CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Biomass is widely considered to be a major potential fuel and renewable resource for the
future. In terms of size of resource, there is the potential to produce at least 50% of Europe’s
total energy requirement, from purpose- grown biomass using agricultural land no longer
required for food, and from wastes and residues from agriculture, commerce and consumers
(Grassi & Bridgwater, 1991). The justification for bioenergy includes (Grassi & Bridgwater,
1991): security of long-term energy supplies for Europe, contributions to the development of
industrial markets, improvements of the environment by utilizing wastes and residues,
making a positive contribution to limiting the greenhouse effect, better management of
surplus agricultural and marginal land, provision of opportunities for socio-economic
development of the less-developed regions of Europe, particularly towards the south. As
produced, biomass is a solid and is difficult to use in many applications without substantial
modification. Conversion to gaseous and liquid energy carriers has many advantages in
handling and application. There is a wide range of processes available for converting biomass
and wastes into more valuable fuels. These include biological processes to make ethanol or
methane, and thermal processes to make heat, gaseous fuels, liquid fuels and solid fuels, from
which a wide variety of secondary products, including electricity, can be produced’.
Electricity is the industrial sector most likely to benefit from this contribution (Grassi &
Bridgwater, 1993), because of the high added value of electricity compared with other energy
forms (Ziv et al., 2010). This paper focuses on advanced gasification techniques for
electricity generation as offering the most developed power generation system based on
biomass. A number of recent reviews cover the principles and practice of biomass
gasification as applied around the world (Pottier, 1982; Wood, E.., Tappan, G.., Hadj, A.,
2004. Understanding the drivers of agricultural land use change in south-central Senegal. J.
Arid Environ. 59 et al., 2008). One of the major problems with biomass is that, as an energy
crop, it is labour-intensive to produce, harvest and transport, as it is dispersed over large
areas. When it is in the form of wastes, costs are much lower, often negative in the case of
domestic solid waste, but the material usually requires extensive processing to make it
compatible with the conversion process. There is, therefore, an upper limit to the size of a
biomass-fuelled power station, which ranges from 10 to 1OOMWe according to the location.

1
1.1 ECONOMICS

Since economic implications determine the rate of development and rate of implementation
of emerging technologies such as biomass gasification, the economics are presented first. The
wide range of justifications for bio-energy listed above mean that orthodox accounting is not
sufficient. Even the addition of both quantified and unquantified incentives such as carbon
taxes and agricultural policy adjustments may not be sufficient to turn a marginally attractive
project into one where the rewards justify the risks, but application of such incentives can
make such projects sufficiently close to commercial acceptability for further development to
be supported, which will reduce the technical risks and enable the project development cycle
to move forward. After discussion of the economic aspects, the technologies are described
and the technical uncertainties identified and reviewed.

CHAPTER 2

2.0 POWER GENERATION SYSTEM STATUS

There are several ways of producing electricity by thermal conversion of biomass:

pressurized gasification with a gas turbine in a combined cycle mode, atmospheric
gasification with a turbine or an engine, and orthodox combustion with a Rankine cycle. Data
have been derived from ongoing in-house research and are internally consistent and
validated. Pressurized gasification in a combined cycle mode is being demonstrated in the
Varnamo plant in Sweden with an Ahlstrom gasifier and a European Gas Turbine 4MWe
machine operating in combined cycle and cogeneration mode (Wood, E.., Tappan, G.., Hadj,
A., 2004. Understanding the drivers of agricultural land use change in south-central Senegal.
J. Arid Environ. 59 et al., 2008). Atmospheric gasification with an engine has been
demonstrated at 500kWe at TPS in Sweden (Wood, E.., Tappan, G.., Hadj, A., 2004.
Understanding the drivers of agricultural land use change in south-central Senegal. J. Arid
Environ. 59 et al., 2008), and there has been extensive experience of such systems around the
world from 10 to 300kWe’. The European Union is planning to support the demonstration of
three biomass-based (short-rotation forestry) IGCC plants ranging from 7 to 12MWe, one
pressurized and two atmospheric. IGCC technology is relatively well developed, with around
eight systems potentially available commercially.

2
2.1 FEED PRETREATMENT

Biomass is prepared in the forest usually as chips, although bundles from short-rotation
forestry and whole logs from conventional forestry may be delivered in some circumstances.
Annual crops would be delivered in bundles (for example from miscanthus or sorghum), as
bales (e.g. from straw), or possibly chopped (from any crop). This material has to be
received, handled, stored and processed prior to gasification, and this front-end system is
described in detail later (see Status and technical uncertainties). The technology is well
established and available for chips, although there is almost no experience with either large-
scale or long-term production of short-rotation coppice for energy purposes. This is partly
why the EU is sponsoring three large IGCC demonstration plants based on biomass. Similarly
there are no robust data on the energy balances for biomass production beyond claims that the
energy ratio (energy out/energy in) is between 15 and 35, i.e. a biomass production energy
efficiency of 93 to 96%. This includes all transport, fertilizer and processing costs up to the
conversion plant gate. Once within the conversion plant, the feed material has to be
processed.

2.2 ELECTRICITY GENERATION

Electricity generation is carried out by internal and external combustion engines or turbines.
Fuel cells have been proposed, but considerable development work is needed before these can
be seriously considered. Data are available for gas turbines and engines operating on fossil
fuels, but few robust data have been found on biomass-derived fuel gas machines, owing to
the unknown costs of modification and maintenance and machine life. Manufacturers are
therefore very reluctant to quote costs for supply, although a number of machines will be
installed over the next few years.

2.3 GASIFICATION

Thermochemical gasification is the conversion by partial oxidation at elevated temperature of

a carbonaceous feedstock such as biomass or coal into a gaseous energy carrier. This contains
carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, methane, trace amounts of higher hydrocarbons
such as ethane and ethene, water, nitrogen (if air is used as the oxidizing agent) and various

3
contaminants such as small char particles, ash, tars and oils. The partial oxidation can be
carried out using air, oxygen, steam or a mixture of these. Air gasification produces a poor-
quality gas in terms of heating value (4-7 MJ m; higher heating value) which is suitable for
boiler, engine and turbine operation, but not for pipeline transportation due to its low energy
density. Oxygen gasification produces a better-quality gas (10-18 MJ m; higher heating
value) which is suitable for limited pipeline distribution and for use as synthesis gas for
conversion, for example, to methanol and gasoline. Gas of this quality can also be produced
by pyrolytic or steam gasification, with the process energy being supplied by combustion of
by-product char in a second reactor, e.g. a twin fluid bed system. Gasification with air is the
more widely used technology since this avoids the costs and hazards of oxygen production
and usage ‘associated with oxygen gasification, and the complexity and cost of multiple
reactors in steam or pyrolytic gasification when two reactors are required. Principles
Gasification occurs in sequential steps: drying to evaporate moisture, pyrolysis to give gas,
vaporized tars or oils and a solid char residue, gasification or partial oxidation of the solid
char, pyrolysis tars and pyrolysis gases.

2.3.1 DOWNDRAFT GASIFERS

The downdraft gasifier (Figure 9) features concurrent flow of gases and solids through a
descending packed bed which is supported across a constriction known as a throat, where
most of the gasification reactions occur. The reaction products are intimately mixed in the
turbulent high-temperature region around the throat, which aids tar cracking. Some tar

4
cracking also occurs below the throat on a residual charcoal bed, where the gasification
process is completed. This configuration results in a high conversion of pyrolysis
intermediates and hence a relatively clean gas. Downdraft gasification is simple, reliable and
proven for certain fuels, such as relatively dry (up to - 30wt % moisture) blocks or lumps
with a low ash content (< 1wt %) and containing a low proportion of fine and coarse particles
(not smaller than - 1 cm and not larger than - 30cm in the longest dimension). Owing to the
low content of tars in the gas, this configuration is generally favoured for small-scale
electricity generation with an internal combustion engine. The physical limitations of the
diameter and particle size relation mean that there is a practical upper limit to the capacity of
this configuration of 500kgh or 500kWe. A relatively new concept of stratified or open-core
downdraft gasifier has been developed, in which there is no throat and the bed is supported
on a grate. This was first devised by the Chinese for rice husk gasification and further
developed by Syngas Inc.” from work carried out at the Solar Energy Research Institute (now
the National Renewable Energy Laboratory - NREL) (Evans, Knight, Onischak, & Babu,
1988).

2.3.2 UPDRAFT GASIFIERS

In the updraft gasifier (Figure 9 & the downward-moving biomass is first dried by the up-
flowing hot product gas. After drying, the solid fuel is pyrolysed, giving char which
continues to move down to be gasified, and pyrolysis vapours which are carried upward by
the up-flowing hot product gas. The tars in the vapour either condense on the cool descending
fuel or are carried out of the reactor with the product gas, contributing to its high tar content.
The extent of this tar ‘bypassing’ is believed to be up to 20% of the pyrolysis products.
(Demirbaş, 2001) The condensed tars are recycled back to the reaction zones, where they are
further cracked to gas and char. In the bottom gasification zone the solid char from pyrolysis
and tar cracking is partially oxidized by the incoming air or oxygen. Steam may also be
added to provide a higher level of hydrogen in the gas. The product gas from an updraft
gasifier thus contains a significant proportion of tars and hydrocarbons which contribute to its
high heating value. The fuel gas requires substantial clean-up if further processing is to be
performed. The principal advantages of updraft gasifiers are their simple construction and
high thermal efficiency: the sensible heat of the gas produced is recovered by direct heat
exchange with the entering feed, which thus is dried, preheated and pyrolysed before entering

5
the gasification zone. In principle, there is little scaling limitation, although no very large
updraft biomass gasifiers have been built. Fluid bed gasifiers. These are a more recent
development that takes advantage of the excellent mixing characteristics and high reaction
rates of this method of gas-solid contacting. The fluidizing material is usually silica sand,
although alumina and other refractory oxides have been used to avoid sintering, and catalysts
have also been used to reduce tars and modify product gas composition’. Although only
recently applied to biomass, there are over 50 years’ experience with peat. Fluidized bed
reactors are the only gasifiers with isothermal bed operation. A typical operating temperature
for biomass gasification is – 80 & 85oC. Most of the conversion of the feedstock to product
gas takes place within the bed; however, some conversion to product gas continues in the
freeboard section owing to reactions of entrained small particles and particularly thermal tar
cracking. In most cases carbon conversion approaches 100%, unless excessive carryover of
fines take place, which will occur with a top feeding configuration.

6
2.4 CIRCULATING FLUID BED GASIFIERS

The fluidizing velocity in the circulating fluid bed is high enough to entrain large amounts of
solids with the product gas (see Figure 9). These systems were developed so that the
entrained material is recycled back to the fluid bed to improve the carbon conversion
efficiency compared with the single fluid bed design. A hot raw gas is produced which, in
most commercial applications to date, is used for close-coupled process heat or in boilers to
recover the sensible heat in the gas. This configuration has been extensively developed for
wood waste conversion in pulp and paper mills for firing lime and cement and steam-raising
for electricity generation.

 Entrained bed gasifiers: In entrained flow gasifiers, no inert material is present but a
finely reduced feedstock is required. Entrained bed gasifiers operate at much higher
temperatures of w 1200-1500°C depending on whether air or oxygen is employed,
and hence the product gas has low concentrations of tars and condensable gases.
However, this high-temperature operation creates problems of materials selection and
ash melting. Conversion in entrained beds effectively approaches 100%. There is little
experience with biomass in such systems.
 Twin fluid bed gasifiers: These are used to give a gas of higher heating value from
reaction with air than is obtained from a single air-blown gasifier (see Figure 10). The
gasifier in effect is a pyrolyser, heated with hot sand from the second fluid bed, which
is heated by burning the product char in air before recirculation to the first reactor.

2.4.1 ATMOSPHERIC GASIFIERS HAVE THE FOLLOWING SIGNIFICANT

FEATURES:

(1) For gas turbine applications the product gas is required to be sufficiently clean for
compression before the turbine. Suggested specifications are given later. For engine
applications the gas quality requirements are less onerous and pressure is not required.

(2) Atmospheric systems have a potentially much lower capital cost at smaller capacities of
below 30MWe as discussed above. Gas compositions and heating values are not significantly
different for either system.

7
2.5 PRODUCTS OF GASIFICATION

The products of gasification vary according to the reactor configuration and oxidant used.
Ideally, there is complete conversion of all tars, hydrocarbons and char in the gasifier to give
fuel gas. However, reactor design can give rise to incomplete oxidation, the extent of which is
mostly determined by reactor geometry.

 GAS CLEANUP: Gases formed by gasification are contaminated by some or all of the
constituents listed in Table II. The level of contamination varies, depending on the
gasification process and the feedstock. Gas cleaning must be applied to prevent erosion,
corrosion and environmental problems in downstream equipment.

 HOT GAS CLEANUP FOR PARTICULATES: Gas streams from biomass

gasification contain very small carbon-containing particles with are difficult to remove
by cyclones. Tests using high-efficiency cyclones” showed that particulate levels were
not reduced to < 5-30g m; and barrier filtration methods using e.g. sintered metal or
ceramic filters are preferred. Hot gas clean-up is particularly important for pressurized
systems, where the sensible heat of the gas needs to be retained and scrubbing systems
for tar removal avoided. High-temperature ceramic or metal candle filters have been
tested with gasification products from peat and coal. Many designs do not give a constant
pressure drop, the differential increasing as the deposits build up. One solution is to layer
the filters and in this case removal efficiencies of >99.8% have been reported. Tests on
wood-derived gases have revealed a further problem with filter clogging by soot arising
from thermal cracking of tars both in the gas phase and on the filter surface. This
problem can be reduced by cooling the gas to <5OO”C and reducing gas velocities
across the filter surface. However, if temperatures fall below 400°C there remains a
potential problem of tar deposition. Recent developments utilize ceramic candle filters
with automatic pulsing to strip off the accumulated filter cake.

8
2.6 TAR CRACKING

Tar concentration is mainly a function of gasification temperature, decreasing as temperature

increases. The relation between temperature and tar level is a function of reactor type and
processing conditions. The tars formed in pyrolysis are thermally cracked in most
environments to refractory tars, soot and gases. Tar levels and characteristics are also
dependent on the feedstock. Tests have shown that tar production in wood gasification is
much greater than in coal or peat gasification and that the tars tend to be heavier, more stable
aromatics”. These may partly react to give soot which can block filters, a problem apparently
peculiar to biomass gasification. This implies that technology developed in coal gasification
tar cleaning may not be directly transferable to biomass feeds. There are two basic ways of
destroying tars’: by catalytic cracking using, for example, dolomite or nickel, by thermal
cracking, for example by partial oxidation or direct thermal contact.

 CATALYTIC CRACKING: Pilot-scale tests have shown that catalytic cracking of

tars can be very effective. Tar conversion of >99% has been achieved using dolomite,
nickel-based and other catalysts at elevated temperatures, typically 80C & 9OC.
These tests have been performed using both fossil and renewable feeds. Most reported
work used a second reactor. Some work has been carried out on incorporation of the
catalyst in the primary reactor, which has often been less successful than use of a
second reactor (Wood, E.., Tappan, G.., Hadj, A., 2004. Understanding the drivers of
agricultural land use change in south-central Senegal. J. Arid Environ. 59 et al.,
2008)’, although this approach has been selected for the Bio power plant at Varnamo
(Wood, E.., Tappan, G.., Hadj, A., 2004. Understanding the drivers of agricultural
land use change in south-central Senegal. J. Arid Environ. 59 et al., 2008).

 THERMAL CRACKING: Tests on a fluidized bed peat gasifier have shown that tar
levels can be reduced to those found in downdraft systems by thermal cracking at
800-1000”C10. However, biomass-derived tars are more refractory and are harder to
crack by thermal treatment alone. As indicated above, elevated freeboard
temperatures in fluid bed gasifiers provide some thermal tar cracking. There are
several ways of achieving thermal cracking:

9
 (1) By increasing residence time after initial gasification, such as in a fluid bed
reactor freeboard, but this is only partially effective.

(2) By direct contact with an independently heated hot surface, which requires a
significant energy supply and thus reduces the overall efficiency. This is also only
partly effective, owing to reliance on good mixing.

(3) By partial oxidation by addition of air or oxygen’. This increases CO, levels,
reduces efficiency and increases costs for oxygen use.

2.6.1 TAR REMOVAL

Water scrubbing is widely assumed to be a proven technique for physical removal of

particulates, tars and other contaminants. Unfortunately, most experience is not so reassuring
and there are many reported problems, particularly in the poor efficiencies of tar removal,
although surprisingly few hard data are available (Kampman et al., 2010). Tars require
physical capture and agglomeration or coalescence more than simple cooling; biomass-
derived tars are known to be very difficult to coalesce, and a complex treatment system is
likely to be required even to attain 90% tar removal. A typical system includes a saturator to
cool and saturate the gas for coalescence of particulates and tars in the next stage. A high-
efficiency scrubber then follows to contact the contaminants intimately and reduce the
pressure so that the water will condense on to the particulates and tar droplets, thus increasing
their size and improving their susceptibility to agglomeration and coalescence. A final stage
provides a high-residence-time tower to allow the system to equilibrate. Tar levels down to
20-40 mg; and particulate levels down to 10-20 mg, can be achieved with such a system.
Soluble gases such as ammonia and soluble solids such as sodium carbonate are effectively
removed. These systems are fairly expensive and create a waste disposal problem by
generating large quantities of contaminated water. This can usually be treated by
conventional biological processes unless there is a high recycle ratio, when more
concentrated solutions will be produced, requiring special disposal. Cooling of the product
will also reduce electrical efficiency, but is essential for applications in engines to provide
gas of the highest energy density. A few attempts have been made to scrub with oil, thought
more likely to capture the tars, but the consequent problems outweighed any benefits.
Electro- static precipitation is an effective but costly way of removing tars, but there is little
experience on biomass-derived gasification products.

10
Fuel-bound nitrogen 50-80% of fuel-bound nitrogen is converted to ammonia and smaller
quantities of other gaseous nitrogen compounds such as hydrogen cyanide during
gasification. These compounds will cause potential emissions problems by forming NO,
during combustion. Nitrogen-containing contaminants all exist in the vapour phase and will
therefore pass through all particulate removal devices. There are four ways of approaching
the problem of NO, emissions, any of which may be used singly or in combination:

(1) Reduction of the formation of NO, by limiting fuel-bound nitrogen in the

feedstock through careful selection of biomass types and/or blending.

(2) Wet scrubbing, which removes ammonia and other soluble nitrogen compounds,
but results in loss of sensible heat and thus poorer efficiencies.

(3) Use of low-NO, combustion techniques to minimize thermal NO, production.

(4) Use of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) at the exhaust of the engine or turbine.
SCR involves a reaction between ammonia and NO, to form nitrogen and water. This
is well-established technology and is often specified for exhaust gases from engines
and turbines. However, there is a capital cost and an efficiency penalty of 2-4%.

2.6.2 SULPHUR

Sulphur is not generally considered to be a problem, since biomass feeds have very low
sulphur contents. However, the specification for turbines is typically 1 ppm or often much
less, and lower still if co-contaminants are present, such as alkali metals. Some gas
compositions have been reported with 0.01 vol.% S (100 ppm). Sulphur removal may
therefore be necessary for turbine applications and can often be achieved with a conventional
sulphur guard. Sulphur concentrations are lower than those produced in the combustion of
fossil fuels, and hence expensive sulphur removal trains are not necessary. If a dolomite
(CaO.MgO) tar cracker is included in the process, this will absorb significant proportions of
sulphur and reduce the levels considerably, but possibly not to the low levels required. A
sulphur guard, consisting of a hot fixed bed of zinc oxide, is likely to be adequate for the
concentrations expected. This would be relatively inexpensive to install but would create a
waste disposal problem from the zinc sulphide produced.

11
2.6.3 CHLORINE

Chlorine is another potential contaminant, which can arise from pesticides and herbicides as
well as in waste materials. A level of 1ppm is often quoted, but this is a function of the
temperature, chlorine species, co- contaminants, and materials of construction. The behaviour
of chlorine and metals at elevated temperatures is well understood. Chlorine and its
compounds can be removed by absorption in active material either in the gasifier or in a
secondary reactor, or by dissolution in a wet scrubbing system. Dolomite and related
materials are less effective at removing chlorine than sulphur.

2.7 POWER GENERATION INTERFACING REQUIREMENTS

The product gases from gasification of biomass may be used in either gas turbines or engines
for the generation of electricity. This section considers gas quality requirements and control
techniques that are required to make the use of gas turbines or engines a feasible proposition.
The gas quality requirement for a gas turbine is known to be very demanding, in that only
extremely low levels of any solid or liquid contaminant, and of some gaseous contaminants
such as sulphur and chlorine compounds, can be tolerated, but there are no specifications
available for design of gas cleaning systems. A common response to a question on tolerance
levels for any contaminant is either ‘zero’ or ‘the same as natural gas’. Results from ongoing
and planned large-scale tests will provide better data. The problem is one of optimization.
Increasingly stringent gas cleaning systems will cost more but will increase the life of the
turbine and/or reduce the maintenance costs. Conversely, relatively poor gas clean-up will
cost less but reduce the turbine life and/or increase maintenance costs.

2.7.1 POWER GENERATION

The principle of power generation from a gas turbine is well known. Air at ambient
temperature and pressure is compressed in order to burn the compressed fuel gas. The hot
exhaust is passed through a gas turbine, where some of the heat energy is recovered as work
and the rest is discharged as waste heat. Some of the work is used to compress the air and the
remainder is used to generate electricity. This simple cycle is not very efficient, since there is
considerable energy wasted in the hot exhaust gases. Efficiency can therefore be increased by

12
adding a heat recovery system after the gas turbine. These systems can either generate steam
or preheat the air. The steam can power a steam turbine in a combined-cycle mode, or it can
be added to the turbine combustion chamber or mixed with the combustion gases and fed
through the gas turbine in a steam-injected gas turbine (STIG) cycle. Owing to the low
heating value of the fuel gas there is a practical limit to the extent to which steam can be
added to the combustion chamber without extinguishing the combustion. System
optimization is very complex; work is under way in the IEA Bioenergy Agreement to model
and optimize such a system. The residual heat from the steam turbine or air preheater can be
used for process steam or for district heating, or may be used in the process, for example for
wood drying. Fuels of low heating value such as gases produced by biomass gasification have
not been demonstrated in gas turbines, although gas of medium heating value from coal
gasification has been used successfully, for example at the Cool Water demons- traction coal
integrated gasifier-combined-cycle (GIG-CC) 100MWe facility in the USA”.

2.7.2 BIOMASS GASIFICATION-TO-ELECTRICITY SYSTEM

The special requirement of a biomass-based system is that if the gasifier operates at

atmospheric pressure the product gas will require compression as well as the air. The air
supply to the gasifier would probably be provided independently, although a bleed from the
air compression loop could be used. This latter choice would require extensive compressor
modifications and impose control problems on the system. Thus a separate additional
compressor is required. A pressurized gasifier would either use compressed air from the
compressed air loop on the turbine set, or have an independent air compressor which would
solve some of the potential control problems described above, but at the expense of higher
cost and lower efficiency.

2.7.3 FUEL SPECIFICATIONS AND TURBINE/ENGINE REQUIREMENTS

Coal integrated gasification (CIG) capacities are far greater than the capacities proposed for
biomass systems, typically ranging from 100MWe at a demonstration scale to 1000MWe.
The gas turbines used are bigger and more tolerant of gas contamination. Biomass-based
systems are limited in size by the availability and collection costs of the resource. There are
few advocates of biomass-based combined-cycle power systems above 50-100MWe, and few

13
sites where biomass can be delivered in sufficient quantities: 45% efficiency for 100MWe.
Contaminant limits for systems based on biomass integrated gasification (BIG) will have to
be much stricter to ensure a long turbine life, although definitive limits have yet to be
finalized.

2.7.4 FUEL COMBUSTION

The heating value of gaseous fuels from biomass gasification is only l0-50% of that of
natural gas. This means that a correspondingly greater volume of fuel will have to be burned
to supply an equivalent amount of heat. Combustion chambers and burners will require
modification to cope with the higher throughput as well as to meet increasingly stringent
environmental requirements. Contaminant limits may have to be tightened to account for the
extra volume of fuel gas required. A low flame temperature is expected from combustion of
gas of low heating value, owing to dilution by nitrogen. This will reduce thermal NO,
production, which is therefore not expected to be an environmental problem. The
composition of gases of medium heating value, which are largely hydrogen and carbon
monoxide with some methane, suggests that they will have a high flame temperature, which
could lead to NO, problems. Burners for such gases will have to be carefully designed to
account for this, or some form of dilution may be necessary, possibly by the nitrogen
extracted in oxygen gasification, or by steam. SCR processes are available for reducing NO,
in exhaust gas, but there is an economic and energetic penalty. Any fuel-bound nitrogen, such
as from bark in particular, will require gas cleaning or a selective catalytic reduction process
as described above. It would be desirable for the turbine to have a dual-fuel capability to
supplement fuel gas and to ensure maximum availability.

2.7.5 ENERGY RECOVERY COMBINED CYCLE

Exhaust gases typically leave the gas turbine at 500-600°C for aero turbines and 400-500°C
for industrial turbines, and so still have considerable thermal energy. This energy, and that of
other high-temperature gas sources such as the raw gas from the gasifier, can be recovered in
a heat-recovery steam generator (HRSG). This steam can be used in a steam turbine to
generate extra electricity. The steam is then cooled and condensed in a cycle before passing
once again through the generator. This combination of gas turbine and steam cycle is known

14
as a combined cycle (CC). The waste heat from the steam turbine can be recovered as heat,
for example for district heating. Steam turbines and boilers are normally only economic in
large-scale applications (> 100MWe), unless there are special circumstances such as low-cost
feed stocks, and for this reason combined cycles are very sensitive to scale. Steam-injection
gas turbine (STIG) cycles may be more appropriate to smaller generating systems, but there
is no experience of such a system applied to biomass- derived gases.

 Steam injection cycle: In steam-injection cycles, the HRSG raises steam which is
then mixed with the compressed air in the gas turbine cycle. Steam is injected at the
combustion chamber and at points before entry to the gas turbine. This increases the
gas turbine throughput and hence the power output. The exhaust gas stream requires a
flue gas condenser. This system is commercially available in natural-gas-fired aero
gas turbines, although there is no experience with gases of low heating value. In such
duties the steam may dilute the fuel to the point where combustion is unstable. There
is also the possibility that turbine capacity may be exceeded.
 Combined Heat and Power (CHP): In all the cycles noted, excess heat or steam can
be used as process steam or in district heating. This will increase overall system
efficiency, but with additional capital cost.

2.8 ENVIRONMENT

The operation of a gasification plant can result in occupational health and safety hazards
unless adequate and effective preventive measures are taken and continuously enforced. A
gasification system comprises: fuel storage, handling and feeding system, the gasifier, gas
cooling and cleaning equipment, utilization of the gas. Each part of the plant creates specific
occupational, health and safety hazards.

2.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF GASIFICATION OPERATIONS

Dust is generated during preparation, storage and handling of the feedstock, feeding, and fly
ash removal by particulate collection equipment; all of these present particular problems
when the solids are dry and friable, Dust generation creates several possible problems,
including: formation of explosive mixtures with air (a primary explosion can render the dust
airborne, causing secondary explosions which can be devastating); inhalation causing lung

15
damage; eye and skin irritation; smells from, or smouldering and ignition of, layers of
combustible dust; dust settlement on all exposed horizontal surfaces, leading to safety
problems for personnel in routine operations, as well as increased maintenance and aesthetic
detraction; increased friction and wear of mechanical equipment caused by dust deposition,
increasing costs and reducing reliability, both increasing the potential for accidents.
Preventive measures include: minimization of solids handling and avoidance of rough
handling to minimize attrition of fuel particles and suspension of dust; complete enclosure of
all solids-handling, particularly conveying equipment at the discharge points; installation of
suction hoods and gas cleaning equipment to control localized dust sources, for example mills
and screens; maintenance of an under pressure in enclosed environments to prevent the
spreading of dust into adjacent premises, again with suitable gas cleaning equipment. Solid
particles also arise in the product gas, such as cinders, fly ash, filter dust, charcoal, fluid bed
inerts and catalyst fines. Since such sources are localized, they are in principle easier to
control. Fine materials such as fly ash may need to be wetted to prevent re-entrainment
during handling and disposal. Carbon formed by secondary cracking or incomplete
gasification can also form explosive mixtures with air, but it is usually contained in
appropriate vessels. Charcoal from biomass can be pyrophoric and needs to be adequately
cooled before discharge and storage if arising in significant amounts. Some types of gasifiers
may produce hot particles, as a consequence of malfunction or equipment faults, which may
ignite flammable materials and cause a fire.

2.8.2 WASTEWATER AND CONDENSABLES

The present trend is to produce a clean tar- and ash-free gas that may be directly burned in an
engine or turbine, and there is a positive effort to design and develop systems that do not
produce a liquid effluent, because of the potential problems of treatment and disposal.
However, if wastewaters and condensates are produced during gas cooling and wet gas
cleaning, they will require treatment (Grassi & Bridgwater, 1993). The condensate is known
to contain, for example, acetic acid, phenols and many other oxygenated organic compounds
that may be soluble or insoluble in water. There is a risk of water pollution and adverse health
effects from the suspended tars and soluble organics. The condensate and wastewaters consist
mainly of water, and can be divided into an aqueous, i.e. water-soluble fraction, and a non-
water-soluble fraction consisting of tars and oils. However, separation is not always simple,

16
since wood tar tends to emulsify in the aqueous phase. The insoluble fraction consists mainly
of ash and particulates, tars, phenolic compounds and light oils. The tars in particular, as well
as the condensates, are toxic and require careful evaluation of their occupational and safety
aspects. Little research has been carried out to determine the mutagenic and carcinogenic
effects of biomass tar, but research on coal tar has confirmed the above reservations. It would
be prudent to assume that some of the tar components may be carcinogenic. High-
temperature gasifier operations can increase this problem, since the mutagenic and
carcinogenic effects are related to the presence of polycyclic aromatics and their relative
concentrations increase as process temperature increases. Direct content between skin and
tars or condensates should be avoided by appropriate clothing and training. Tars present an
insignificant fire hazard, as their flash points are comparatively high. Tar disposal has not
been examined, but it is usually assumed that it may be recycled to the gasifier or incinerated.
Other disposal options are unlikely to be acceptable. No work is known to have been carried
out on other uses for the tar, such as chemicals recovery and direct applications such as road
tar, although chemicals from biomass via flash pyrolysis are of major interest’.

 Fly ash and char: Fly ash and char present similar problems to those caused by dust
as described above. There is an additional risk of fire, which dictates that fly ash and
char should be stored moist. Disposal of this wetted mixture presents its own
environmental problems. The solids need to be separated from the water in a water
treatment facility. Extracted water will be contaminated and may require further
treatment before discharge, using orthodox water treatment technology.
 Odour Problems: Odours may arise because of: the degradation of organic matter
(for example in refuse or sewage gasification), the occurrence of even minute gas
leaks, the handling and storage of tar, wastewater, fly ash and other by-products.
Wood tar has a strong, characteristic and persistent odour, even in minute
concentrations. The smell of coal tar is somewhat aromatic owing to the presence of
naphthalene, anthracene and phenanthrene. Tar derived from lignocellulose feedstock
is more pungent. When sulphur- or nitrogen-containing feedstock are used, the
producer gas also contains odorous gases, such as H2S, COS or NH.
 Noise: Noise is produced whenever a mechanical part or an engine or motor is in
operation. Particular plant areas where noise levels are likely to be significant are:
reception, storage and handling equipment, the feeding system, the compressors, the
gas turbine or engine. The effects on humans of prolonged exposure to noise are well

17
 documented. Adequate measures must be taken to minimize noise, for example by
using sound- and vibration-absorbent materials between supports or acoustic
enclosure. Operators are also required to be provided with ear protection plugs,

2.8.3 HAZARDS OF GASIFIER OPERATION COMBUSTIBLE GASES AND

VAPOURS

A flammable gas is combustible only within a certain range of concentrations, bounded by

the LEL (lower explosion limit) and the UEL (upper explosion limit). Below the LEL, the
mixture is too lean to sustain combustion. Above the UEL the reaction stops because of a
deficiency in oxygen. In both cases the generation of heat becomes too slow to give rise to
the characteristic acceleration in reaction rates which marks the start of an explosion. The
range between the LEL and UEL values depends on the reactivity of the flammable
compound or mixture. It widens when the flammable gas or the combustion air is preheated
or under pressure. Air leaks into the gasifier plant as a consequence of a reduction in
operating pressure. Reduced pressure may arise due to rapid cooling, condensation of vapour
such as water, chimney effects, or the suction of an induced-draft fan or of an engine. Fuel
gas leaks out of the gasifier plant into a confined space, thus building up a substantial
concentration in an enclosed space. A source of ignition is necessary for an explosion, so
explosion-proof, flameproof or spark proof motors would be specified in any such areas. In
addition, such an atmosphere is likely to present a lethal toxicity hazard from carbon
monoxide, so suitable detectors should be fitted.

 Combustible Dusts: Combustible solids such as wood, flour and coal in very small
particles can also form explosive mixtures with air within certain concentration limits,
usually ranging from 20 to 50mgm-3 for LEL and 2 to 6gmV3 for UEL. Numerous
carbohydrate materials, including starch, sugar and wood flour, have given rise to
extremely destructive explosions.
 Fire risks: The main fire risks in gasifier systems are associated with: fuel storage,
combustible dusts formed in fuel commination, fuel drying (in forced-draft conditions
a fire is likely to expand quickly), ignition procedure (especially for moving-bed
gasifiers), and the product gas. There are also the usual risks associated with any
construction involving a thermal unit. Local rules and guidelines should be followed
for construction and materials of buildings. Adequate means for fire-fighting

18
 CHAPTER THREE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

3.0 CONCLUSION

The process components involved in an integrated biomass-to-electricity system have all

been individually tested at pilot scale or larger, but long-term operation and integration can
be achieved only with substantial demonstration plant. Several processes are in hand and
more are planned for implementation in the near term. The key conclusions from this study
are summarized below: The stage of development of biomass gasifiers is sufficiently
advanced to justify a substantial demonstration plant to prove the total IGCC concept and
obtain reliable performance data. There are still areas of uncertainty, but these are relatively
minor and will not be resolved until and unless a large integrated plant is built. Gas cleaning
has been developed in the laboratory to the point where large-scale demonstration and long-
term operating experience are necessary. This area can be considered the least developed and
most likely to create problems in a demonstration plant. Biomass handling, storage, drying,
commination and screening are well established in the pulp and paper industry, as well as
combustion systems world-wide, and present no uncertainties in operation and performance.
There is a need to optimize the cost and performance of the front end of the plant in relation
to the gasifier performance and requirements, and the availability of heat and power energy
from the clean-up and power generation stages. Turbine fuel specifications are imperfectly
defined. There are various requirements promoted by manufacturers that have not been
substantiated in tests. There will be a trade-off between higher levels of gas cleaning and
higher maintenance costs that can only be resolved by large-scale and long-term operation.
Engine fuel specifications are imperfectly defined. The level of uncertainty is lower than for
gas turbines. Engines exist that can be, and have been, readily adapted to run on biomass-
derived gases. However, fuel specifications are currently produced on an ad hoc basis.

19
3.1 RECOMMENDATION

Biomass is readily available in large amounts and all attention seems to be shifting towards
renewable energy. Large organizations and governments are looking into harnessing the
potential of the biomass energy. Therefore I would recommend that the department should
procure more advanced research on the use of biomass as a source of energy and also affiliate
with organizations that are already researching the use of biomass energy.

20
 REFERENCE

Demirbaş, A. (2001). Biomass resource facilities and biomass conversion processing for fuels
and chemicals. Energy Conversion and Management, 42(11), 1357–1378.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(00)00137-0

Evans, R. J., Knight, R. A., Onischak, M., & Babu, S. P. (1988). Development of Biomass
Gasification to Produce Substitute Fuels. Energy, (88), 7.
https://doi.org/10.2172/5206147

Grassi, G., & Bridgwater, A. V. (1991). The european community energy from biomass
research and development programme. International Journal of Solar Energy, 10(3–4),
127–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425919108941456

Grassi, G., & Bridgwater, A. V. (1993). The opportunities for electricity production from
biomass by advanced thermal conversion technologies. Biomass and Bioenergy, 4(5),
339–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/0961-9534(93)90050-E

Kampman, B., Bergsma, G., Schepers, B., Croezen, H., Fritsche, U. R., Henneberg, K., …
van der Linde, C. (2010). BUBE: Better Use of Biomass for Energy - Background
Report to the Position Paper of IEA RETD and IEA Bioenergy. IEA RETD and IEA
Bioenergy, (10), 151pp. Retrieved from
http://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Better-Use-of-Biomass-for-
Energy-Background-Report.pdf

Pottier, M. (1982). HYDROGEN PRODUCTION AND STORAGE. Commission of the

European Communities, (Report) EUR, 115–144.

Wood, E.., Tappan, G.., Hadj, A., 2004. Understanding the drivers of agricultural land use
change in south-central Senegal. J. Arid Environ. 59, 565–582.,
doi:10.1073/pnas.1011163107 DeFries, R., Rosenzweig, C., 2010. Toward a whole-
landscape approach for sustainable land use in the tropics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S.
A. 107, 19627–19632., doi:10.1126/science.1111772 Foley, J.A., DeFries, R., Asner,
G.P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S.R., Chapin, F.S., Coe, M.T., Daily, G.C.,
Gibbs, H.K., Helkowski, J.H., Holloway, T., Howard, E.A., Kucharik, C.J., Monfreda,
C., Patz, J.A., Prentice, 570–574., doi:10.1007/s00267-010-9438-x Trisurat, Y.,
Alkemade, R., Verburg, P.H., 2010. Projecting Land-Use Change and Its Consequences

21
 for Biodiversity in Northern Thailand. Environ. Manage. 45, 626–639., Chomitz, K.M.,
Gray, D.A., 1996. Roads, land use, and deforestation: A spatial model applied to belize.
World Bank Econ. Rev. 10, 487–512., doi:10.1073/pnas.1014773107 Meyfroidt, P.,
Rudel, T.K., Lambin, E.F., 2010. Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement
of land use. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 107, 20917–20922., … Herrero, M.,
Thornton, P.K., Notenbaert, A., Msangi, S., Wood, S., Kruska, R., Dixon, J., Bossio, D.,
van de Steeg, J., Freeman, H.A., Li, X., ParthasarathyRao, P., 2012. Drivers of change in
crop-livestock systems and their potential impacts on agro-ecos, K. I. 1–114. (2008).
Urban Forest and Rural Cities: Multi-sited Households, Consumption Patterns, and
Forest Resources in Amazonia. Ecology and Society, (08). https://doi.org/10.1186/1556-
276X-7-150

Ziv, Y., Muthen, B. O., Zhang, X., Nurmi, J.-E. E., Fettig, A., Schultz, T. R., … Marquis, J.
(2010). Social Policy Report. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, (10).
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits

22