BioEnergy Lists: Gasifiers & Gasification

From loiselle at dinonet1.dinonet.it Tue Oct 7 16:48:08 1997
From: loiselle at dinonet1.dinonet.it (loiselle@dinonet1.dinonet.it)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: rural gasification
Message-ID: <19971007205728421.AAA228@loiselle>

Hello gasification talk,
I am a first year grad student at the University of Siena in Italy,
I have worked mostly environmental engineering projects regarding air
and water pollution, but I am trying to get a biomass project started
here in the Department and I was very happy to find your talk
address.

I am searching for information on small gasification systems, that
would be realisable in a rural environment with agricultural wastes
and possibly separated residential wastes, if one of
the professionals on this talk network could send me information
about a 100 - 200 kWh electric fixed grate gasification system, that
is low technolgy and flexible enough to be adapted to two or three
biomass sources (salice, agricultural wastes, phragmites), I
would be very grateful.

dott. STEVEN LOISELLE
UNIV. di SIENA
Dipt. di Chimica & Biosistemi

 

From j.andries at wbmt.tudelft.nl Wed Oct 8 02:10:50 1997
From: j.andries at wbmt.tudelft.nl (Jans Andries)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: rural gasification
Message-ID: <9710080712.AA05313@dutw444.wbmt.tudelft.nl>

We are planning to start a project next year where we
are going to connect a 75 kWel gas turbine via a
high temperature ceramic filter to
an existing pressurised fluidised bed gasifier (1.5 MWel).
We will make the connection in such a way that the results
of the gasturbine part are transferable to systems using other
gasification systems.
If anybody is interested i can send more info by mail.
Please contact us directly by e-mail.
Jans Andries
Laboratory for Thermal Power Engineering
Delft University of Technology
Mekelweg 2
2628 CD Delft The Netherlands
tel: +31-15-2785410 fax: +31-15-2782460
e-mail: j.andries@wbmt.tudelft.nl
web site: http://www-pe.wbmt.tudelft.nl/~andries/index.htm
web site: http://dutw321.wbmt.tudelft.nl
(most up to date, only during office hours)

 

 

From pbk2906 at bergsoe.dtu.dk Wed Oct 8 04:23:55 1997
From: pbk2906 at bergsoe.dtu.dk (Claus Hindsgaul Hansen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: rural gasification
In-Reply-To: <9710080712.AA05313@dutw444.wbmt.tudelft.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.971008100853.25221A-100000@venus.bergsoe.dtu.dk>

Please send me your info!

I am a student writing my Master Thesis on "Producer gas quality
measurements". Specifically, I will try to determine the contents of
particulate matter, size distribution and (hopefully) chemical contents
og particulate matter and tar (whatever that is :) ).

You may allready know our gasifier setup at DTU, but...
At the two-stage gasifier at DTU we are using a venturi-scrubber for
gas-cleaning. Recently we succesfully ran an IC-engine at 100% producer
gas from wood uh... small, chopped wood-bricks (D < 8 cm).

I'm sure, you are well aware, that a considerable amount of the tar
contents can be expected to stay in the gas phase at high temperatures. I
would very much like to know, how you will handle this?

Claus Hindsgaul Hansen
Skodsborgvej 190, v.2906 - 2850 Naerum
c918280@student.dtu.dk
http://www.gbar.dtu.dk/~c918280

On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Jans Andries wrote:

> We are planning to start a project next year where we
> are going to connect a 75 kWel gas turbine via a
> high temperature ceramic filter to
> an existing pressurised fluidised bed gasifier (1.5 MWel).
> We will make the connection in such a way that the results
> of the gasturbine part are transferable to systems using other
> gasification systems.
> If anybody is interested i can send more info by mail.
> Please contact us directly by e-mail.
> Jans Andries

 

 

From poncelet at term.ucl.ac.be Wed Oct 8 04:38:46 1997
From: poncelet at term.ucl.ac.be (Jean-Marc Poncelet)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: GAZ-L: oxidation rate
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971008103920.006931f0@spot.term.ucl.ac.be>

Dear gasifiermen,

I've read the book 'Biomass Gasification Principles and Technology', 1981
.I'm working on a gasification model and I would like to be sure of my
references. My question is about the carbon oxidation reaction speed : if
the order of the carbon oxidation reaction is approximated by 0.5, how much
is the oxygen partial pressure? 1 bar or 0.21 bar?

Thank you very much!
PONCELET JEAN-MARC
Research Ingeneer
Faculté des Sciences Appliquées
Unité TERM
Place du Levant 2
B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve
BELGIQUE
Tél.: +32(0)10-472232
Fax.: +32(0)10-452692

 

 

From convrtch at southern.co.nz Wed Oct 8 15:59:52 1997
From: convrtch at southern.co.nz (convertech)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <v01520d00b061a4e65348@[202.37.189.59]>

 

 

 

 

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Thu Oct 9 02:45:11 1997
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: German report
Message-ID: <199710090648.TAA24763@powerlink.co.nz>

 

Hello Gasification Colleagues

In response to our editor's plea earlier this year for more chat on this
Network, I thought you may be interested in some comments regarding
gasification in Germany. Having just spent four weeks there, I had the
opportunity to see a few gasifiers, talk to many students (and their
Professors), other gasifier manufacturers, engine designers, and anyone
else unlucky enough to be caught up in discussion relating to gasification.

There were also a few project proposals to review for funding application,
and gasification equipment assessment to see if their design had the
capability to match their suppliers glowing specifications! With so much
to cover, I think it is best to make a number of reports so that you don't
get too bored ploughing through this in one go.

Gasification is a hot topic in Germany, and with the E.U. funding renewable
energy research projects, it is natural everyone who can write a proposal
is endeavouring to feed from the public purse. It was very hard not to
believe there wasn't a special training centre hidden away somewhere on how
to prepare E.U. funded proposals. Everyone trying so hard to dress up
projects to sound new and exciting. It was difficult but necessary to
point out that just about all there is to know of any relevance is already
available in the literature.

Because my own speciality is high performance engine gasification, I was
disappointed to find that engine gasifier projects were being proposed
using process heat type gasifiers. It is a widely held belief to those I
questioned, that if it makes gas, you can use it for anything. Furthermore
if you make a big one and fuel it with rubbish demolition wood (shredded)
you can power villages and small towns. This is tremendous enthusiasm but
difficult to accept when none had even small gasifiers operating to
commercial standards with engines.

On reflection, I haven't received any reports of reliably operating
commercially manufactured wood gasifiers in Germany except our own in
Furstenwalde. Anybody out there like to identify engine gasifiers that can
be seen working anywhere in Europe?

Possibly the projects that caused me to bristle most were those proposing
gasifier testing with different fuels, and comparing gasifiers ability to
gasify standard fuels. In the first instance it is quite clear from
reading the literature that few projects have gasifiers operating,
expertise, and no appreciation of what constitutes a correctly functioning
gasifier. Have a look in your own library and see how many references you
can find describing behaviour of the gasifier when it is functioning
correctly. One thing for sure, any gasifier test programme has to be
invalid if the gasifier cannot be reliably demonstrated by the manufacturer
using his own approved fuel., Then having demonstrated the gasifiers
reliability, all gasifiers that meet this requirement should have the
opportunity to participate in the test programme. If this isn't done, and
some sort of random selection of gasifiers are tested, then whoever is
conducting the tests could be seen in less than a credible light. This is
how I commented to those who presented their proposals for scrutiny, and
hopefully the rewrites will assist them to get funds eventually.

Whilst on the subject of fuel, at several different meetings I was asked my
opinion of densified fuel (briquettes). As a gasifier fuel, sawdust
briquettes worked O.K. in our Fluidyne gasifier, but other agricultural
wastes have individual problems and unlikely to be good fuel. There is
also the point that briquettes are energy consumptive to produce so
therefore expensive. This could be offset if the sawdust is a waste
disposal problem and the cost of briquetting charged to the waste source.
The cost of the briquettes should then cost no more than that charged for
wood chips. The idea is to produce energy from wood, not use energy to
create the fuel. The debate was lively, and I can only conclude the
briquette manufacturers are suggesting that their fuel will solve all gas
making problems. Anybody like to comment on this?

Next report: Engines, turbines and dreamers.

Regards
Doug Williams.

 

 

From cmurphy at pressenter.com Thu Oct 9 10:47:01 1997
From: cmurphy at pressenter.com (Craig P. Murphy)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: German report
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19971009143149.006fc8a8@pop.pressenter.com>

At 07:43 PM 10/9/97 +1300, you wrote:
>
>Hello Gasification Colleagues
>
>In response to our editor's plea earlier this year for more chat on this

-----------------------------------CLIPPED----------CLIPPED-----------------
-----------------

>Next report: Engines, turbines and dreamers.
>
>Regards
>Doug Williams.
>
>
>DOUG,
THANKS FOR YOUR VERY GOOD APPROACH, PLEASE KEEP IT COMING
REGARDS
CRAIG MURPHY
BROAD STREET RESOURCES, INC.

 

 

From terry at sri.org.au Thu Oct 9 11:13:57 1997
From: terry at sri.org.au (Terry Dixon)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: GASIFICATION QUESTIONS
Message-ID: <9710091516.AA28830@richmond.sri.org.au>

Dear Gasification Colleagues,

I am Group Leader of the Engineering Research Group at the Sugar Research
Institute (SRI) Australia. SRI is the research and development arm of the
Australian sugar industry. We have extensive ongoing RDD&C programs in the
areas of energy utilisation, biomass combustion, boiler technology as well
as many other fields. In recent years we have developed our advanced
integrated high temperature drying - swirl burner biomass combustion system.

There are 29 sugar factories in Australia (26 in the state of Queensland),
and most are very large factories by world standards.
Our studies have shown that these factories have the potential, using
conventional steam cycle technology, to cogenerate to the grid in the range
of 35-60 MW each. With gasification and CC gas turbines these cogeneration
levels can easily be doubled. Our immediate R&D interest is therefore in
the status of LARGE SCALE biomass gasification for GT applications.

Which leads me to several questions that I would appreciate comments on by
those of you with experience and rationality in the field of biomass
gasification. I have just read the comments of Doug Williams, and am
impressed that some on his comments echo my perceptions. Here are the
comments/questions, based on my perception of the published data so far,
for which I seek a response.

(1) The kinetics of biomass gasification have been "done to death" by
researchers all over the world. You can read about it anywhere.

(2) There are a plurality of gasification techniques and variants and
variations, ALL AT THE SMALL SCALE (from several hundred kW up to 1 or 2 MWe)
and all claimed by their proponents to be commercial. I agree with Doug
Williams that the true commercial status of the vast majority of these
systems has yet to be proved ie. reliability, maintainability, operability,
sustained quality of output, all of the normal things that are expected
by a commercial client.

(3) When it comes to the "big end of town" in biomass gasification ie.
gasifier capacities of over 20 MWe, there is a major absence of systems.
This is the development scenario that we at SRI are working up to for
our Australian sugar factories.

(4) The automatic translation of the small scale gasification technologies
to the larger scale for commercialization is by no means anyway certain.

(5) I am closely aware of the demonstration scale biomass gasifiers that are
currently under trial (well, at least built and being tested) in Hawaii
(Maui) and USA (Vermont). Can somebody inform me of other similar sized
demonstration gasifiers that have been undergoing serious, sustained
development and testing. I have very limited information on developments
in Sweden and Italy.

(6) There is still a very long D,D&C path to be followed before large scale
gasification becomes legitimately commercial.

Our immediate activities are directed to studying the various gasification
technologies that are around, and determining (from engineering and
commercial viewpoints) a preferred combination of technology bits that
would lead to the viable gasification of Australian sugar cane bagasse.

My sincere thanks for your considerations and assistance.

Cheers

Dr Terry Dixon

 

 

From jaturnbu at ix.netcom.com Thu Oct 9 12:22:19 1997
From: jaturnbu at ix.netcom.com (Jane H. Turnbull)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: German report
In-Reply-To: <199710090648.TAA24763@powerlink.co.nz>
Message-ID: <343C9583.4AAB@ix.netcom.com>

Doug -

Your comments certain bear out Seppo Hulkkonen's and my experience when
we spent some considerable time two years ago surveying the developers
of small, potentially modular gasifiers world-wide. We had a list of 27
or so supposedly commercial units, but of that list no more than 4 or 5
came close to having reliable systems, and even in those cases, most of
the the validation of systems had been to produce process steam - not
power.

As you know, yours was one of the technologies which we rather liked -
also Malcolm Lefcort's. Personally, I'm also intrigued with the Iowa
State Latent Heat Ballasted System, though it remains at an early
developmental stage. Right now I'm also looking forward to visiting two
weeks from now the B9 Energy Biomass CHP system going on line in
northern Ireland.

One problem which has been very evident is the inadequacy of R&D on heat
exchangers for indirectly-fired units. I had tried to put together a
consortium of expertise to address this challenge about a year ago;
however, there really was limited enthusiasm - or perhaps limited
understanding of what a difference a reasonably priced high temperature
heat exchanger could make.

Another vision of mine is to help establish an incubator center - to
bring developers of units in and have the systems engineers take a hard
look at their concepts. Then, if a system looks realistic and
promising, provide support getting it through the pilot stage. Once
solid cost and performance information is in place, venture capital
should be forthcoming.

The solar and wind folk have really worked quite effectively to push
their technologies through the early years of maturation. It is
frustrating to see so much wheel-spinning amongst our biomass
colleagues.

Best to you,

Jane Turnbull

 

 

From bentermm at convertech.co.nz Thu Oct 9 16:02:30 1997
From: bentermm at convertech.co.nz (Markus M Benter)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: German report
Message-ID: <v01540b00b0638eeaeb1e@[202.37.189.82]>

Dear Doug,

Thanks for your report of your trip to my home country. Although I have not
been there for a year, just from the few contacts I keep, I can certainly
confirm the "run on Brussels for gasification research funding"!

I look forward to your next report! I hope all went well for you/Fluidyne
over there!

Cheers
Markus

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Markus M Benter
Energy and Process Engineer
Scott Convertech Ltd
PO Box 13 776
Christchurch
NEW ZEALAND

e-mail: bentermm@convertech.co.nz
www: http://www.southpower.co.nz/conver.htm

 

 

From bentermm at convertech.co.nz Thu Oct 9 16:27:47 1997
From: bentermm at convertech.co.nz (Markus M Benter)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: GASIFICATION QUESTIONS
Message-ID: <v01540b03b06394f45694@[202.37.189.82]>

Dear Terry,

I am by no means the most informed person on this list when it comes to
large scale biomass gasification for power generation. In response to your
question 5, I can tell you though that I have been in contact with Lurgi,
they are building an IGCC gasification plant in Pisa, Italy (Bioeletricca)
(data accord. to Lurgi: air blown ACFB, T=approx. 800-900degC, p=0.14MPa,
throughput 7.1Mg(od)/h, fluid. medium: sand, gas LHV=6.5MJ/Nm3, gas
cleaning: 3-stage scrubber, particle removel: second cyclone and bag
filter, output net=12MWel). I understand that they have reasonable
experience in this area from biomass combustion plants and biomass
gasification for lime kilns.

In Sweden there is Bioflow/Sydkraft (Ahlstrom/Foster Wheeler), which is
operating a plant in Vaernamo but these people are online themselves and
you should be able to get hold of data directly from them easily.

I hope that has helped. Let me know if I can help you with contacts etc., I
have just gone through this exercise for some NZ industry.

Kind regards
Markus

PS Will you be at "Solar '97" in Canberra?

----------

>(5) I am closely aware of the demonstration scale biomass gasifiers that are
>currently under trial (well, at least built and being tested) in Hawaii
>(Maui) and USA (Vermont). Can somebody inform me of other similar sized
>demonstration gasifiers that have been undergoing serious, sustained
>development and testing. I have very limited information on developments
>in Sweden and Italy.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Markus M Benter
Energy and Process Engineer
Scott Convertech Ltd
PO Box 13 776
Christchurch
NEW ZEALAND

e-mail: bentermm@convertech.co.nz
www: http://www.southpower.co.nz/conver.htm

 

 

From npandit at osf1.gmu.edu Thu Oct 9 17:07:57 1997
From: npandit at osf1.gmu.edu (NITIN PANDIT)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: German report
In-Reply-To: <343C9583.4AAB@ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95q.971009163738.29638E-100000@osf1.gmu.edu>

Jane:

On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Jane H. Turnbull wrote:
> Your comments certain bear out Seppo Hulkkonen's and my experience when
> we spent some considerable time two years ago surveying the developers
> of small, potentially modular gasifiers world-wide. We had a list of 27
> or so supposedly commercial units, but of that list no more than 4 or 5
> came close to having reliable systems, and even in those cases, most of
> the the validation of systems had been to produce process steam - not
> power.

I agree with your comments about the the current unavailability of
commercialized large scale systems. Of course, every time I dealt with
any sugar mill, the owners and financiers wanted to see it operating
somewhere else first. An interesting approach might be to see the
process steam as a useful product as below...

> (snip)
> The solar and wind folk have really worked quite effectively to push
> their technologies through the early years of maturation. It is
> frustrating to see so much wheel-spinning amongst our biomass
> colleagues.

It does appear that some technologies are making it steadily past critical
mass despite the same catch-22 situation discussed above. And that is
what induces me to direct the following comments to the SRI folks in
Australia and others in this discussion.

Many sugar mills can do a lot more to improve their thermal efficiency.
The steam-on-cane ratios are too high and there is a heap of literature
on what sugar mills ought to do about it. Apart from that, in some mills,
I personally thought it might be worthwhile putting a smaller gasifier(s)
(space and location permitting) to provide process heat to some of the
major processes. With a lower consumption of bagasse to meet local needs,
there would be more left for other uses. (Even at that point, taking
Harry's past guidance, I dont know if I would restrict its use for making
baseload power only as there are other material uses of biomass.) I think
the approach might be particularly appealing at the time of expansion of
crushing capacity to avoid (optimize) the additional energy requirements.

In general, it may be worthwhile optimizing systems using existing scale
gasifiers where feasible until the "ideal" scale system is bestowed upon
us. The use would probably encourage larger scale development and use
over time without too many more pilots. In my observation, there is
sufficient slack (inefficiency) in the sugar mills that several such
alternatives could be tried. But then of course, they are not my mills...

It is evident that to take such an approach, one needs to be site
specific; SRI may have looked at the many variations of this theme already
and therefore, I may have overstated the case based on my experience.

Regards

Nitin

****************************************************************************

Nitin Pandit
Tel: (703) 263-0689 3867 Zelkova Court
Fax: (703) 263-0953 Fairfax, VA 22033
Net: npandit@gmu.edu USA

****************************************************************************

 

 

From lars.stromberg at generation.vattenfall.se Fri Oct 10 04:42:56 1997
From: lars.stromberg at generation.vattenfall.se (lars.stromberg@generation.vattenfall.se)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: SV: GAS-L: GASIFICATION QUESTIONS
Message-ID: <199710100843.KAA00789@energy.vattenfall.se>

 

Dear Terry,

Since at least 20 years there has been a development work going on in
Sweden on larger scale gasifiers. At present the company TPS (Thermal
processes) at Studsvik is active in the field. They have built several
process development plants and one commercial plant in Italy so far, all
aiming at cogeneration, or electricity only, in the size range 10-50 MW
electric, with gasturbines or large scale diesels. As far as I know they
are planning some plants in the UK and Brazil at present. One project I
was involved in myself ten years ago was a process development project
with a large diesel from Hedemora diesels, which worked fine. In fact
better than anticipated. You can contact the TPS company on phone
+46-155-221300, or fax +46-155-263052. Ask for the president Erik
Rensfelt and refer to me. They are probably at the net also somewhere.
Further, our collegues at the other large power company in Sweden named
Sydkraft, have built a demo plant in Värnamo, in the south of Sweden. The
plant itself is built by Ahlström, today Foster Wheeler, and is going
along quite well as I have heard. Contact the Krister Ståhl by phone
+46-40-255693 or fax +46-40 6115184

Best regards
Lars Strömberg
Vattenfall, Electricity production

----------
Från: terry@sri.org.au (Terry Dixon)[SMTP:PC @SMTP {terry@sri.org.au
(Terry Dixon)}]
Skickat: den 9 oktober 1997 17:29
Till: gasification@crest.org; VATTNET/RACKSTA3/LSTR
Kopia: terry@sri.org.au
Angående: GAS-L: GASIFICATION QUESTIONS

<<Fil: SMTP_ENV.TXT>>

Dear Gasification Colleagues,

I am Group Leader of the Engineering Research Group at the Sugar Research
Institute (SRI) Australia. SRI is the research and development arm of
the
Australian sugar industry. We have extensive ongoing RDD&C programs in
the
areas of energy utilisation, biomass combustion, boiler technology as
well
as many other fields. In recent years we have developed our advanced
integrated high temperature drying - swirl burner biomass combustion
system.

There are 29 sugar factories in Australia (26 in the state of
Queensland),
and most are very large factories by world standards.
Our studies have shown that these factories have the potential, using
conventional steam cycle technology, to cogenerate to the grid in the
range
of 35-60 MW each. With gasification and CC gas turbines these
cogeneration
levels can easily be doubled. Our immediate R&D interest is therefore in
the status of LARGE SCALE biomass gasification for GT applications.

Which leads me to several questions that I would appreciate comments on
by
those of you with experience and rationality in the field of biomass
gasification. I have just read the comments of Doug Williams, and am
impressed that some on his comments echo my perceptions. Here are the
comments/questions, based on my perception of the published data so far,
for which I seek a response.

(1) The kinetics of biomass gasification have been "done to death" by
researchers all over the world. You can read about it anywhere.

(2) There are a plurality of gasification techniques and variants and
variations, ALL AT THE SMALL SCALE (from several hundred kW up to 1 or 2
MWe)
and all claimed by their proponents to be commercial. I agree with Doug
Williams that the true commercial status of the vast majority of these
systems has yet to be proved ie. reliability, maintainability,
operability,
sustained quality of output, all of the normal things that are expected
by a commercial client.

(3) When it comes to the "big end of town" in biomass gasification ie.
gasifier capacities of over 20 MWe, there is a major absence of systems.
This is the development scenario that we at SRI are working up to for
our Australian sugar factories.

(4) The automatic translation of the small scale gasification
technologies
to the larger scale for commercialization is by no means anyway certain.

(5) I am closely aware of the demonstration scale biomass gasifiers that
are
currently under trial (well, at least built and being tested) in Hawaii
(Maui) and USA (Vermont). Can somebody inform me of other similar sized
demonstration gasifiers that have been undergoing serious, sustained
development and testing. I have very limited information on developments
in Sweden and Italy.

(6) There is still a very long D,D&C path to be followed before large
scale
gasification becomes legitimately commercial.

Our immediate activities are directed to studying the various
gasification
technologies that are around, and determining (from engineering and
commercial viewpoints) a preferred combination of technology bits that
would lead to the viable gasification of Australian sugar cane bagasse.

My sincere thanks for your considerations and assistance.

Cheers

Dr Terry Dixon

 

 

From yrjo.solantausta at vtt.fi Fri Oct 10 07:26:23 1997
From: yrjo.solantausta at vtt.fi (Yrjo Solantausta)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: GASIFICATION QUESTIONS
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19971010133127.0092c5c0@vttmail.vtt.fi>

A response to Dr Terry Dixon

>... levels can easily be doubled. Our immediate R&D interest is therefore in
>the status of LARGE SCALE biomass gasification for GT applications.
>
>Which leads me to several questions that I would appreciate comments on by
>those of you with experience and rationality in the field of biomass
>gasification. I have just read the comments of Doug Williams, and am ...

At least two major players on LARGE SCALE biomass gasification for GT
applications have not yet been mentioned: Uhde GmbH and Carbona Inc.

Uhde built on Rheinbraun license a > 100 MWth (25 t/h) pressurised (10 bar)
oxygen blown gasifier for peat (25 t/h), but the facility was also run on
wood. Uhde has offices all over the place.

Carbona licenses IGT technology, and they have a major pilot plant (15 bar,
about 15-20 MWth), in which several biomasses have been tested. The
contacts forCarbona are: Kari Salo tel. +358-9-540 7150, fax +358-9-540
71540 (Finland), and Jim Patel, tel. +1-770-956 0601, fax +1-770-956 0063
(USA).

Yrjo Solantausta

 

From prmesron at mail.snider.net Fri Oct 10 14:46:44 1997
From: prmesron at mail.snider.net (Ron Bailey, Jr.)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:23 2004
Subject: GAS-L: German report, Gasification Questions
Message-ID: <343E77A1.4D6A1539@mail.snider.net>

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: multipart/alternative
Size: 0 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/gasification/attachments/19971010/b95819dd/attachment.bin