April 2001 Gasification Archive

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Wed Apr 4 07:49:15 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Out of pocket..
Message-ID: <d2.4a5d3c1.27fc6399@cs.com>

I, Tom Reed, am driving to Boston and back to Denver, April 9-May 5, visiting
many friends.

I'll have my laptop on road, so communication should be OK but maybe
spotty....

TOM REED

From Carl.Carley at eml.ericsson.se Thu Apr 5 03:44:48 2001
From: Carl.Carley at eml.ericsson.se (Carl Carley (EML))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: FW: More Efficient Ethanol Production
Message-ID: <5F052F2A01FBD11184F00008C7A4A80004862429@EUKBANT101>

Hi all,
Not sure if this is relevant to this list, makes for interesting reading
Carl

This item is one of the news releases and story leads that ARS Information
distributes on weekdays to fax and e-mail subscribers. You can also get the
latest ARS news on the World Wide Web at
www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/thelatest.htm.
* Feedback and questions to ARS News Service via e-mail: isjd@ars-grin.gov.
* ARS Information Staff, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Room 1-2251, Beltsville MD
20705-5128, (301) 504-1617, fax 504-1648.
----------
From: "ARS News Service" <isjd@ars-grin.gov>
To: "ARS News List" <ars-news@ars-grin.gov>
Subject: More Efficient Ethanol Production
Date: Wed, Apr 4, 2001, 3:55 AM

STORY LEAD:
More Efficient Ethanol Production Closer to Reality
___________________________________________

ARS News Service
Agricultural Research Service, USDA
Kathryn Barry Stelljes, (510) 559-6069, kbstelljes@ars.usda.gov
April 4, 2001
___________________________________________

Producing fuel ethanol from grains at low temperatures may be more
feasible, thanks to improved enzymes developed in the laboratory,
Agricultural Research Service scientists reported Tuesday at the American
Chemical Society meeting in San Diego, Calif.

When grains are processed into ethanol, starch granules are cooked at 105
degrees Celsius (about 223 degrees Fahrenheit) to convert the starch to a
form that enzymes can degrade into simple sugars. About 10 to 15 percent of
the processing energy required to make ethanol goes towards providing the
heat used to cook the starch. Producers, of course, aim to use as little
energy as possible to make the fuel.

Researchers at ARS' Western Regional Research Center in Albany, Calif.,
have developed variants of a natural starch-degrading enzyme that breaks
down starch 50 times faster than the original enzyme in the laboratory, at
37 degrees Celsius (about 99 degrees Fahrenheit). Enzymes with greater
activity at low temperatures could facilitate development of more
energy-efficient methods of ethanol production.

These findings could also provide additional outlets for wheat, barley and
other grains, and support efforts to increase nonfood uses of agricultural
products. Executive Order 13134, signed by the president in 1999, aims to
triple use of biobased products and bioenergy in the United States by 2010.

At the ACS meeting Tuesday, ARS chemist Dominic Wong and ARS chemical
engineer George Robertson co-chaired a symposium on the application of
combinatorial chemistry in agriculture and food processing.

ARS is the chief scientific research agency of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
___________________________________________

Scientific contact: Dominic Wong or George Robertson, ARS Western Regional
Research Center, Process Chemistry and Engineering Research Unit, Albany,
Calif.; phone (510) 559-5621, fax (510) 559-5818, dwsw@pw.usda.gov or
grobertson@pw.usda.gov.
___________________________________________

Gasification List is sponsored by
USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
-
Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

From c.downing at sri.org.au Fri Apr 6 00:02:35 2001
From: c.downing at sri.org.au (Chris Downing)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
Message-ID: <OF7DD09C80.D0EB1A56-ON4A256A26.0015A9C3@sri.org.au>

Dear List Members,

I am looking for lock hopper suppliers in Australia. I am after a vessel
of roughly 2-5 m3 to cycle every minute or so at 25 bar, to test some
gasification related apparatus. No detailed calculations yet. Can anyone
help?

Thanks,
Chris Downing

-------------------------------

This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please
notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original
message.

Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost
by any mistaken delivery of the email.

-------------------------------

From enecon at ozemail.com.au Fri Apr 6 04:00:16 2001
From: enecon at ozemail.com.au (Jim Bland)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
In-Reply-To: <OF7DD09C80.D0EB1A56-ON4A256A26.0015A9C3@sri.org.au>
Message-ID: <002f01c0be6f$a44c8760$0582140a@bruce>

Chris,

Any pressure vessel manufacturer could do this. I don't think you'd get an
off-the-shelf lock hopper. In Brisbane, Evans Deakin Industries could do
it, or try the Yellow Pages under "Pressure Vessels - Industrial". I am
more familiar with Victorian manufacturers, who would include John Beever,
Britannia Thermal Units, Heat Exchangers International (who own WE Smith in
Coff's Harbour). If you want it in stainless, I would consider some
different manufacturers.

I designed some smaller lock hoppers for brown coal gasification at 30 bar
some years ago, and would be happy to do the design for your application
(for a fee).

Regards,

Jim

Enecon Pty. Ltd.
35 Whitehorse Rd., Deepdene VIC 3103, Australia
PO Box 555, Deepdene DC VIC 3103, Australia
Tel: +61-3-9817 6255
Fax: +61-3-9817 6455
www.enecon.com.au
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Downing <c.downing@sri.org.au>
To: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 2:00 PM
Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia

> Dear List Members,
>
> I am looking for lock hopper suppliers in Australia. I am after a vessel
> of roughly 2-5 m3 to cycle every minute or so at 25 bar, to test some
> gasification related apparatus. No detailed calculations yet. Can anyone
> help?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris Downing
>
> -------------------------------
>
> This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please
> notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
> Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost
> by any mistaken delivery of the email.
>
> -------------------------------
>
>
>
> Gasification List is sponsored by
> USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
> and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
> -
> Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
> http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
>

From antonio.hilst at merconet.com.br Fri Apr 6 07:19:56 2001
From: antonio.hilst at merconet.com.br (Antonio G. P. Hilst)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
In-Reply-To: <OF7DD09C80.D0EB1A56-ON4A256A26.0015A9C3@sri.org.au>
Message-ID: <3ACDA657.1F5ABD31@merconet.com.br>

The only lock hopper I saw (British Gas Coouncil Coal Gasification Plant,
Scotland, and Schwarze Pump, East Germany, 1978) was from Lurgi, Germany.
Antonio

Chris Downing wrote:

> Dear List Members,
>
> I am looking for lock hopper suppliers in Australia. I am after a vessel
> of roughly 2-5 m3 to cycle every minute or so at 25 bar, to test some
> gasification related apparatus. No detailed calculations yet. Can anyone
> help?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris Downing
>
> -------------------------------
>
> This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please
> notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
> Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost
> by any mistaken delivery of the email.
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Gasification List is sponsored by
> USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
> and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
> -
> Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
> http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

From Carl.Carley at eml.ericsson.se Fri Apr 6 09:35:14 2001
From: Carl.Carley at eml.ericsson.se (Carl Carley (EML))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: gasifier construction
Message-ID: <5F052F2A01FBD11184F00008C7A4A80004862435@EUKBANT101>

Hi all,
I'm starting work on a gasifier just now, the main reactor part is cone shaped. Faced with the 'what will the cone look like in the flat' problem, I down loaded a really simple to use program from
www.plate-n-sheet.com/
the basic shareware function was just what I needed, you type in all the variable of the cone shape, hit the button and it develops it into the flat. This is printed out to scale and stuck on the blank to be folded up. More complex square to round etc need the licence code.

Carl

From tmiles at trmiles.com Fri Apr 6 19:59:17 2001
From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010406165610.020837f0@mail.easystreet.com>

Chris,

There are some interesting challenges in designing a high pressure
lockhopper system for bagasse. We have designed and built pressurized
lockhopper metering bin systems of this size and pressure for wood and
bagasse since 1980. It requires custom valve design and custom fabrication.
The system could be fabricated in Australia or Thailand.

A one minute cycling rate is too fast for this application. You'll need a
dual lockhopper. We have other design concepts that we would
include. What's your purge gas?

Someone from your organization visited our system in Hawaii after it was
shut down. We only had three months to run that feeder, but enough to learn
what improvements are needed for bagasse.

Regards,

Tom Miles

At 02:00 PM 4/6/01 +1000, Chris Downing wrote:
>Dear List Members,
>
>I am looking for lock hopper suppliers in Australia. I am after a vessel
>of roughly 2-5 m3 to cycle every minute or so at 25 bar, to test some
>gasification related apparatus. No detailed calculations yet. Can anyone
>help?
>
>Thanks,
>Chris Downing
>
>-------------------------------
>
>This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is
>for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
>and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or
>distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please
>notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original
>message.
>
>Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost
>by any mistaken delivery of the email.
>
>-------------------------------
>
>
>
>Gasification List is sponsored by
>USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
>and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
>-
>Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
>http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
>http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

Thomas R Miles tmiles@trmiles.com
T R Miles, TCI Tel 503-292-0107
1470 SW Woodward Way Fax 503-292-2919
Portland, OR 97225 USA

From tcampisi at hrl.com.au Sun Apr 8 19:53:46 2001
From: tcampisi at hrl.com.au (Campisi, Tony)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
Message-ID: <DF6E04DCF106D4119AF8009027F653A65DF7CF@MAIL_MULGRAVE>

Hi Chris,

HRL has 25-bar lock hoppers on our 10 tonne per hour coal gasification plant
at our Morwell (Australia) facility which may be suitable - we'll give you a
call.

Tony

--------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Campisi PhD
Senior Research Scientist
Combustion, Gasification, Ash Fouling, Process Chemistry
HRL Technology Pty Ltd
677 Springvale Road, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia 3170
Telephone: +61 3 9565 9760
Facsimile: +61 3 9565 9777
Mobile: 0409 550 982
e-mail: campa@hrl.com.au
WWW: http://www.hrl.com.au
--------------------------------------------------------

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Downing [SMTP:c.downing@sri.org.au]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 2:01 PM
> To: gasification@crest.org
> Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
>
> Dear List Members,
>
> I am looking for lock hopper suppliers in Australia. I am after a vessel
> of roughly 2-5 m3 to cycle every minute or so at 25 bar, to test some
> gasification related apparatus. No detailed calculations yet. Can anyone
> help?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris Downing
>
> -------------------------------
>

From tmiles at teleport.com Sun Apr 8 20:03:42 2001
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
In-Reply-To: <DF6E04DCF106D4119AF8009027F653A65DF7CF@MAIL_MULGRAVE>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010408165346.021a4720@mail.teleport.com>

There's a solution. Just turn the bagasse into "biocoal" first. :-)

Tom

At 09:46 AM 4/9/01 +1000, Campisi, Tony wrote:
>Hi Chris,
>
>HRL has 25-bar lock hoppers on our 10 tonne per hour coal gasification plant
>at our Morwell (Australia) facility which may be suitable - we'll give you a
>call.
>
>Tony
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>Anthony Campisi PhD
>Senior Research Scientist
>Combustion, Gasification, Ash Fouling, Process Chemistry
>HRL Technology Pty Ltd
>677 Springvale Road, Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia 3170
>Telephone: +61 3 9565 9760
>Facsimile: +61 3 9565 9777
>Mobile: 0409 550 982
>e-mail: campa@hrl.com.au
>WWW: http://www.hrl.com.au
>--------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Downing [SMTP:c.downing@sri.org.au]
> > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 2:01 PM
> > To: gasification@crest.org
> > Subject: GAS-L: 25 bar Lock Hopper - Australia
> >
> > Dear List Members,
> >
> > I am looking for lock hopper suppliers in Australia. I am after a vessel
> > of roughly 2-5 m3 to cycle every minute or so at 25 bar, to test some
> > gasification related apparatus. No detailed calculations yet. Can anyone
> > help?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris Downing
> >
> > -------------------------------
> >
>
>Gasification List is sponsored by
>USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
>and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
>-
>Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
>http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
>http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

Thomas R Miles tmiles@trmiles.com
T R Miles, TCI Tel 503-292-0107
1470 SW Woodward Way Fax 503-292-2919
Portland, OR 97225 USA

From snkm at btl.net Fri Apr 13 12:38:05 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Chiptec
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010413093126.00915860@wgs1.btl.net>

An extremely interesting gasifier device is over at the Chiptec Wood Energy
Systems web site:

WWW.chiptec.com

An ideal mechanism for firing any boiler.

Peter Singfield

Belize - Central America

From snkm at btl.net Sat Apr 14 13:27:40 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010414111645.0092f9a0@wgs1.btl.net>

Hey Listers -- where is everyone??

List is so slow these days -- so here is something to chew over --

A while back on this list we had quite the discussion regarding water
injection. Came across this reference just now that can add greater
perspective.

I have appended the text -- but a fine diagram at this site goes a long way
in demonstrating "how-to".

Probably another aspect of steam reforming. Could possibly be an
interesting method of reducing tars -- in the cylinder -- on the fly.

Here is how one could "tweak" such a system. Take any old "large" diesel.
Convert to spark ignition for producer gas product. Keep the diesel
injection system functional but use it for injecting water -- rather than
diesel.

Due to the water injection -- one might not even have to reduce compression
ratios??

Piece of cake -- right??

Any hands on experimenters left out there? You realize this could be just
the solution to many of the exiting problems of direct fueling with
gasifiers of IT engines. And very cheaply!! Check out the Url.

Upwards and onwards!!

Peter Singfield / Belize; Central America

*******appended*******

http://www.wartsila.com/asp/empty.asp?P=366&A=closeall&C=15657

News from Technology

On this page we will tell about new topical issues within our R&D. New
stories will be written every couple of months. This article on Direct
water injection has been issued on 13 October 2000.

Direct water injection to be rolled out on Wärtsilä engines

Increasing humidity in the combustion process is a well-known way to reduce
formation of nitrogen oxides in a diesel engine. Of all the possible
methods available Wärtsilä chose to go for Direct Water Injection some
years ago because it has no adverse effects on injection equipment
reliability, it has low water consumption in relation to NOx reduction, and
it is a simple and comparatively cheap system

The Direct Water Injection system has been perfected by extensive field
testing, comprising altogether sixteen ships. In its final and current
version it has given excellent results concerning both nitrogen oxide
reduction and reliability of the system itself. A level of 5 g/kWh NOx can
comfortably be reached with only a slight increase in fuel consumption.

At this moment Direct Water Injection is available for the Wärtsilä 46 and
the Wärtsilä Vasa 32. Next year it will also be available on the Wärtsilä
38, Wärtsilä 32 and Sulzer ZA40.

The figure shows that the system is in fact a common rail system with the
rail valve included in the central injector.

From snkm at btl.net Sat Apr 14 17:01:57 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010414145546.008f1430@wgs1.btl.net>

Hi Ed;

At 01:25 PM 4/14/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Peter
>Always good to read your posts.
>I have a small corn to ethanol plant and have always wondered if injecting
>ethanol into a diesel engine would cut the tar buildup from the producer gas
>as well as add BTU's to the mix. Ethanol likes high compression ratios.
>Any thoughts? Experiences?
>Ed Woolsey

Have not got a clue regarding ethanol injection in a diesel. But well
remember adding alcohol to diesel fuel every winter when running trucks.

In this case I was remembering that steam of high temperature and high
pressure gasifies tars by Steam reforming.

The temperatures and pressures inside that diesel cylinder should be
sufficient to do the job -- if there is enough time available. Ergo --
better for big slow rpm diesel engines.

Tue, 13 Feb 2001 Ken Calvert <Renertech@ xtra.co.nz> posted to this list:

A typical Gas setup would be a giant Crossley single cylinder Gas engine
with a piston two feet in diameter and running at about 300rpm.and 200
horsepower. The clearance on the piston would be measured in sixteenths of
an inch, to allow for the build up of tars, which virtually doubled up as
the lubricating oil. (once it got hot that is.)

Now that would be a fine example to try water injection on! but kind of
impractical at this time and place.

Still -- even and old Lister single cylinder diesel -- or one of the
Chinese clones of such -- could be easily converted for experimental
purposes. Slow down the RPM to 300 or less. Of course -- a big drop in
rating. Normally one would get about 8 hp on pure diesel. But even if only
2 HP would be produced with a "dirty" gas -- and the over all efficiency
would jump right up as well.

Here in Belize -- a Chinese knock-off -- called "Petter" is a large single
cylinder air cooled diesel that produces 8 HP maximum. We buy these across
the border in Guatemala for $1100 US. I was thinking of that motor for
"experimental" purposes.

As it has no water jacket -- drilling a new hole in the head for a spark
plug is not such a problem.

Further -- changing compression ratios -- if required -- is not such a big
deal either. Starting with simply putting in a thicker head gasket -- and
if required -- carving some material out of the piston crown.

The injection system would then run on distilled and degassed water.
Degassed so as to avoid any corrosive tendencies. Degassing is accomplished
by simply boiling the water.

One would have to calculate just how much water to inject -- and leave the
injection governor fixed at that setting. Hopefully, the designed range of
operation will be suitable. Probably near the minimum end.

Even if this does not work to satisfaction -- and tars still kill the
engine -- all is not lost. No big deal to rebuild and try again. Parts are
cheap.

Once such a bench model is proven effective -- if effective at all -- no
problems scaling up to a bigger and more expensive machine.

The first advantage to the efficiency cycle is that "hot" product gas would
be fed directly to this engine. True -- tempered down by the 50% mix of
ambient temperature air. But still a respectable added btu value.

Steam reforming can be a slow process -- but a great increase in process
speed is accomplished when under pressure. The pressures involved in that
diesel cycle are quite respectable.

I simply feel this is an "experiment" well worth pursuing.

One could also experiment with spray injecting water into the beginning of
a long intake manifold. So a mixture of product gas, steam reformation
product, mixes with air just before the intake valve. In that case -- any
of a number of gasoline car engines manifold spray injectors could be
retrofitted for this purpose.

Again -- the hot as possible product gas would be used -- no cooling is
required -- no loss of btu's. The extra heat of the product gas being
invested in the new gas from the steam reformation.

But in that case -- no pressure to speed the reaction. And maybe not enough
heat to complete the reformation.

The tars will probably steam reform to methane.

And then -- maybe a combination of both -- down stream manifold injection
as well as compression injection?? The down stream water injection doing
only a partial reformation according to the amount of heat available for
investment.

Or even circulate the product gas through a jacket surrounding the reaction
zone of the gasifier to get that extra heat as well as time. Staging water
spray injectors at the correct positions.

Certainly a new area to tinker in.

Further -- Ken's example does demonstrate the possibility of designing an
engine specifically for running with high tar levels. Maybe another
consideration?

At present the state of biomass gasification to operate an IC engine is
locked into rather stringent criteria due to this tar problem. These
criteria resulting in even a strict fuel conditioning regimen -- never mind
a great loss of heat btu's in the product gas cleaning processes -- plus
all the extra mechanisms involved.

One begins to contemplate alternative solutions. I feel those presented
above bare further thought.

I personally feel it is a lot simpler to build a properly designed IC
engine for high tar product gas than deal with all the fuel and gas
conditioning as so well demonstrated in the present state of this art.
Further, it results in much more efficient operation from a thermodynamic
view.

As steam reforming is endothermic -- the extra heat in the product gas,
fresh from the gasifier, would be invested into higher btu value gas. This
would make for some extremely interesting results if combined in a
compression/combustion engine. If properly clocked in -- the engine would
actually run cooler rather than hotter. Less energy loss to the water
jacket -- more mechanical energy going to the crank shaft.

Come on folks -- upward and onwards!!

Peter Singfield
Belize Central America

>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Peter Singfield [mailto:snkm@btl.net]
>Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2001 11:22 AM
>To: gasification@crest.org
>Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
>
>
>
>Hey Listers -- where is everyone??
>
>List is so slow these days -- so here is something to chew over --
>
>A while back on this list we had quite the discussion regarding water
>injection. Came across this reference just now that can add greater
>perspective.
>
>I have appended the text -- but a fine diagram at this site goes a long way
>in demonstrating "how-to".
>
>Probably another aspect of steam reforming. Could possibly be an
>interesting method of reducing tars -- in the cylinder -- on the fly.
>
>Here is how one could "tweak" such a system. Take any old "large" diesel.
>Convert to spark ignition for producer gas product. Keep the diesel
>injection system functional but use it for injecting water -- rather than
>diesel.
>
>Due to the water injection -- one might not even have to reduce compression
>ratios??
>
>Piece of cake -- right??
>
>Any hands on experimenters left out there? You realize this could be just
>the solution to many of the exiting problems of direct fueling with
>gasifiers of IT engines. And very cheaply!! Check out the Url.
>
>Upwards and onwards!!
>
>Peter Singfield / Belize; Central America
>
>*******appended*******
>
>http://www.wartsila.com/asp/empty.asp?P=366&A=closeall&C=15657
>
>News from Technology
>
>On this page we will tell about new topical issues within our R&D. New
>stories will be written every couple of months. This article on Direct
>water injection has been issued on 13 October 2000.
>
>Direct water injection to be rolled out on Wärtsilä engines
>
>Increasing humidity in the combustion process is a well-known way to reduce
>formation of nitrogen oxides in a diesel engine. Of all the possible
>methods available Wärtsilä chose to go for Direct Water Injection some
>years ago because it has no adverse effects on injection equipment
>reliability, it has low water consumption in relation to NOx reduction, and
>it is a simple and comparatively cheap system
>
>The Direct Water Injection system has been perfected by extensive field
>testing, comprising altogether sixteen ships. In its final and current
>version it has given excellent results concerning both nitrogen oxide
>reduction and reliability of the system itself. A level of 5 g/kWh NOx can
>comfortably be reached with only a slight increase in fuel consumption.
>
>At this moment Direct Water Injection is available for the Wärtsilä 46 and
>the Wärtsilä Vasa 32. Next year it will also be available on the Wärtsilä
>38, Wärtsilä 32 and Sulzer ZA40.
>
>The figure shows that the system is in fact a common rail system with the
>rail valve included in the central injector.
>
>
>
>Gasification List is sponsored by
>USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
>and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
>-
>Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
>http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
>http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
>http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
>

From snkm at btl.net Sat Apr 14 17:46:44 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:18 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Heat transferring for steam reformation
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010414154020.0092a940@wgs1.btl.net>

"Michael Lewis" wrote:

>>> It has been known for a long time that if you got the steam hot enough
(like above 2,000 F), you could gasify with it using the sensible heat in
the steam much like using the sensible heat in the coal described above.
Problem was, no one knew how to get the steam "hot enough". Concepts like
heating with an electric arc worked but had no economic basis. Silicon
carbide heat exchanges and ceramic pebble heaters work but do have their
temperature limitations.

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

All true -- but consider this!

The reaction is also highly pressure variable. Increase pressure --
temperatures required go down.

With a little pressure and less than 1200 F one can steam reform any
biomass to methane.

Now -- consider this -- your most efficient heat transfer is simple
electrical resistance heaters. also the cheapest. and they work very well
at 1200 F range.

Consider this -- the steam reformation reaction is a method of storing heat
as a gas. Beats the hell out of charging batteries efficiency wise.

Why -- because in a reaction chamber heated by electrical resistance
elements over 99% conversion of power to heat is realized. There is no flue
gas going out at 1200 F -- get it??

Let me describe an example. Got a windmill putting out variable power.
Instead of charging batteries power up some resistance heaters. These
reform carbohydrates to gas -- say methane. Store the methane. When you
want power -- run an IC engine with the methane. Beats batteries!

Now -- the "pressure". Well, how much do you want?? How about 2000 or so
psi?? No problem -- you have a reaction chamber at 1200F that you are
injecting water into on demand.

What am I saying?? Well, load your reaction chamber with biomass. Shut the
door. Power up the heaters. When temp reaches past 1200 -- start injecting
water. Steam reformation of biomass cools down the reaction chamber below
1200 -- stop injecting water.

At the same time you have a pressure release device allowing gas out of
this reaction chamber. Set it at the pressure you want to charge your tanks
with.

So depending on how much wind is pushing the wind-mill -- you inject more
or less water. and in anyeven -- you charge cylinders with methane rich gas
at 2000 psi.

Now -- let's lose the windmill -- put in an IC engine running on some of
the methane produced to generate power to heat the reaction chamber. Get it??

The only steam reforming heat loss is initial heating of the reaction
chamber -- the outside of which is well insulated. If your greedy -- you
can recover that heat in any number of ways when you shut down the reaction
chamber -- but hardly worth it -- as is it small. all the rest of the heat
goes into production of gas from biomass.

True -- your IC engine running on methane is going to do around 36%
"electrical-production" efficiency -- and that is a problem. The energy is
not lost -- but is there in the engine exhaust and motor cooling circuit.

Well, I can extract another 30% of so of that into electrical power using a
refrigeration cycle power plant.

Then the wind-mill or solar panel examples -- replacing batteries -- as a
power regulation and storage medium -- gets hard to beat.

Steam reformation is simply investing heat into a gas -- with a high "set"
point. Granted - if you use an open flame -- or any combustion process to
reach that set point - you will take an efficiency licking. But if you use
electrical resistance heating -- it works just fine.

Another way to do this is by considering that 1200 F as a topping line.
That is you have a "fire" gas of say 2400 F -- you top it down to 1200 F
through the above mentioned steam reforming device. The 1200 F flu gas from
there goes on to power a refrigeration cycle power plant. Your end flu gas
will be about 30 F above ambient air temp.

So then what have you got!

A device that produced a product gas rich in methane -- stored in tanks at
2000 PSI or whatever -- and a lot off electrical power coming out at 40%
and better over all thermal to electrical power efficiencies. (Ah -- the
reason we all should be interested in refrigeration cycle plants)

Now you have a power plant that makes electrical power as well as fuel for
all your vehicles -- directly from any old biomass -- no matter what
moisture content -- etc -- including things like sewage, garbage, car tires
-- and why stop there -- coal, crude oil, natural gas -- any carbon or
hydrocarbon - and at better than any other process's efficiency.

Just what more could you want?

Peter Singfield
Belize, Central America

From snkm at btl.net Sun Apr 15 08:45:30 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Heat transferring for steam reformation
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010415061358.00909950@wgs1.btl.net>

Hi Ken;

Couple of points;

1/ Wartsila is using this system at present after extended trials on 18
ship engines.

2/ Only sufficient steam is injected to deal with products of combustion --
injection -- that is a finely metered amount. Doubt there is enough extra
available for corrosion.

3/ Remember "steam" is a normal product of combustion and as such every
engine is living with it.

4/ Black "magnetic" iron oxide was a traditional "plating" technique for
preserving iron pipes. This plating was done by parking pipe in a high
temperature steam atmosphere for the required amount of time. This form of
iron oxide is stable and serves to coat and protect iron surfaces from
corrosion along the same lines as aluminum oxide does for aluminum.

5/ How about all those high pressure piston steam engines that operated for
so many years? Of course they changed rings, valves and even cylinder
sleeves as part of a servicing schedule -- but less often than any
equivalent power IC engine.

So the rest of you out there -- rest easy --

Should I pull out the old postings on water injection in fighter planes
during WWII??

It is being done, has been done -- and no "extra" problems with corrosion.

However -- the "meek" at heart can certainly abstain from further discussion.

Peter Singfield
Belize, Central America

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

Peter Singfield

At 10:09 PM 4/15/2001 +1200, you wrote:
>Having read a little more, I'm back for 4 cents worth this time.
>Gentlemen! Steam at the temperatures that you are advocating is highly
>corrosive to mild steel, and there are not too many engines out there
>built like the modern steam boiler with lots of stainless and high nickel
>and chromium formulations. We started making our prototype gasifiers out
>of mild steel plate, because it was cheaper lots cheaper, and they were
>only built in the short term, to prove a point before building a better one.
>But even so we had to give away the mild steel from tuyeres on down. Just
>a few hours and your steel surfaces will start sheding millimetre thick
>flakes of black iron oxide. It is also my personal opinion that if you
>want to try putting water into the sytem through a diesel injector, that
>you try it with your oldest one, because it will not last very long at all.
>Doi let me know how it works. Ken Calvert. Again!
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Peter Singfield" <snkm@btl.net>
>To: <gasification@crest.org>
>Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 8:41 AM
>Subject: GAS-L: Heat transferring for steam reformation
>
>
>>
>> "Michael Lewis" wrote:
>>
>> >>> It has been known for a long time that if you got the steam hot enough
>> (like above 2,000 F), you could gasify with it using the sensible heat in
>> the steam much like using the sensible heat in the coal described above.
>> Problem was, no one knew how to get the steam "hot enough". Concepts like
>> heating with an electric arc worked but had no economic basis. Silicon
>> carbide heat exchanges and ceramic pebble heaters work but do have their
>> temperature limitations.
>>
>> ********************
>>
>> All true -- but consider this!
>>
>> The reaction is also highly pressure variable. Increase pressure --
>> temperatures required go down.
>>
>> With a little pressure and less than 1200 F one can steam reform any
>> biomass to methane.
>>
>> Now -- consider this -- your most efficient heat transfer is simple
>> electrical resistance heaters. also the cheapest. and they work very well
>> at 1200 F range.
>>
>> Consider this -- the steam reformation reaction is a method of storing
>heat
>> as a gas. Beats the hell out of charging batteries efficiency wise.
>>
>> Why -- because in a reaction chamber heated by electrical resistance
>> elements over 99% conversion of power to heat is realized. There is no
>flue
>> gas going out at 1200 F -- get it??
>>
>> Let me describe an example. Got a windmill putting out variable power.
>> Instead of charging batteries power up some resistance heaters. These
>> reform carbohydrates to gas -- say methane. Store the methane. When you
>> want power -- run an IC engine with the methane. Beats batteries!
>>
>> Now -- the "pressure". Well, how much do you want?? How about 2000 or so
>> psi?? No problem -- you have a reaction chamber at 1200F that you are
>> injecting water into on demand.
>>
>> What am I saying?? Well, load your reaction chamber with biomass. Shut the
>> door. Power up the heaters. When temp reaches past 1200 -- start injecting
>> water. Steam reformation of biomass cools down the reaction chamber below
>> 1200 -- stop injecting water.
>>
>> At the same time you have a pressure release device allowing gas out of
>> this reaction chamber. Set it at the pressure you want to charge your
>tanks
>> with.
>>
>> So depending on how much wind is pushing the wind-mill -- you inject more
>> or less water. and in anyeven -- you charge cylinders with methane rich
>gas
>> at 2000 psi.
>>
>> Now -- let's lose the windmill -- put in an IC engine running on some of
>> the methane produced to generate power to heat the reaction chamber. Get
>it??
>>
>> The only steam reforming heat loss is initial heating of the reaction
>> chamber -- the outside of which is well insulated. If your greedy -- you
>> can recover that heat in any number of ways when you shut down the
>reaction
>> chamber -- but hardly worth it -- as is it small. all the rest of the heat
>> goes into production of gas from biomass.
>>
>> True -- your IC engine running on methane is going to do around 36%
>> "electrical-production" efficiency -- and that is a problem. The energy is
>> not lost -- but is there in the engine exhaust and motor cooling circuit.
>>
>> Well, I can extract another 30% of so of that into electrical power using
>a
>> refrigeration cycle power plant.
>>
>> Then the wind-mill or solar panel examples -- replacing batteries -- as a
>> power regulation and storage medium -- gets hard to beat.
>>
>> Steam reformation is simply investing heat into a gas -- with a high "set"
>> point. Granted - if you use an open flame -- or any combustion process to
>> reach that set point - you will take an efficiency licking. But if you use
>> electrical resistance heating -- it works just fine.
>>
>> Another way to do this is by considering that 1200 F as a topping line.
>> That is you have a "fire" gas of say 2400 F -- you top it down to 1200 F
>> through the above mentioned steam reforming device. The 1200 F flu gas
>from
>> there goes on to power a refrigeration cycle power plant. Your end flu gas
>> will be about 30 F above ambient air temp.
>>
>> So then what have you got!
>>
>> A device that produced a product gas rich in methane -- stored in tanks at
>> 2000 PSI or whatever -- and a lot off electrical power coming out at 40%
>> and better over all thermal to electrical power efficiencies. (Ah -- the
>> reason we all should be interested in refrigeration cycle plants)
>>
>> Now you have a power plant that makes electrical power as well as fuel for
>> all your vehicles -- directly from any old biomass -- no matter what
>> moisture content -- etc -- including things like sewage, garbage, car
>tires
>> -- and why stop there -- coal, crude oil, natural gas -- any carbon or
>> hydrocarbon - and at better than any other process's efficiency.
>>
>> Just what more could you want?
>>
>> Peter Singfield
>> Belize, Central America
>>
>>
>>
>> Gasification List is sponsored by
>> USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
>> and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
>> -
>> Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
>> http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
>> http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
>> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
>> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
>> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>>
>
>

From snkm at btl.net Sun Apr 15 10:27:40 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010415064039.0090f810@wgs1.btl.net>

Hi again Ken;

Interesting -- the Petter runs better with more hydrogen in the gas. So
synthesis gas (product of steam reformation process) would be much more
ideal. The almost double btu rating would not hurt either.

And of course -- Ed could run that Petter by a mixture of pure ethanol and
producer gas?? That is reduce compression and add spark ignition.

Probably could then run the ethanol through the injection system along the
same lines as is done with diesel supplementing? (To supply some extra
power for exceptional loading)

That would then be a 100% non-fossil fuel application. 15% ethanol rather
than 15% diesel? All running at 12 to 14 compression ratios??

Thanks for the blast from the past.

Peter Singfield / Belize

At 09:49 PM 4/15/2001 +1200, you wrote:
>Dear Ed Woolsey and Peter Singfield, seeing as Ken Calvert and Renertech
>have received an honourable mention in this debate. let me add another two
>cents worth. Don't bother to reduce the rpm, its the cumulative factor
>that counts, even if its only for a fraction of a second each cycle it all
>adds up in time.
>Your problem will be to keep the ethanol intimately blended with the diesel.
>Unless you have a bit of detergent in the brew, the ethanol will separate
>out and you will get slugs of pure ethanol through the system which will
>wreck your injectors very quickly. Lack of lubrication is part of it, but
>there is a bit of detonation or something else too. I think that the
>ethanol picks up all the water in the bottom of your fuel tanks and filters
>and it is the steam that does the damage. Sorry I don't know what the
>detergent is/was. A crowd called APACE in Australia used to make it. Top
>secret patents pending and all that jazz.
>I think that it would be much more profitable to shoehorn that spark plug
>into the system somewhere. We did it with a 5hp single cylinder 1,500hp
>Petter engine (British not Chinese) 20 years ago. Straight gas with a
>spark ignition ran fine at about 14-1 compression ratio But do it too long
>at maximum power and the tips of your injectors will cook unless you have
>the right sort of cylinder head to keep them out of the heat. Dual fueling
>diesel engines by putting a Tee into the air intake with a butterfly valve
>and just blending gas into the airflow works fine too, but once again it
>is hard to stop your injectors overheating with a lot of heat being produced
>and only minimal fuel flow through them to keep them cool. We tried the
>100% gas route, because during OPEC 1 in the early eighties, even 15%
>diesel, just to give ignition, was hurting our budget. You can do it
>either way, but it certainly is not a pushover, you will have to do a lot
>of work on it to get long term reliability. Unless you have a lot of
>hydrogen in the mix, to improve the flame speed, you will start to loose
>power at higher speeds. Carbon monoxide doesn't burn anywhere near as fast
>as one would like. A blast from the past! from Ken Calvert.
>renertech@xtra.co.nz
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Peter Singfield" <snkm@btl.net>
>To: <gasification@crest.org>
>Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 7:56 AM
>Subject: RE: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
>
>
>
>
>

From gary at privacy.nu Sun Apr 15 12:36:43 2001
From: gary at privacy.nu (Gary)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20010415064039.0090f810@wgs1.btl.net>
Message-ID: <002901c0c5c9$b8d46700$310a0341@mdlnd1.tx.home.com>

hi guys,

i have an old book (1980) on alcohol fuels which has a mention on water
injection then goes on for about a half chapter on injecting ethanol or
ethanol/water into ic engines, including diesel engines. the author mentions
that a tractor he experimented with which produced 125 horspower using 8 1/2
gallons of diesel per hour produced the same horspower using a 50/50 mixture
of ethanol/water injected into the intake, and consumed only 6 gallons of
diesel and 2 gallons of 50% alcohol water mixture per hour. saving 6% in
total fuel use and 30% diesel fuel.

he also said that contrary to most "expert" opinion that diesel engines can
be run on pure alcohol with just adjustment of the metering pump, the only
problem being the lubrication of the injectors. this can be solved by the
mixture of 5-20% vegetable oil to the alcohol , however both the alcohol and
the oil must be anhydrous as they won't mix in the presence of water.

so, could a diesel be run on producer gas and alcohol without going to spark
ignition, maybe? at least its one more possibility to consider.

gary

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Singfield" <snkm@btl.net>
To: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx

>
> Hi again Ken;
>
> Interesting -- the Petter runs better with more hydrogen in the gas. So
> synthesis gas (product of steam reformation process) would be much more
> ideal. The almost double btu rating would not hurt either.
>
> And of course -- Ed could run that Petter by a mixture of pure ethanol and
> producer gas?? That is reduce compression and add spark ignition.
>
> Probably could then run the ethanol through the injection system along the
> same lines as is done with diesel supplementing? (To supply some extra
> power for exceptional loading)
>
> That would then be a 100% non-fossil fuel application. 15% ethanol rather
> than 15% diesel? All running at 12 to 14 compression ratios??
>
> Thanks for the blast from the past.
>
> Peter Singfield / Belize
>
> At 09:49 PM 4/15/2001 +1200, you wrote:
> >Dear Ed Woolsey and Peter Singfield, seeing as Ken Calvert and
Renertech
> >have received an honourable mention in this debate. let me add another
two
> >cents worth. Don't bother to reduce the rpm, its the cumulative factor
> >that counts, even if its only for a fraction of a second each cycle it
all
> >adds up in time.
> >Your problem will be to keep the ethanol intimately blended with the
diesel.
> >Unless you have a bit of detergent in the brew, the ethanol will separate
> >out and you will get slugs of pure ethanol through the system which will
> >wreck your injectors very quickly. Lack of lubrication is part of it,
but
> >there is a bit of detonation or something else too. I think that the
> >ethanol picks up all the water in the bottom of your fuel tanks and
filters
> >and it is the steam that does the damage. Sorry I don't know what the
> >detergent is/was. A crowd called APACE in Australia used to make it.
Top
> >secret patents pending and all that jazz.
> >I think that it would be much more profitable to shoehorn that spark
plug
> >into the system somewhere. We did it with a 5hp single cylinder
1,500hp
> >Petter engine (British not Chinese) 20 years ago. Straight gas with a
> >spark ignition ran fine at about 14-1 compression ratio But do it too
long
> >at maximum power and the tips of your injectors will cook unless you
have
> >the right sort of cylinder head to keep them out of the heat. Dual
fueling
> >diesel engines by putting a Tee into the air intake with a butterfly
valve
> >and just blending gas into the airflow works fine too, but once again
it
> >is hard to stop your injectors overheating with a lot of heat being
produced
> >and only minimal fuel flow through them to keep them cool. We tried the
> >100% gas route, because during OPEC 1 in the early eighties, even 15%
> >diesel, just to give ignition, was hurting our budget. You can do it
> >either way, but it certainly is not a pushover, you will have to do a
lot
> >of work on it to get long term reliability. Unless you have a lot of
> >hydrogen in the mix, to improve the flame speed, you will start to loose
> >power at higher speeds. Carbon monoxide doesn't burn anywhere near as
fast
> >as one would like. A blast from the past! from Ken Calvert.
> >renertech@xtra.co.nz
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Peter Singfield" <snkm@btl.net>
> >To: <gasification@crest.org>
> >Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 7:56 AM
> >Subject: RE: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Gasification List is sponsored by
> USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
> and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
> -
> Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
> http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>

From snkm at btl.net Sun Apr 15 18:10:31 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010415160215.00914bc0@wgs1.btl.net>

Well Gary -- that is incredible info you supply below!!

At a 50/50 mixture there probably is more than sufficient water available
to stream reform tars.

And all this without converting to spark ignition!! Would be simply
incredible if true. Especially if the gasifier product could lower
water/alcohol consumption down to 15% or less -- as in the case of
diesel/producer gas operation.

There you go Ed -- a real experiment to try!!

Lubrication for the injection system may be problematical.

Peter Singfield

Belize

At 11:32 AM 4/15/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>hi guys,
>
>i have an old book (1980) on alcohol fuels which has a mention on water
>injection then goes on for about a half chapter on injecting ethanol or
>ethanol/water into ic engines, including diesel engines. the author mentions
>that a tractor he experimented with which produced 125 horspower using 8 1/2
>gallons of diesel per hour produced the same horspower using a 50/50 mixture
>of ethanol/water injected into the intake, and consumed only 6 gallons of
>diesel and 2 gallons of 50% alcohol water mixture per hour. saving 6% in
>total fuel use and 30% diesel fuel.
>
>he also said that contrary to most "expert" opinion that diesel engines can
>be run on pure alcohol with just adjustment of the metering pump, the only
>problem being the lubrication of the injectors. this can be solved by the
>mixture of 5-20% vegetable oil to the alcohol , however both the alcohol and
>the oil must be anhydrous as they won't mix in the presence of water.
>
>so, could a diesel be run on producer gas and alcohol without going to spark
>ignition, maybe? at least its one more possibility to consider.
>
>gary
>

From snkm at btl.net Sun Apr 15 19:23:47 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Heat transferring for steam reformation
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010415171641.009216b0@wgs1.btl.net>

Dear Tom T;

At 03:37 PM 4/15/2001 EDT, you wrote:
>Dear Peter,

***********snipped*********

> Designing an engine with a combined combustion and water injection to
>make use of the steam forming characteristics of water injection would be
>quite an engine as it would have much higher thermal efficiency with lowered
>operating temperature and lowered exhaust temperature. However, problems
with
>handling water such as freezing, filtering, corrosion have left this design
>in the closet. Recovery of the water from the exhaust could reduce the water
>requirements significantly.

I believe it could be done easier now. Good microcontroller with sensors
monitoring product gas composition and modern electronic injection control
varying water injection on the fly -- real time controlling.

******snipped*********

> However, Varsila is on the right track and apparently has had good
>success with this methodology. My hat is off to them.

Did you notice in the flow diagram that they are using an electronically
controlled water injection system? That means the sensor technology is now
developed. The micro-controller is a given.

Interesting times indeed.

Your right about condensing water from the exhaust. And the best way to do
that and gain back some more thermal efficiency is with the installation of
a refrigerant cycle heat to mechanical energy system -- for both engine
cooling circuit and exhaust gases.

Think this is all getting to expensive and to exotic?? Check out a duel
cycle gas turbine/steam power plant. Now there is expensive and complicated
-- and they are the world's "darlings" right now.

The advantage of doing the same with a big Wartsila is a great reduction in
capital costs -- a great reduction in gas cleaning -- and probably a much
higher over all efficiency when combined with a refrigerant cycle recovery.

The Wartsila 38 has a bore of 15 in and a stroke of 18.7 in and turns at
600 RPM -- plus comes with its own waste heat boiler:

116 PSI steam (14.5% of input fuel btu value)

and

85/50 C hot water (23% of input fuel btu value)

A very nice set up for waste heat recover using a refrigerant cycle power
plant!

(Which you can just order up from any geothermal power plant maker and fit
directly)

Think about it ---

By the way -- the Wartsila 64 claims a 51% engine efficiency (the 38 just
42.5) have to check that out and see what is shaking there.

And those bloat-ware dual cycle (gas turbine -- steam power plant) "trying"
to break 40%!!!

By the way -- all the above is not "theory" - simply combining
off-the-shelf components. And an extremely easy fit it is.

Why doesn't some one do it?? Well, we have reached this point in our great
modern societies ---

In short words -- forget it -- it will never happen. Eh tu Tom T!

Sticking a geothermal power plant on the waste heat boilers of a big diesel
-- who ever heard of such foolishness -- we certainly do not want any of
that kind of unorthodox thinking in this society!!

Well, from here in Belize -- I be any kind of unorthodox and laugh easily
at the redundancy of your great new societies.

I just showed you all how to get better than 50% over all efficiencies! To
bad there is no concern about depleting fossil fuels and economizing power
production. No -- its full throttle and d**n the costs! Playing the stock
market will cover our A*s.

Sure guys -- keep on dreaming ---

Peter Singfield
Belize; Central America

>
>
>Sincerely,
>Leland T. Taylor
> President
> Thermogenics Inc.
>7100-2nd St. NW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87107
>phone 505-344-4846 fax 505-344-6090
>Attached files are zipped and can be decompressed with <A
>HREF="http://www.aladdinsys.com/expander/">www.aladdinsys.com/expander/ </A>
>

From snkm at btl.net Sun Apr 15 20:52:54 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Heavy Metal
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010415183945.0091d990@wgs1.btl.net>

Wartsila 64 -- big boomer:

http://www.wartsila.com/asp/empty.asp?P=723&C=10010

25 in bore

35.4 in stroke

327.3 rpm

Overall efficiency for electrical power production -- crude oil -- better
than 50%

2733 hp per cylinder

Comes in straight 6, 7, 8, 9, cylinder configs

Or as a V config -- 12, 16, 18

The six in line produces 12,060 KW and weighs 232 ton (metric)

And yes -- can be had as a gas burner.

Probably could run it from a huge down-draft gasifier that takes full
length trees -- as in:

"giant Crossley single cylinder Gas engine with a piston two feet in
diameter and running at about 300rpm"

"The gasifiers were made
of fire bricks with a fuel hopper five or six feet in diameter and ten to
twelve feet deep and a throat at the bottom of around ten inches. These
units, usually 4 or 5 were in operation at any one time, were fired with
logs each as heavy as one man could carry. In the case of Australian
hardwood that would be a log six to eight feet long and eight to ten
inches in diameter. The logs would be seasoned for a month or so, as they
were transported into the mine, but were still green with lots of sap."

Thanks again Ken -- but I think a knuckle boom log loader would be required
for the Wartsila 64

Peter Singfield

From keith at journeytoforever.org Mon Apr 16 02:08:39 2001
From: keith at journeytoforever.org (Keith Addison)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20010415064039.0090f810@wgs1.btl.net>
Message-ID: <v04210103b6ffdbffe660@[61.121.36.47]>

"Gary" <gary@privacy.nu> wrote:

>hi guys,
>
>i have an old book (1980) on alcohol fuels which has a mention on water
>injection then goes on for about a half chapter on injecting ethanol or
>ethanol/water into ic engines, including diesel engines. the author mentions
>that a tractor he experimented with which produced 125 horspower using 8 1/2
>gallons of diesel per hour produced the same horspower using a 50/50 mixture
>of ethanol/water injected into the intake, and consumed only 6 gallons of
>diesel and 2 gallons of 50% alcohol water mixture per hour. saving 6% in
>total fuel use and 30% diesel fuel.
>
>he also said that contrary to most "expert" opinion that diesel engines can
>be run on pure alcohol with just adjustment of the metering pump, the only
>problem being the lubrication of the injectors. this can be solved by the
>mixture of 5-20% vegetable oil to the alcohol , however both the alcohol and
>the oil must be anhydrous as they won't mix in the presence of water.
>
>so, could a diesel be run on producer gas and alcohol without going to spark
>ignition, maybe? at least its one more possibility to consider.
>
>gary

Hi Gary

That has to be "The Manual for the Home and Farm Production of
Alcohol Fuel", by S.W. Mathewson. If so, the full text is online at
the Journey to Forever Biofuels Library:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library.html

Best wishes

Keith Addison

From gary at privacy.nu Mon Apr 16 09:51:26 2001
From: gary at privacy.nu (Gary)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20010415064039.0090f810@wgs1.btl.net>
Message-ID: <000701c0c67b$c9faae60$310a0341@mdlnd1.tx.home.com>

yes that is it!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Addison" <keith@journeytoforever.org>
To: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Water Injection and reducing NOx

> "Gary" <gary@privacy.nu> wrote:
>
> >hi guys,
> >
> >i have an old book (1980) on alcohol fuels which has a mention on water
> >injection then goes on for about a half chapter on injecting ethanol or
> >ethanol/water into ic engines, including diesel engines. the author
mentions
> >that a tractor he experimented with which produced 125 horspower using 8
1/2
> >gallons of diesel per hour produced the same horspower using a 50/50
mixture
> >of ethanol/water injected into the intake, and consumed only 6 gallons of
> >diesel and 2 gallons of 50% alcohol water mixture per hour. saving 6% in
> >total fuel use and 30% diesel fuel.
> >
> >he also said that contrary to most "expert" opinion that diesel engines
can
> >be run on pure alcohol with just adjustment of the metering pump, the
only
> >problem being the lubrication of the injectors. this can be solved by the
> >mixture of 5-20% vegetable oil to the alcohol , however both the alcohol
and
> >the oil must be anhydrous as they won't mix in the presence of water.
> >
> >so, could a diesel be run on producer gas and alcohol without going to
spark
> >ignition, maybe? at least its one more possibility to consider.
> >
> >gary
>
> Hi Gary
>
> That has to be "The Manual for the Home and Farm Production of
> Alcohol Fuel", by S.W. Mathewson. If so, the full text is online at
> the Journey to Forever Biofuels Library:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library.html
>
> Best wishes
>
> Keith Addison
>
>
> Gasification List is sponsored by
> USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
> and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
> -
> Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
> http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
>

From snkm at btl.net Mon Apr 16 15:37:16 2001
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Orimulsion
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20010416133038.008d53d0@wgs1.btl.net>

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 2483 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/gasification/attachments/20010416/8161b2a1/attachment.bin
From tmiles at trmiles.com Fri Apr 20 21:49:05 2001
From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Gasification List Archives
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010420184459.020f1b80@mail.easystreet.com>

Archives for the Gasification List are available again on the new CREST
website at:

http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com

Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Gasification Events and Information:
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/

From enecon at ozemail.com.au Sun Apr 22 20:29:11 2001
From: enecon at ozemail.com.au (Jim Bland)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Gasification air flow
Message-ID: <004901c0cb8c$7a148900$0582140a@bruce>

I have spent Easter making my first wood-fired gasifier, based on Tom
Reed's turbo stove (inverted downdraft gasifier), as posted on 1st March.
John Davies' work has also been helpful.

I can make nice flames burning the volatiles in the first phase, but am
having difficulty establishing a flame during the second phase when charcoal
is converted to CO. Probably I'm not getting enough primary air in.

My question to Tom is, what is the basis of your 6/1 air/fuel ratio to
convert charcoal to CO, when the charcoal is not flowing? I mean, if I put
in 6 parts of air to one of charcoal, what is to stop half the charcoal in
the gasifier converting to CO2, with no formation of CO? Surely there are
some other factors at work.

Regards,

Jim Bland

Enecon Pty. Ltd.
35 Whitehorse Rd., Deepdene VIC 3103, Australia
PO Box 555, Deepdene DC VIC 3103, Australia
Tel: +61-3-9817 6255
Fax: +61-3-9817 6455
www.enecon.com.au

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Wed Apr 25 15:13:21 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Gasification air flow
Message-ID: <2f.14550f42.28187b21@cs.com>

Dear Jim:

Jim Bland asked....

>My question to Tom is, what is the basis of your 6/1 air/fuel ratio to
convert charcoal to CO, when the charcoal is not flowing? I mean, if I put
in 6 parts of air to one of charcoal, what is to stop half the charcoal in
the gasifier converting to CO2, with no formation of CO? Surely there are
some other factors at work.

You can derive the 6/1 air fuel ratio for charcoal gasification from:

C + 1/2(O2 + 3.76 N2) ==> CO2 + 1.88 N2

The molecular weight of carbon is 12. The molecular weight of air, (as
written above, since air is 21% O2 and ~79%N2 by volume) is 137. So A/F =
66/12 = 5.7 ~ 6.

The A/F ratio for biomass gasification is MUCH more complicated and depends
very strongly on the superficial velocity of the air and gases as they form.
At low velocity it can approach 0 (for bone dry fuel at VERY low velocities)
and 1.5 for maximum gasfication velocity.

This is a major complication for biomass where the volatiles are the dominant
energy form.

Jim asks further why the reaction goes to CO and not CO2. This is because in
the presence of excess carbon and at temperatures above 800 C, the chemical
equilibrium favors CO strongly. The reaction is so exothermic that even a
slow admixture of air with charcoal will easily achieve this temperature.
Forced draft probably achieves the equilibrium in less than 5 particle
diameters.

Glad to hear the stove work is going well. Keep me posted on your progress.

Yours truly, TOM REED BEF/CPC

In a message dated 4/22/01 5:27:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
enecon@ozemail.com.au writes:

<<
I have spent Easter making my first wood-fired gasifier, based on Tom
Reed's turbo stove (inverted downdraft gasifier), as posted on 1st March.
John Davies' work has also been helpful.

I can make nice flames burning the volatiles in the first phase, but am
having difficulty establishing a flame during the second phase when charcoal
is converted to CO. Probably I'm not getting enough primary air in.

My question to Tom is, what is the basis of your 6/1 air/fuel ratio to
convert charcoal to CO, when the charcoal is not flowing? I mean, if I put
in 6 parts of air to one of charcoal, what is to stop half the charcoal in
the gasifier converting to CO2, with no formation of CO? Surely there are
some other factors at work.

Regards,

Jim Bland

Enecon Pty. Ltd.
35 Whitehorse Rd., Deepdene VIC 3103, Australia
PO Box 555, Deepdene DC VIC 3103, Australia
Tel: +61-3-9817 6255
Fax: +61-3-9817 6455
www.enecon.com.au

>>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Thu Apr 26 04:32:09 2001
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOX
Message-ID: <001401c0ce2b$327de180$649736d2@graeme>

Dear Gasification Colleagues

The introduction of steam or water into an engine can reduce NOX emissions
and has a well documented history of use.

There are however a few traps for the less informed as the benefits are just
as likely to reverse and create havock with the ignition system and
lubrication oil.

Steam heated on the exhaust pipe just under the manifold can be introduced
into the carburettor inlet in a controlled manner. The mix of petrol or
gasoline and steam then enters the cylinder well mixed. On ignition the
very high temperature explosion creates the correct to split the steam into
hydrogen and oxygen. Hence the reports in circulation of engines running on
hydrogen or water. The end result is that this extra charge of gas and
oxygen produces a cleaner burn without or less NOX.

As running diesels on dual fuel with producer gas in my own speciality, I
have found that alland any form of moisture in the gas causes problems.

Adding steam to gas that already is wet, and carries high amounts of dirt or
soot with the condensable water, we found that every chance to squeeze water
out of the gas is needed to ensure the gas was clean.

With diesels, the addition of steam or water to "enhance" combustion results
in heat being stolen from the temperature of diesel igniting to vapourise
and crack the water. It may happen in a way, but one thing for sure it
slows the flame front speed and you end up with burning gas or unburnt gas
going out the exhaust pipe.

Hope this helps.
Regards
Doug Williams.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF

From jmdavies at xsinet.co.za Thu Apr 26 13:50:35 2001
From: jmdavies at xsinet.co.za (John Davies)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Gasification air flow
In-Reply-To: <004901c0cb8c$7a148900$0582140a@bruce>
Message-ID: <006701c0ce79$f5cb9b20$7ad4ef9b@p>

Jim Bland wrote.

> I can make nice flames burning the volatiles in the first phase, but am
> having difficulty establishing a flame during the second phase when
charcoal
> is converted to CO. Probably I'm not getting enough primary air in.

I have also had the same problem with the second phase. Tom mentioned
temperatures of 800 C plus, which set me thinking. At this temperature the
charcoal will not be red hot but glow orange moving towards yellow at 1000
C.

Thinking back, when looking down the gas chimney only a red hot glow was
seen, indicating temperatures well below 800 C . This was despite a large
variation in primary air adjustments. The only reason I can think of is that
the insulation is not sufficient and or the charcoal bed too small in
volume.

Another way of describing the preference for CO production at >800 C is
that any CO2 produced will then react with carbon before leaving the bed .
CO2 plus C = 2 CO, providing there is enough contact time and the bed is
hot
enough. ( depth/ velocity = X : X being the required contact time with
Carbon )

I hope these thoughts provide the solutions to our problem.

John Davies.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF

From enecon at ozemail.com.au Thu Apr 26 19:47:38 2001
From: enecon at ozemail.com.au (Jim Bland)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Gasification air flow
In-Reply-To: <004901c0cb8c$7a148900$0582140a@bruce>
Message-ID: <002001c0ceab$7744c920$0582140a@bruce>

John,

I think low temperature may well be the cause of the problem. My gasifier
is not getting all that hot - I'd be surprised if it's anywhere near 800°;
certainly there is only a very small zone of orange glow, about half the
size of a 35 mm film canister, in a 2 litre bed, probably only half full of
charcoal.

I'll try better air distribution to see if that increases the size of the
glowing area.

Regards,

Jim

Enecon Pty. Ltd.
35 Whitehorse Rd., Deepdene VIC 3103, Australia
PO Box 555, Deepdene DC VIC 3103, Australia
Tel: +61-3-9817 6255
Fax: +61-3-9817 6455
www.enecon.com.au
----- Original Message -----
From: John Davies <jmdavies@xsinet.co.za>
To: Gasification list <gasification@crest.org>; stove list
<stoves@crest.org>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Gasification air flow

> Jim Bland wrote.
>
> > I can make nice flames burning the volatiles in the first phase, but am
> > having difficulty establishing a flame during the second phase when
> charcoal
> > is converted to CO. Probably I'm not getting enough primary air in.
>
> I have also had the same problem with the second phase. Tom mentioned
> temperatures of 800 C plus, which set me thinking. At this temperature the
> charcoal will not be red hot but glow orange moving towards yellow at 1000
> C.
>
> Thinking back, when looking down the gas chimney only a red hot glow was
> seen, indicating temperatures well below 800 C . This was despite a large
> variation in primary air adjustments. The only reason I can think of is
that
> the insulation is not sufficient and or the charcoal bed too small in
> volume.
>
> Another way of describing the preference for CO production at >800 C is
> that any CO2 produced will then react with carbon before leaving the bed .
> CO2 plus C = 2 CO, providing there is enough contact time and the bed is
> hot
> enough. ( depth/ velocity = X : X being the required contact time with
> Carbon )
>
> I hope these thoughts provide the solutions to our problem.
>
> John Davies.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> Stoves List Archives and Website:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
>
> Stoves List Moderators:
> Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
> Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
>
> Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
> http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF

From luizmagri at yahoo.com Fri Apr 27 22:46:08 2001
From: luizmagri at yahoo.com (Luiz Alberto Magri)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:19 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Heat transferring for steam reformation
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20010415171641.009216b0@wgs1.btl.net>
Message-ID: <20010428024555.22475.qmail@web11705.mail.yahoo.com>

Peter,

Let me include two remarks:

1) Yes, 51% from Wärtsilä sounds a bit large if they
are talking about a simple cycle plant. Unless that
claimed ("reclaimed" perhaps???) water injection is
doing a big and nice job.

2) No, 40% for a combined cycle is not a challenge.
Minimum of 52% (net power / LHV base) using an
up-to-date gas turbine.

Cheers,

Luiz Magri
Rio de Janeiro

>
> By the way -- the Wartsila 64 claims a 51% engine
> efficiency (the 38 just
> 42.5) have to check that out and see what is shaking
> there.
>
> And those bloat-ware dual cycle (gas turbine --
> steam power plant) "trying"
> to break 40%!!!
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF

BioEnergy Lists: Gasifiers & Gasification

April 2001 Gasification Archive