catalyst for biomass gasifiers: catalyst characterization, Appl. Catal. Gen. 294 [256] C.C. Sreejith, C. Muraleedharan, P. Arun, Performance prediction of steam
(2005) 68–79, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcata.2005.07.044. gasification of wood using an ASPEN PLUS thermodynamic equilibrium model,
[233] K.K. Dwivedi, Prabhansu, M.K. Karmakar, P.K. Chatterjee, Thermal degradation, Int. J. Sustain. Energy 33 (2014) 416–434.
characterization and kinetic modeling of different particle size coal through TGA, [257] S. Vikram, P. Rosha, S. Kumar, S. Mahajani, Thermodynamic analysis and
Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 18 (2020), 100523, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. parametric optimization of steam-CO2 based biomass gasification system using
tsep.2020.100523. Aspen PLUS, Energy 241 (2022), 122854, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[234] K. Jayaraman, I. Gökalp, Thermal characterization, gasification and kinetic energy.2021.122854.
studies of different sized Indian coal and char particles, Int. J. Adv. Eng. Sci. Appl. [258] A.M. Ali, M. Shahbaz, K. Shahzad, M. Inayat, S. Naqvi, A.A. Al-Zahrani, M.
Math. 6 (2014) 31–40. I. Rashid, M. Rehan, A.B. Mahpudz, Polygeneration syngas and power from date
[235] C. Li, K. Suzuki, Tar property, analysis, reforming mechanism and model for palm waste steam gasification through an Aspen Plus process modeling, Fuel 332
biomass gasification—an overview, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13 (2009) (2023), 126120, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.126120.
594–604, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2008.01.009. [259] Y. Li, Y. Pang, H. Tu, F. Torrigino, S.M.A. Biollaz, Z. Li, Y. Huang, X. Yin,
[236] V. Nemanova, K. Engvall, Tar variability in the producer gas in a bubbling F. Grimm, J. Karl, Impact of syngas from biomass gasification on solid oxide fuel
fluidized bed gasification system, Energy Fuels 28 (2014) 7494–7500. cells: a review study for the energy transition, Energy Convers. Manag. 250
[237] H. Zhu, Z. Chen, L. Pastor-Perez, X. Long, M. Millan, How syngas composition (2021), 114894, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114894.
affects catalytic steam reforming of tars: an analysis using toluene as model [260] P. V Aravind, W. de Jong, Evaluation of high temperature gas cleaning options for
compound, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 48 (2023) 1290–1303, https://doi.org/ biomass gasification product gas for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells, Prog. Energy
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.10.045. Combust. Sci. 38 (2012) 737–764, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2012.03.006.
[238] B. Zhao, X. Zhang, L. Chen, R. Qu, G. Meng, X. Yi, L. Sun, Steam reforming of [261] Z. Ud Din, Z.A. Zainal, Tar reduction mechanism via compression of producer gas,
toluene as model compound of biomass pyrolysis tar for hydrogen, Biomass J. Clean. Prod. 184 (2018) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.198.
Bioenergy 34 (2010) 140–144, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.10.011. [262] S. Anis, Z.A. Zainal, Tar reduction in biomass producer gas via mechanical,
[239] S. Wang, Y. Zhang, R. Shan, J. Gu, H. Yuan, Y. Chen, Steam reforming of biomass catalytic and thermal methods: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (2011)
tar model compound over two waste char-based Ni catalysts for syngas 2355–2377, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.018.
production, Energy 246 (2022), 123342, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [263] P. Xue, M. Liu, H. Yang, H. Zhang, Y. Chen, Q. Hu, S. Zhang, H. Chen, Mechanism
energy.2022.123342. study on pyrolysis interaction between cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin based
[240] R. Coll, J. Salvadó, X. Farriol, D. Montané, Steam reforming model compounds of on photoionization time-of-flight mass spectrometer (PI-TOF-MS) analysis, Fuel
biomass gasification tars: conversion at different operating conditions and 338 (2023), 127276, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.127276.
tendency towards coke formation, Fuel Process. Technol. 74 (2001) 19–31, [264] F.-X. Collard, J. Blin, A review on pyrolysis of biomass constituents: mechanisms
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3820(01)00214-4. and composition of the products obtained from the conversion of cellulose,
[241] S. Yang, S. Wang, H. Wang, Numerical study of biomass gasification in a 0.3 hemicelluloses and lignin, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 38 (2014) 594–608,
MWth full-loop circulating fluidized bed gasifier, Energy Convers. Manag. 223 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.06.013.
(2020), 113439, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113439. [265] J. Liu, X. Chen, W. Chen, M. Xia, Y. Chen, H. Chen, K. Zeng, H. Yang, Biomass
[242] S. Yang, J. Liang, S. Wang, H. Wang, High-fidelity investigation of pyrolysis mechanism for carbon-based high-value products, Proc. Combust. Inst.
thermochemical conversion of biomass material in a full-loop circulating (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2022.09.063.
fluidized bed gasifier, Energy 224 (2021), 120093, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [266] K. Hainsch, K. Löffler, T. Burandt, H. Auer, P. Crespo del Granado, P. Pisciella,
energy.2021.120093. S. Zwickl-Bernhard, Energy transition scenarios: what policies, societal attitudes,
[243] S.Y. Foong, R.K. Liew, C.L. Lee, W.P. Tan, W. Peng, C. Sonne, Y.F. Tsang, S.S. Lam, and technology developments will realize the EU Green Deal? Energy 239 (2022),
Strategic hazard mitigation of waste furniture boards via pyrolysis: pyrolysis 122067 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.122067.
behavior, mechanisms, and value-added products, J. Hazard Mater. 421 (2022), [267] P.J. Megía, A.J. Vizcaíno, J.A. Calles, A. Carrero, Hydrogen production
126774, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126774. technologies: from fossil fuels toward renewable sources. A mini review, Energy
[244] P. Morf, P. Hasler, T. Nussbaumer, Mechanisms and kinetics of homogeneous Fuels 35 (2021) 16403–16415.
secondary reactions of tar from continuous pyrolysis of wood chips, Fuel 81 [268] A. Öhman, E. Karakaya, F. Urban, Enabling the transition to a fossil-free steel
(2002) 843–853, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-2361(01)00216-2. sector: the conditions for technology transfer for hydrogen-based steelmaking in
[245] X. Li, J.R. Grace, A.P. Watkinson, C.J. Lim, A. Ergüdenler, Equilibrium modeling Europe, Energy Res. Social Sci. 84 (2022), 102384, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
of gasification: a free energy minimization approach and its application to a erss.2021.102384.
circulating fluidized bed coal gasifier, Fuel 80 (2001) 195–207, https://doi.org/ [269] G. Bang, D.-K. Moon, J.-H. Kang, Y.-J. Han, K.-M. Kim, C.-H. Lee, High-purity
10.1016/S0016-2361(00)00074-0. hydrogen production via a water-gas-shift reaction in a palladium-copper
[246] Equilibrium modeling of gasification: a free energy minimization approach and its catalytic membrane reactor integrated with pressure swing adsorption, Chem.
application to a circulating fluidized bed coal gasifier, Fuel Energy Abstr. 43 Eng. J. 411 (2021), 128473, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.128473.
(2002) 32, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6701(02)80325-3. [270] S. Saeidi, F. Fazlollahi, S. Najari, D. Iranshahi, J.J. Klemeš, L.L. Baxter, Hydrogen
[247] S. Jarungthammachote, A. Dutta, Equilibrium modeling of gasification: Gibbs free production: perspectives, separation with special emphasis on kinetics of WGS
energy minimization approach and its application to spouted bed and spout-fluid reaction: a state-of-the-art review, J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 49 (2017) 1–25, https://doi.
bed gasifiers, Energy Convers. Manag. 49 (2008) 1345–1356, https://doi.org/ org/10.1016/j.jiec.2016.12.003.
10.1016/j.enconman.2008.01.006. [271] K. Gao, M.C. Iliuta, Trends and advances in the development of coal fly ash-based
[248] R.A. Moghadam, S. Yusup, W. Azlina, S. Nehzati, A. Tavasoli, Investigation on materials for application in hydrogen-rich gas production: a review, J. Energy
syngas production via biomass conversion through the integration of pyrolysis Chem. 73 (2022) 485–512, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jechem.2022.05.016.
and air–steam gasification processes, Energy Convers. Manag. 87 (2014)
670–675.

14