June 2002 Gasification Archive

From arnt at c2i.net Mon Jun 3 13:41:12 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: MDF and energy
In-Reply-To: <007b01c1f6af$d3ca8860$6401a8c0@tommain>
Message-ID: <20020604002925.729e5f47.arnt@c2i.net>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 21:03:18 +0300,
"ali yilmaz" <alyilmaz@anet.net.tr> wrote in message
<000b01c20b28$f3d33de0$59ab92d4@b0b2a8>:

> Hello all,
>
> Does anyone has any experience about the energy consumption / need of
> a continuous MDF plant with 500 m3 capacity.

..500 m³ per year, month, week, day, hour?

> I am trying to calculate an approximate energy value for the
> followings ( but a little bit confused with differentr feedbacks I got
> from my customer...)

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen

Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF
List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>

From alyilmaz at anet.net.tr Mon Jun 3 21:35:50 2002
From: alyilmaz at anet.net.tr (ali yilmaz)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: MDF and energy
In-Reply-To: <007b01c1f6af$d3ca8860$6401a8c0@tommain>
Message-ID: <000e01c20b91$e8b5fec0$baab92d4@ali>

500 m3/day...

Sorry for that

Ali
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arnt Karlsen" <arnt@c2i.net>
To: "ali yilmaz" <alyilmaz@anet.net.tr>
Cc: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 1:29 AM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: MDF and energy

> On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 21:03:18 +0300,
> "ali yilmaz" <alyilmaz@anet.net.tr> wrote in message
> <000b01c20b28$f3d33de0$59ab92d4@b0b2a8>:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Does anyone has any experience about the energy consumption / need of
> > a continuous MDF plant with 500 m3 capacity.
>
> ..500 m³ per year, month, week, day, hour?
>
> > I am trying to calculate an approximate energy value for the
> > followings ( but a little bit confused with differentr feedbacks I got
> > from my customer...)
>
> --
> ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
>
> Scenarios always come in sets of three:
> best case, worst case, and just in case.
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From jsmeenk at iastate.edu Tue Jun 4 12:55:03 2002
From: jsmeenk at iastate.edu (Jerod Smeenk)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20020604164721.04103318@jsmeenk.mail.iastate.edu>

All,

Has anyone established procedures for analysis of trace contaminants in gas
streams from biomass gasifiers? I am interested in either on-line or
off-line gas sampling techniques. Contaminants of interest include H2S,
COS, HCl, NH3, HCN, and alkali (K and Na). Thanks in advance!

Jerod

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerod Smeenk Phone: (515) 294-6402
Iowa State University Fax: (515) 294-3261
1043 Black Engineering E-mail: jsmeenk@iastate.edu
Ames, IA 50011

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From dschmidt at undeerc.org Tue Jun 4 13:28:29 2002
From: dschmidt at undeerc.org (Schmidt, Darren)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas
Message-ID: <601A55066596D211A7AD00104BC6FB25010D6B6D@undeerc.eerc.und.NoDak.edu>

See the European protocol.
http://www.tarweb.net/index.shtml

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerod Smeenk [mailto:jsmeenk@iastate.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 4:54 PM
To: gasification@crest.org
Subject: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas

All,

Jerod

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
Jerod Smeenk Phone: (515) 294-6402
Iowa State University Fax: (515) 294-3261
1043 Black Engineering E-mail: jsmeenk@iastate.edu
Ames, IA 50011

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tombreed at attbi.com Thu Jun 6 04:40:29 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas
In-Reply-To: <601A55066596D211A7AD00104BC6FB25010D6B6D@undeerc.eerc.und.NoDak.edu>
Message-ID: <00ea01c20d5b$c5d3eae0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Darren, Jerod and All:

> Has anyone established procedures for analysis of trace contaminants in
gas
> streams from biomass gasifiers? I am interested in either on-line or
> off-line gas sampling techniques. Contaminants of interest include H2S,
> COS, HCl, NH3, HCN, and alkali (K and Na). Thanks in advance!
>
> Jerod

With such a long list of contaminants you would need to use gas
chromatography or an online mass spectrometer and calibrate and check often.
Plan to devote at least one many year/year of a skilled scientists time
(plus another year of his bureaucratic boss plus 6 months of oversite from
the EPA) to the job.

And you can be sure that almost all known molecules will be there at some
ppb level and we can all get excited about it.

It is not surprising that the "golden age" of gasification was 1942-45 when
the effort was necessity driven by the military preempting gasoline
supplies.

Your resident cynic... TOM REED
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> -------------
> Jerod Smeenk Phone: (515) 294-6402
> Iowa State University Fax: (515) 294-3261
> 1043 Black Engineering E-mail: jsmeenk@iastate.edu
> Ames, IA 50011
>
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From dschmidt at undeerc.org Thu Jun 6 07:48:41 2002
From: dschmidt at undeerc.org (Schmidt, Darren)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: FW: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas
Message-ID: <601A55066596D211A7AD00104BC6FB25010D6B81@undeerc.eerc.und.NoDak.edu>

-----Original Message-----
From: Timpe, Ronald C.
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 11:46 AM
To: Schmidt, Darren
Subject: RE: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas

Darren,

There are on-line instrumental methods for measuring H2S,COS, HCl, NH3, HCN,
(Gas Chromatography, spectroscopic methods and others). HCl and NH3 are
very hydrophilic so tend to dissolve in condensate (H2O). Laboratory
analysis of condensate gives good indication of those gases. Gas is
sometimes collected in bags and taken to the lab for analysis, remembering
that most of the HCl and NH3 will be in condensate and not give a reliable
result in gas bag analysis. If the condensate water is alkaline, H2S and HCN
will also partition into the condensate so the condensate must also be
analyzed. COS hydrolyzes in the condensate (to H2S and CO2)so will not be
measured as COS. K (potassium) and Na(sodium)is collected in impinger
trains and brought back to the lab for analysis. Flame photometry is used in
our lab for K and Na analyses. As far as I know there is not an on-line
method for the latter two at this time. They are so soluble in water that
they tend to dissolve in condensate so condensate analysis gives a good
indication of K and Na vapor in the gas stream.

Ron Timpe
UNDEERC
rtimpe@undeerc.org
(701)-777-5219

-----Original Message-----
From: Schmidt, Darren
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 10:03 AM
To: Timpe, Ronald C.
Subject: FW: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas

This fellow asked me this question. What do we use to measure the elements
he requested?

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerod Smeenk [mailto:jsmeenk@iastate.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 4:54 PM
To: gasification@crest.org
Subject: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas

All,

Jerod

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
Jerod Smeenk Phone: (515) 294-6402
Iowa State University Fax: (515) 294-3261
1043 Black Engineering E-mail: jsmeenk@iastate.edu
Ames, IA 50011

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From W.deJong at wbmt.tudelft.nl Thu Jun 6 21:31:42 2002
From: W.deJong at wbmt.tudelft.nl (W.deJong@wbmt.tudelft.nl)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: (Fwd) Re: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas
Message-ID: <3D006F67.13502.144E24A6@localhost>

Dear Jerod,

At TU Delft (section Thermal Power Engineering) we quantify COS,
NH3, HCN and HCl in biomass gasification product gas from a
pressurised fluidised bed gasifier by off-line FTIR analysis with a 2
m optical hot gas cell (ca. 150 °C) and a resolution of 0.125 cm^-1.
Details of spectra etc. can be found in the PhD thesis of Peter
Hoppesteyn. We could not analyse H2S with FTIR analysis, as
there is too much spectral overlap with CO2 peaks. Therefore, we
used an on-line 'lead-acetate papertape' instrument from Maihak.
Alkali metals were sampled with hot ceramic probes (including
ceramic cyclone + filter) and wet trapping in acid solution.

with best regards,

Wiebren

> All,
>
> Has anyone established procedures for analysis of trace contaminants
> in gas streams from biomass gasifiers? I am interested in either
> on-line or off-line gas sampling techniques. Contaminants of
> interest include H2S, COS, HCl, NH3, HCN, and alkali (K and Na).
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Jerod
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> -- ------------------- Jerod Smeenk Phone: (515)
> 294-6402 Iowa State University Fax: (515)
> 294-3261 1043 Black Engineering E-mail: jsmeenk@iastate.edu
> Ames, IA 50011
>
------- End of forwarded message -------
Wiebren de Jong, MSc.
TU Delft
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering & Marine Technology
Section Thermal Power Engineering (EV)
Mekelweg 2
NL-2628 CD Delft
The Netherlands
Telephone: +31 15 2789476
Mobile: +31 6 51236425
Telefax: +31 15 2782460
e-mail at home: wkdejong@kabelfoon.nl
e-mail general: wiebrendejong@hotmail.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From vanderdrift at ecn.nl Thu Jun 6 22:14:26 2002
From: vanderdrift at ecn.nl (Drift, A. van der)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas
Message-ID: <92D6AAE888CED411A16A00508BB0B827261592@ecntex.ecn.nl>

Jerod,

A ECN, we do our measurements of mentioned trace components in the gas from
our gasifiers by the following methods.

H2S and COS are determined on-line by using a µGC and a Poraplot column and
a Themal Conductivity detector.
Sometimes H2S and COS are determined off-line by sampling gas in Tedlar bags
and performing gas analysis on a Gas Chromatograph. H2S and COS are
separated on a CP-SIL 5CB column and detected by using a Flame Photometric
Detector.

HCl and NH3 are determined by leading the gasstream of a biomass gasifier
over a hot quartz fibre filter (250 degr. C) in order to get rid of dust and
soot and after that the stream is passed through a washing bottle,
containing 50 ml of double destilled water. The sample flow is regulated by
a gaspump with rotameter and is about 2 L/min and the sampling time is about
20 min. After this collection time the sample line is being flushed with
double destilled water into the washing bottle. The amount of water is being
transferred into a polyethylene bottle which has been weighed prior to the
measurement and is weighed afterwards in order to determine the amount of
water. After this the sample is being transferred to the lab where HCl is
determined as Chloride using Anion Chromatography and NH3 is determined as
NH4+ by performing Ammonium Flow Injection Analysis (AMFIA).

HCN is sampled with a similar procedure as above, only in this case the
washing bottle is filled with 50 ml of 10M NaOH. On the lab steam
destillation is performed, after which the HCN is determined as CN- by using
a spectrophotometric technique.

Alkali (K and Na) in a gaseous phase are not yet determined on a routine
scale at ECN. We have however some very promising results with a titatium
probe with internal water quench and gas sampling. The resulting condensate
is analysed on Na and K by using ICP-AES.

For more details you can contact me anytime,

Greetings

Bram van der Drift
ECN Biomass
POBox 1
NL 1755 ZG Petten, the Netherlands
tel: (31) 224-564515
fax: (31) 224-568487
Email: vanderdrift@ecn.nl
Email: biomass@ecn.nl

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Jerod Smeenk [SMTP:jsmeenk@iastate.edu]
> Verzonden: 04 June 2002 23:54
> Aan: gasification@crest.org
> Onderwerp: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas
>
> All,
>
> Has anyone established procedures for analysis of trace contaminants in
> gas
> streams from biomass gasifiers? I am interested in either on-line or
> off-line gas sampling techniques. Contaminants of interest include H2S,
> COS, HCl, NH3, HCN, and alkali (K and Na). Thanks in advance!
>
> Jerod
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> Jerod Smeenk Phone: (515) 294-6402
> Iowa State University Fax: (515) 294-3261
> 1043 Black Engineering E-mail: jsmeenk@iastate.edu
> Ames, IA 50011
>
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tombreed at attbi.com Fri Jun 7 04:04:08 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis
In-Reply-To: <92D6AAE888CED411A16A00508BB0B827261592@ecntex.ecn.nl>
Message-ID: <018401c20e1f$dbe8d740$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear All:

I particularly recommend the use of Dragger tubes for occasional analysis of
a large number of gas contaminents such as HCl, COS, H2S, NH3, ...

At http://www.hbcumi.cau.edu/tqp/311/Module%20III/311-38/311-38.html

I found

Two companies supply the tubes, Sensidyne and Dragger. Both provide
handbooks on the chemistry of the tubes and kits and procedures for rapid
assessment of hazardous sites. The calibrated pumps sold by the two
companies are not interchangeable. For general purpose monitoring the EPA
has approved the use of colorimetric tubes for NH3 , CO2 , CO, Cl2 , HCN, H2
S, and SO2 .
They are relatively inexpensive and easy to use. (Not to be confused with
DRAG ER as in dragging airplanes).

Yours truly, TOM REED BEF

----- Original Message -----
From: "Drift, A. van der" <vanderdrift@ecn.nl>
To: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 1:12 AM
Subject: RE: GAS-L: Trace contaminant analysis is producer gas

Jerod,

A ECN, we do our measurements of mentioned trace components in the gas from
our gasifiers by the following methods.

For more details you can contact me anytime,

Greetings

Bram van der Drift
ECN Biomass
POBox 1
NL 1755 ZG Petten, the Netherlands
tel: (31) 224-564515
fax: (31) 224-568487
Email: vanderdrift@ecn.nl
Email: biomass@ecn.nl

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Thu Jun 13 18:35:03 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Sweet Chestnut Gasification
Message-ID: <005d01c21354$7133dc80$06ff58db@newpc>

Hello Rebecca,

Sweet Chestnut should not cause any problems if used for down draught
gasifiers. As with all woods used for gasification, the moisture content
should be as low as possible (15 - 20%) and you need to closely monitor the
chip size.

The big trap for most projects drawing wood from city forestry, is the use
of drum chippers which make a lot of fines and is very poor gasifier fuel. I
am pretty sure there was a lot of chestnut chipped at Rural Generations
Brook Hall Project in Londonderry following Winter gales a couple of years
ago and there were no unusual problems, although it was mixed with other
hardwoods.

Make sure you use a screw auger chipper with a medium size chip (50 x 25 x
5) and it should work fine.

Problems with coppice willow gasification can be overcome with a correctly
designed gasifier, and again the correct cutting size of the chip. If you
haven't done so, you can read about our work with the fuel on the Fluidyne
Archive www.fluidynenz.250x.com

Hope this helps

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From Sarita19th at aol.com Sat Jun 15 03:59:04 2002
From: Sarita19th at aol.com (Sarita19th@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: grasses
Message-ID: <88.19a8bb26.2a3c93a2@aol.com>

I am interested in a commercially ready [or near ready] gasification process
for grasses such as elephant grass [Napier grass, Merker grass, Uganda grass]
or star grass, to feed turbogenerator which would wheel "green electricity"
to a factory in Puerto Rico.

Would appreciate comments from persons who have studied and/or operated such
a process.

Global Market Place has a list but is not responding to "search".

Thank you. Lewis L. Smith, energy economist

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Sun Jun 16 09:52:54 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: Coppicing Alder?
In-Reply-To: <005d01c21354$7133dc80$06ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <003101c21567$19b67d40$04ff58db@newpc>

Hi Harmon,

Haven't had the opportunity to investigate coppicing Alder, but would guess
that as all young fast growing wood is similar to willow, one could expect
to experience much the same problems.

Given that there is huge experience in the selection of willow species and
years of knowledge in their actual cultivation, I doubt if you could
convince farmers to change over to Alder as an energy crop. All they are
interested in is tons / acre whatever the biomass, and it is our job to find
out how to turn it into gasifier fuel.

Will be back in Northern Ireland about September and will keep it in mind to
check out the Alder option as it may be more appropriate in some places.

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harmon Seaver" <hseaver@cybershamanix.com>
To: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 4:40 PM
Subject: Coppicing Alder?

> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:34:35PM +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
> > Problems with coppice willow gasification can be overcome with a
correctly
> > designed gasifier, and again the correct cutting size of the chip. If
you
> > haven't done so, you can read about our work with the fuel on the
Fluidyne
> > Archive www.fluidynenz.250x.com
> >
> Read your piece there on coppicing willow and the problems inherent in
that
> -- too bad none of that is mentioned on the sites touting willow as wonder
> crop. Do you have any idea if alder would be better? It has other
advantages,
> IIRC, it's nitrogen-fixing for one.
>
>
> --
> Harmon Seaver
> CyberShamanix
> http://www.cybershamanix.com

-
Bioenergy List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/bioenergy/200202/

Bioenergy List Moderator:
Tom Miles, tmiles@trmiles.com
List-Post: <mailto:bioenergy@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bioenergy-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bioenergy-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:bioenergy-subscribe@crest.org>

Sponsor the Bioenergy List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Bioenergy Events and Information:
http://www.bioenergy2002.org
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

From Sarita19th at aol.com Sun Jun 16 12:12:48 2002
From: Sarita19th at aol.com (Sarita19th@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: No Subject
Message-ID: <132.f65da99.2a3e58b7@aol.com>

Re inquiry by Lewis L. Smith as to gasification processes applicable to
grasses â€”

Ron Bailey <rbaileys@prmenergy.com> offers process well-proven with rice
hulls. Unfortunately most of the info is in "frames" which
<sarita19th@aol.com cant handle. Is it also available as a pdf document ?

Bill Klein asks how much feedstock am I talking about. Answer â€” enough to put
30 megawatts of power on the buss bar.

Thank you. Lewis L. Smith <sarita19th@aol.com>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From Sarita19th at aol.com Mon Jun 17 05:22:40 2002
From: Sarita19th at aol.com (Sarita19th@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: grass gassification
Message-ID: <25.2929aadb.2a3f4a1b@aol.com>

Reply to Darren Schmidt, EERC USA

Size range is supply to turbogenerator required to put 30 megawatts of power
on the bus bar.

Lewis L. Smith sarita19th@aol.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From Sarita19th at aol.com Mon Jun 17 05:31:34 2002
From: Sarita19th at aol.com (Sarita19th@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: No Subject
Message-ID: <22.2a3e9a88.2a3f4c30@aol.com>

Reply to Ron Bailey Sr. :

Can access <prmenergy.com> but when I try to go farther, I get a "type 3"
error and get knocked off the Internet, apparently because
<sarita19th@aol.com> cannot handle information in frames.

Please send written material to

Lewis L. Smith
Condesa del Mar 201
Ave. Isla Verde 3103
Carolina PR 00979

Thanks. Lewis L. Smith

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From Sarita19th at aol.com Mon Jun 17 07:25:09 2002
From: Sarita19th at aol.com (Sarita19th@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: GAS-L
Message-ID: <18b.958ce13.2a3f66cd@aol.com>

Ref. your reply. Many thanks. Will do.

Lewis L. Smith

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Mon Jun 17 08:59:21 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Sweet Chestnut Gasification
In-Reply-To: <005d01c21354$7133dc80$06ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020617125824.01c71500@mail.ilstu.edu>

Dear Graeme and other "Gasifiers", (with copy to the Stoves list serve)

I am new to this list serve, but have been active for a year on the Stoves
List serve. I am working with Tom Reed on a domestic gasifier stove for
cooking with biomass. My area of work is southern Africa, specifically in
Mozambique and where it joins with Swaziland and South Africa. I head to
Africa on 4 July for 3 months.

My question is about "chippers". Graeme makes clear statements about drum
chippers producing poor quality chips and screw-auger chippers producing
good quality chips.

Is there a good source of info about these chippers, especially regarding
making fuel for gasifiers? I am especially interested in the least
expensive, and I hope manually powered, but all info will be useful.

Paul

Paul S. Anderson (full signature block info should be at the end of this
message.)

At 03:34 PM 6/14/02 +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
>Hello Rebecca,
>
>Sweet Chestnut should not cause any problems if used for down draught
>gasifiers. As with all woods used for gasification, the moisture content
>should be as low as possible (15 - 20%) and you need to closely monitor the
>chip size.
>
>The big trap for most projects drawing wood from city forestry, is the use
>of drum chippers which make a lot of fines and is very poor gasifier fuel. I
>am pretty sure there was a lot of chestnut chipped at Rural Generations
>Brook Hall Project in Londonderry following Winter gales a couple of years
>ago and there were no unusual problems, although it was mixed with other
>hardwoods.
>
>Make sure you use a screw auger chipper with a medium size chip (50 x 25 x
>5) and it should work fine.
>
>Problems with coppice willow gasification can be overcome with a correctly
>designed gasifier, and again the correct cutting size of the chip. If you
>haven't done so, you can read about our work with the fuel on the Fluidyne
>Archive www.fluidynenz.250x.com
>
>Hope this helps
>
>Doug Williams
>FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
>
>
>-
>Gasification List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
>Gasification List Moderator:
>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>www.webpan.com/BEF
>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From snkm at btl.net Mon Jun 17 09:43:25 2002
From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:09:59 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 3rd World "Chipper" Device
Message-ID: <3.0.32.20020617123604.00919df0@wgs1.btl.net>

Dear All;

>I am especially interested in the least
>expensive, and I hope manually powered, but all info will be useful.

Regarding your quest for that perfect "chipper".

May I dare suggest the Machete??

Peter Singfield
Belize -- Central America

At 01:06 PM 6/17/2002 -0500, Paul S. Anderson wrote:
>Dear Graeme and other "Gasifiers", (with copy to the Stoves list serve)
>
>I am new to this list serve, but have been active for a year on the Stoves
>List serve. I am working with Tom Reed on a domestic gasifier stove for
>cooking with biomass. My area of work is southern Africa, specifically in
>Mozambique and where it joins with Swaziland and South Africa. I head to
>Africa on 4 July for 3 months.
>
>My question is about "chippers". Graeme makes clear statements about drum
>chippers producing poor quality chips and screw-auger chippers producing
>good quality chips.
>
>Is there a good source of info about these chippers, especially regarding
>making fuel for gasifiers? I am especially interested in the least
>expensive, and I hope manually powered, but all info will be useful.
>
>Paul
>
>Paul S. Anderson (full signature block info should be at the end of this
>message.)
>
>At 03:34 PM 6/14/02 +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
>>Hello Rebecca,
>>
>>Sweet Chestnut should not cause any problems if used for down draught
>>gasifiers. As with all woods used for gasification, the moisture content
>>should be as low as possible (15 - 20%) and you need to closely monitor the
>>chip size.
>>
>>The big trap for most projects drawing wood from city forestry, is the use
>>of drum chippers which make a lot of fines and is very poor gasifier fuel. I
>>am pretty sure there was a lot of chestnut chipped at Rural Generations
>>Brook Hall Project in Londonderry following Winter gales a couple of years
>>ago and there were no unusual problems, although it was mixed with other
>>hardwoods.
>>
>>Make sure you use a screw auger chipper with a medium size chip (50 x 25 x
>>5) and it should work fine.
>>
>>Problems with coppice willow gasification can be overcome with a correctly
>>designed gasifier, and again the correct cutting size of the chip. If you
>>haven't done so, you can read about our work with the fuel on the Fluidyne
>>Archive www.fluidynenz.250x.com
>>
>>Hope this helps
>>
>>Doug Williams
>>FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
>>
>>
>>-
>>Gasification List Archives:
>>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>>
>>Gasification List Moderator:
>>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>>www.webpan.com/BEF
>>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>>
>>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>>-
>>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
>Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
>Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
>E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
>
>
>-
>Gasification List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
>Gasification List Moderator:
>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>www.webpan.com/BEF
>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Mon Jun 17 10:09:21 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: 3rd World "Chipper" Device
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020617123604.00919df0@wgs1.btl.net>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020617140816.01c67ec0@mail.ilstu.edu>

Peter,

Considering the extremely low cost of labor (and
unemployment/underemployment) in Mozambique and many other places, your
suggestion is very appropriate.

When we can see people beside the road making a living by breaking up
stones to become gravel by using only a hammer, then a machete could be the
right tool.

Anyone have comments or experiences on machetes for production of gasifier
fuels? Or the next level higher in technology?

Paul

At 12:37 PM 6/17/02 -0500, Peter Singfield wrote:

>Dear All;
>
> >I am especially interested in the least
> >expensive, and I hope manually powered, but all info will be useful.
>
>Regarding your quest for that perfect "chipper".
>
>May I dare suggest the Machete??
>
>Peter Singfield
>Belize -- Central America

Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of 2001-2003
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Mon Jun 17 23:17:49 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: Sweet Chestnut Gasification
In-Reply-To: <MABBKKNLMCKBBJKBLMGNGEJCCLAA.raywije@eureka.lk>
Message-ID: <002201c216a0$a9952ee0$15ff58db@newpc>

Hello Ray,

Have put up a brochure about screw auger chippers on the Fluidyne Archive -
www.fluidynenz.250x.com

Hope this is of assistance.

Regards,

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Wijewardene" <raywije@eureka.lk>
To: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
Cc: <joseph@sltnet.lk>
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 10:50 AM
Subject: RE: Sweet Chestnut Gasification

> For Graeme Williams.. We are very active with a project in SriLanka in
> gasification for electricity generation (55 kva already in operation and a
> 500 kva under contruction and plans thereafer for several hundreds) and
> immediateloy took to heart your recommendation to closely watch the size
of
> chips (50x25x5 we find also 'flows' through well, and 'fines' to be
avoided
> as much as possible).
>
> You mention a machine/tool called a 'screw-augur-chipper'.. Would you
kindly
> explain this a little further, and suggest from where we might purchase
one
> to try out.
>
> Thanking you kindly.... RAY WIJEWARDENE, Colombo, SriLanka.
>

-
Bioenergy List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/bioenergy/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Tue Jun 18 14:43:30 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Sweet Chestnut Gasification
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020617125824.01c71500@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <004301c21721$cfcd67e0$11ff58db@newpc>

Dear Paul,

Welcome to Gasification - a technology where nothing is as it seems! I
guess Stoves must be much the same, as to my knowledge they have been
'improving' for at least the last 20 years.

In answer to your question regarding chippers and chip size, it is unlikely
you will find much by way of recommended sizes for gasification processes.
Few, if any manufacturers have worked specifically to design a small chunker
for rural needs and the best manual design is still a sharp axe.

However, seeing as you are looking for ideas, my suggestion is to consider
making a double leverage guillotine which should work up to about 50mm. The
wood should be fed through on an angle to reduce cutting forces. Set up in
the middle of a village it would be available and useable by everyone.

To reduce confusion, my son Graeme's computer is my link to the world as I
am computer illiterate and intend to remain that way!

Hope this helps.

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul S. Anderson" <psanders@ilstu.edu>
To: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>;
<rebecca.heaton@bronzeoak.com>
Cc: <gasification@crest.org>; <bioenergy@crest.org>; <stoves@crest.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 6:06 AM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Sweet Chestnut Gasification

> Dear Graeme and other "Gasifiers", (with copy to the Stoves list serve)
>
> I am new to this list serve, but have been active for a year on the Stoves
> List serve. I am working with Tom Reed on a domestic gasifier stove for
> cooking with biomass. My area of work is southern Africa, specifically in
> Mozambique and where it joins with Swaziland and South Africa. I head to
> Africa on 4 July for 3 months.
>
> My question is about "chippers". Graeme makes clear statements about drum
> chippers producing poor quality chips and screw-auger chippers producing
> good quality chips.
>
> Is there a good source of info about these chippers, especially regarding
> making fuel for gasifiers? I am especially interested in the least
> expensive, and I hope manually powered, but all info will be useful.
>
> Paul
>
> Paul S. Anderson (full signature block info should be at the end of this
> message.)
>
> At 03:34 PM 6/14/02 +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
> >Hello Rebecca,
> >
> >Sweet Chestnut should not cause any problems if used for down draught
> >gasifiers. As with all woods used for gasification, the moisture content
> >should be as low as possible (15 - 20%) and you need to closely monitor
the
> >chip size.
> >
> >The big trap for most projects drawing wood from city forestry, is the
use
> >of drum chippers which make a lot of fines and is very poor gasifier
fuel. I
> >am pretty sure there was a lot of chestnut chipped at Rural Generations
> >Brook Hall Project in Londonderry following Winter gales a couple of
years
> >ago and there were no unusual problems, although it was mixed with other
> >hardwoods.
> >
> >Make sure you use a screw auger chipper with a medium size chip (50 x 25
x
> >5) and it should work fine.
> >
> >Problems with coppice willow gasification can be overcome with a
correctly
> >designed gasifier, and again the correct cutting size of the chip. If
you
> >haven't done so, you can read about our work with the fuel on the
Fluidyne
> >Archive www.fluidynenz.250x.com
> >
> >Hope this helps
> >
> >Doug Williams
> >FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
> >
> >
> >-
> >Gasification List Archives:
> >http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> >Gasification List Moderator:
> >Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> >www.webpan.com/BEF
> >List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> >List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> >List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> >Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> >-
> >Other Gasification Events and Information:
> >http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> >http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> >http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> >http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
> Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
> Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
> Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
> E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Tue Jun 18 16:36:08 2002
From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Sweet Chestnut Gasification
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020617125824.01c71500@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <20020619003356.GA11903@cybershamanix.com>

The Kopo Hogger brochure you show on your website looks quite interesting,
but their phone number (from the brochure) no longer works and I can't find any
company by that name listed in the Yellow Pages. Don't suppose you have any
other info on them?

--
Harmon Seaver
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Wed Jun 19 07:25:09 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Sweet Chestnut Gasification
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020617125824.01c71500@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020619113007.018ee100@mail.ilstu.edu>

Doug,

could you provide any sort of diagram or photo of the suggested
>double leverage guillotine which should work up to about 50mm.

Thanks,

Paul

At 11:42 AM 6/19/02 +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
>Dear Paul,
>
>Welcome to Gasification - a technology where nothing is as it seems! I
>guess Stoves must be much the same, as to my knowledge they have been
>'improving' for at least the last 20 years.
>
>In answer to your question regarding chippers and chip size, it is unlikely
>you will find much by way of recommended sizes for gasification processes.
>Few, if any manufacturers have worked specifically to design a small chunker
>for rural needs and the best manual design is still a sharp axe.
>
>However, seeing as you are looking for ideas, my suggestion is to consider
>making a double leverage guillotine which should work up to about 50mm. The
>wood should be fed through on an angle to reduce cutting forces. Set up in
>the middle of a village it would be available and useable by everyone.
>
>To reduce confusion, my son Graeme's computer is my link to the world as I
>am computer illiterate and intend to remain that way!
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Doug Williams
>FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Wed Jun 19 07:43:01 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Ultra small-scale gasification interests
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020617125824.01c71500@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020619113251.018ee990@mail.ilstu.edu>

Gasifiers,

Who on the Gasification List Serve is seriously interested / involved with
the very small size gasification units such as Tom Reed and I am
producing? I would like to know who you are.

Also, please indicate if you are ALSO on the Stoves List Serve, which is
focused on SMALL stoves for developing countries, but with only a few
"Stovers" working on gasification stoves.

For the curious (or bored?), you might want to go to this website and
scroll down to the entries for Tom Reed and then down to mine (Paul S.
Anderson) to see what we have been doing with gasification in VERY small
stoves.

http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/

If you have an interest in this very small-scale gasification (and
associated issues such as preparation of correct-sized fuel for these
domestic stoves), PLEASE reply so that we can have better contact.

To all: The question that is not yet answered (pending replies to this
message) is whether or not the discussion of small scale (domestic level)
gasification should be on this Gasification List Serve.

The novice,

Paul
Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of 2001-2003
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From kchisholm at ca.inter.net Wed Jun 19 20:38:43 2002
From: kchisholm at ca.inter.net (Kevin Chisholm)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Ultra small-scale gasification interests
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020617125824.01c71500@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <3D1169A1.4706967C@ca.inter.net>

Dear Paul

"Paul S. Anderson" wrote:
>
> Gasifiers,
>
> Who on the Gasification List Serve is seriously interested / involved with
> the very small size gasification units such as Tom Reed and I am
> producing? I would like to know who you are.
>
I am very interested in very small size gasification
units.

> Also, please indicate if you are ALSO on the Stoves List Serve, which is
> focused on SMALL stoves for developing countries, but with only a few
> "Stovers" working on gasification stoves.
>
I am also on teh Stoves List.

> For the curious (or bored?), you might want to go to this website and
> scroll down to the entries for Tom Reed and then down to mine (Paul S.
> Anderson) to see what we have been doing with gasification in VERY small
> stoves.
>
> http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/
>
I went there, and could not find a specific reference
to
such work. Could you please give a URL that points
directly to the work on small scale gasification?

> If you have an interest in this very small-scale gasification (and
> associated issues such as preparation of correct-sized fuel for these
> domestic stoves), PLEASE reply so that we can have better contact.

I am interested.
>
> To all: The question that is not yet answered (pending replies to this
> message) is whether or not the discussion of small scale (domestic level)
> gasification should be on this Gasification List Serve.
>
Since it is Gasification, the answer seems obvious.

Kindest regards,

Kevin Chisholm

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From jerry5335 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 20 05:01:51 2002
From: jerry5335 at yahoo.com (jerry dycus)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: small-scale gasification , rankine combo
In-Reply-To: <3D1169A1.4706967C@ca.inter.net>
Message-ID: <20020620135950.83664.qmail@web21402.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi All,
I agree that small gasifiers should be here.
There is a good sized for gasifiers for a 1.5 to 10hp
motors for making electricity while heating the
building making it almost 100% eff with the electric
savings paying for the engine, gen and fuel.
Most needed is a unit that can be started then
left to burn for 12hrs. Is there a simpler way than
using pellets and a feed auger?
A 2 or 3hp (Motor) unit would be a real money
saver for those north of Fla. Too bad I live in
central Fla.
Along with the gasifier, a small rankine
engine of the same size to get the most from producer
gas.
Does anyone know about using ethanol as a
working fluid compared to water or propane/butane in
eff?
I've heard it's good but couldn't find any info
on it.
In the last 3 months I've learned a lot about
rankine engine and want to build 20kw unit and
shooting for 40% eff with insulation and heat recovery
preheating the working fluid and combustion air into
the insulated gasifier .
Thanks,
jerry dycus
--- Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net> wrote:
> Dear Paul
>
> "Paul S. Anderson" wrote:
> >
> > Gasifiers,
> >
> > Who on the Gasification List Serve is seriously
> interested / involved with
> > the very small size gasification units such as Tom
> Reed and I am
> > producing? I would like to know who you are.
> >
> I am very interested in very small size gasification
> units.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From gregandapril at earthlink.net Fri Jun 21 06:54:02 2002
From: gregandapril at earthlink.net (Greg and April)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Cutting grass can cause pollition
Message-ID: <000901c2193a$7bb12640$f4c9b241@oemcomputer>

But not the way you think, check it out

http://www.csiro.au/promos/ozadvances/Series12Grass.html

Greg H.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Fri Jun 21 13:05:01 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: small-scale gasification , rankine combo
In-Reply-To: <3D1169A1.4706967C@ca.inter.net>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020621170509.01c70bc0@mail.ilstu.edu>

At 06:59 AM 6/20/02 -0700, jerry dycus wrote:
> Hi All,
> I agree that small gasifiers should be here (discussed on
> Gasification List).
>There is a good sized for gasifiers for a 1.5 to 10hp
>motors for making electricity while heating the
>building making it almost 100% eff with the electric
>savings paying for the engine, gen and fuel.

Does anyone have a full (or partial) list of commercially available SMALL
gasifiers, their costs, and their capabilities. What is the smallest that
is commercially available?

> Most needed is a unit that can be started then
>left to burn for 12hrs. Is there a simpler way than
>using pellets and a feed auger?

Tom Reed and I are working with "batch feeding" and can get a sustained
burn for 40 minutes without much problem. But we have not made a
large-batch unit, so we do not know the impact of the height that is
essentially filled with pellets. One of many experiments waiting to be tried.

> A 2 or 3hp (Motor) unit would be a real money
>saver for those north of Fla. Too bad I live in
>central Fla.
> Along with the gasifier, a small rankine
>engine of the same size to get the most from producer
>gas.
> Does anyone know about using ethanol as a
>working fluid compared to water or propane/butane in
>eff?
> I've heard it's good but couldn't find any info
>on it.
> In the last 3 months I've learned a lot about
>rankine engine and want to build 20kw unit and
>shooting for 40% eff with insulation and heat recovery
>preheating the working fluid and combustion air into
>the insulated gasifier .
> Thanks,
> jerry dycus
>--- Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net> wrote:
> > Dear Paul
> >
> > "Paul S. Anderson" wrote:
> > >
> > > Gasifiers,
> > >
> > > Who on the Gasification List Serve is seriously
> > interested / involved with
> > > the very small size gasification units such as Tom
> > Reed and I am
> > > producing? I would like to know who you are.
> > >
> > I am very interested in very small size gasification
> > units.
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
>http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From wdzeller at adelphia.net Fri Jun 21 19:05:06 2002
From: wdzeller at adelphia.net (Dave)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: small-scale gasification , rankine combo
In-Reply-To: <3D1169A1.4706967C@ca.inter.net>
Message-ID: <000d01c219a2$f04befe0$26b23418@rhmdky.adelphia.net>

Dear Paul:

Here are a few companies who produce gasifiers. They are located in China
and you will probably require use of an online translator to make full use
of them. I suggest either the Altavista
Translator(http://babelfish.altavista.com/) or the Arcnet Translator(
http://sangenjaya.arc.net.my/url/index-e.html). Some of these are outright
gas producers while others are cooking stoves

Here are a few manufacturers:
http://sxxx.sei.sn.cn/sxxb/xatwt/tan06.html
http://www.tiantian-qd.com/product.htm
http://www.cnnygh.com/qiyiechanpin/qihualu/qihualuidex.htm
http://www.cnnygh.com/qiyiechanpin/qihualu/qihualujpg.htm
http://www.cn-res.com/homepage/lk-res/a2/Mpicture1.htm

Also, here are a few links for some interesting energy saving solid
fuel/coal stoves:
http://www.hardwaretoday.com/meilu/index.htm#P1
http://www.china-huage.com/product.htm
http://www.cnnygh.com/qiyiechanpin/jimeilu/jiemeilu.htm
http://www.sjzlq.gov.cn/xz/dahe/bz/bz.html
http://www.hede.com.cn/csnql.htm
http://www.guanglei.com.cn/
http://www.chinahuowang.com/
http://www.jzgy.net/mxqy/zagl/cpjs.htm
http://www.86370.com/business/gl/gl.htm
http://www.suliqiang.com/cpjs.htm
http://www.congxin.com/index.htm

I know many of these products primarily use coal, but it seems that with the
new generation of coal gasifiers that the Chinese have perfected a product
which can burn high volatile bituminous lump coal to some degree of
efficiency. In addition, their standard coal-fired water stoves feature
improved efficiency, though not as good as the gasifiers.

I realize that you may not " be into coal", but the fact is that for many
large, highly populated countries coal is considered as a cheap domestically
produced alternative to expensive imported petroleum.

I have, however, found some interesting corporate websites in Turkey where
they build efficient stoves that burn all sorts of wood products as well as
coal. These stoves are known as "kovali soba" (bucket stoves) which are
designed as low cost, attractive (they are porcelain enameled) heating and
cooking stoves. If you are interested in knowing more about these stoves
(efficiencies ranging from 77% to 87%) let me know and I'll send you a
comprehensive list of their webpages. They are noteworthy in that the Turks
seem to have perfected a stove in which combustion air is effectively
preheated. Also, these heaters and cooking ranges are supposedly smokeless
in operation.

Sincerely,

Dave Zeller

---- Original Message -----
From: "Paul S. Anderson" <psanders@ilstu.edu>
To: "jerry dycus" <jerry5335@yahoo.com>
Cc: <gasification@crest.org>; <stoves@crest.org>
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: small-scale gasification , rankine combo

> At 06:59 AM 6/20/02 -0700, jerry dycus wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > I agree that small gasifiers should be here (discussed on
> > Gasification List).
> >There is a good sized for gasifiers for a 1.5 to 10hp
> >motors for making electricity while heating the
> >building making it almost 100% eff with the electric
> >savings paying for the engine, gen and fuel.
>
> Does anyone have a full (or partial) list of commercially available SMALL
> gasifiers, their costs, and their capabilities. What is the smallest
that
> is commercially available?
>
> > Most needed is a unit that can be started then
> >left to burn for 12hrs. Is there a simpler way than
> >using pellets and a feed auger?
>
> Tom Reed and I are working with "batch feeding" and can get a sustained
> burn for 40 minutes without much problem. But we have not made a
> large-batch unit, so we do not know the impact of the height that is
> essentially filled with pellets. One of many experiments waiting to be
tried.
>
> > A 2 or 3hp (Motor) unit would be a real money
> >saver for those north of Fla. Too bad I live in
> >central Fla.
> > Along with the gasifier, a small rankine
> >engine of the same size to get the most from producer
> >gas.
> > Does anyone know about using ethanol as a
> >working fluid compared to water or propane/butane in
> >eff?
> > I've heard it's good but couldn't find any info
> >on it.
> > In the last 3 months I've learned a lot about
> >rankine engine and want to build 20kw unit and
> >shooting for 40% eff with insulation and heat recovery
> >preheating the working fluid and combustion air into
> >the insulated gasifier .
> > Thanks,
> > jerry dycus
> >--- Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net> wrote:
> > > Dear Paul
> > >
> > > "Paul S. Anderson" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Gasifiers,
> > > >
> > > > Who on the Gasification List Serve is seriously
> > > interested / involved with
> > > > the very small size gasification units such as Tom
> > > Reed and I am
> > > > producing? I would like to know who you are.
> > > >
> > > I am very interested in very small size gasification
> > > units.
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> >http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>
> Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
> Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of 2001-2003
> Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
> Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
> E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
>
>
> -
> Stoves List Archives and Website:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/200204/
> http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/
> >
> Stoves List Moderators:
> Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
> Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com
> >
> List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> >
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>
>http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/Chambers/Chambers.htm
>

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/200204/
http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/
>
Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com
>
List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
>
Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
http://www.bioenergy2002.org
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/Chambers/Chambers.htm

From jerry5335 at yahoo.com Sat Jun 22 04:10:28 2002
From: jerry5335 at yahoo.com (jerry dycus)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: small-scale gasification , rankine combo
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020621170509.01c70bc0@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <20020622130824.75153.qmail@web20419.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi Paul and All,
--- "Paul S. Anderson" <psanders@ilstu.edu> wrote:
> At 06:59 AM 6/20/02 -0700, jerry dycus wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > I agree that small gasifiers should be
> here (discussed on
> > Gasification List).
> >There is a good sized for gasifiers for a 1.5 to
> 10hp
> >motors for making electricity while heating the
> >building making it almost 100% eff with the
> electric
> >savings paying for the engine, gen and fuel.
>
> Does anyone have a full (or partial) list of
> commercially available SMALL
> gasifiers, their costs, and their capabilities.
> What is the smallest that
> is commercially available?
, I know of none. Unless you include pellet stoves.
Could a pellet stove be turned into a gas
generator?
If an availible pellet stove could be modifed to
just make the gas for an ICE rather than making it and
burning it itself would give us a good fuel feed
system.

>
> > Most needed is a unit that can be started
> then
> >left to burn for 12hrs. Is there a simpler way than
> >using pellets and a feed auger?
>
> Tom Reed and I are working with "batch feeding" and
> can get a sustained
> burn for 40 minutes without much problem. But we
> have not made a
> large-batch unit, so we do not know the impact of
> the height that is
> essentially filled with pellets. One of many
> experiments waiting to be tried.
Maybe a big say 24' dia storage chamber with a
bottom cone down to say 2" or 3" pipe leading to the
gasifying chamber.
Twice as big for chips with stirring to keep
clogging down.
Thanks,
jerry dycus

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Sat Jun 22 20:40:22 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Simple Manual Chip Guillotine
Message-ID: <007001c21a78$83fd2bc0$10ff58db@newpc>

Dear Paul and Gasification Colleagues,

Normally I would not suggest something if it couldn't be made to work, and a
double levered guillotine is widely used in steel working workshops for
cutting heavy angles and flats. The only problem with these straight type
cutting blades is that they don't open up enough to cut wood.

Having been asked for a plan or sketch design for such a guillotine, I have
posted a concept drawing onto the Fluidyne Archive - www.fluidynenz.250x.com
to illustrate the principles.

With all the engineering expertise within this group, it would be useful to
work out the optimum pivot positions to obtain the maximum cutting force.
I'm sure this would assist Paul with his Mozambeque project, and may assist
others to resolve fuel preparation problems.

Please don't send me the information, but post it to the list for comment
and share the knowledge.

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From guillaume.brouillard at sympatico.ca Sun Jun 23 13:18:44 2002
From: guillaume.brouillard at sympatico.ca (Guillaume Brouillard)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale gasification
Message-ID: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>

In response to a question that was asked whether
small scale gasification should be treated here, I really appreciate all posts
here and although I do want to hear of what is going on in large scale
gasification, my main concern is small scale gasifiers, gasification, producer
gas, and engines. Hoping to hear mor from these, Thank you!

Greetings!
William
Fohg

From psanders at ilstu.edu Mon Jun 24 03:48:24 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale gasification
In-Reply-To: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020624145543.01c74c90@mail.ilstu.edu>

William,

Thanks for your message. I have placed your name into my list
. expect to hear more in the near future.

Paul

At 04:30 PM 6/23/02 -0400, Guillaume Brouillard wrote:
In response to a
question that was asked whether small scale gasification should be
treated here, I really appreciate all posts here and although I do want
to hear of what is going on in large scale gasification, my main concern
is small scale gasifiers, gasification, producer gas, and engines. Hoping
to hear mor from these, Thank you!

Greetings!
William
Fohg
Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 -
7/00
Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of
2001-2003
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State
University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice:
309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items:
www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

From LINVENT at aol.com Mon Jun 24 04:13:20 2002
From: LINVENT at aol.com (LINVENT@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale gasification
Message-ID: <7d.2937b0b1.2a48d6f7@aol.com>

Dear Gasification list,
The EPA has published proposed regulations exempting gasifiers used at
refineries from RCRA for power generation. This has very dramatic impacts for
the field of gasification because of the language which is stated in the
regulations which includes statements like "gasifiers are not an emission
source" which means that it separates the technology from incineration which
is a source. Other statements clearly define gasification as a preferred
manner of waste or energy source.
In our discussions with the EPA, they state that if the gasifier is not
located at a refinery and operated on the narrow range of feedstock, it will
be considered to be an incinerator. This is not only a problem with the
technical issues, but becomes a regulatory and registration or permitting
problem as the conventional monitoring of incinerator performance cannot be
done on gasifiers.
Any gasifier operator is faced with a possible problem with permitting or
operational approval.
Thermogenics may be forced into a suit to clarify this issue. How can a
gasifier be a gasifier only for one application? It appears as though the EPA
is being rather intransigent about this issue.
If you are interested in supporting the future of gasification, you may
wish to assist in this effort. At this point, the discussions are preliminary
with the EPA, and no legal action on their part has been taken, but we are
being cautious about this issue.
Let us know your thoughts on this. We have a copy of the proposed
regulations exempting the refineries but cannot provide a URL as we cannot
find them on the EPA site.

Sincerely,
Leland T. Taylor
President
Thermogenics Inc.
7100-2nd St. NW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87107
phone 505-761-5633 fax 505-341-0424
Attached files are zipped and can be decompressed with <A
HREF="http://www.aladdinsys.com/expander/">www.aladdinsys.com/expander/ </A>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Mon Jun 24 08:15:26 2002
From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>
Message-ID: <20020624231526.GC12931@cybershamanix.com>

Has anyone ever tried cleaning the NOx out of the woodgas prior to feeding it
to an engine by, say, running it thru a catalytic convertor? Or any other
method? Seems like that would greatly enhance the power of the woodgas, and,
since cars do it that way for the exhaust, why not for a gasifier?

--
Harmon Seaver
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tombreed at attbi.com Mon Jun 24 20:10:27 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>
Message-ID: <006101c21c40$a9088df0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Harmon:

Sounds like you may be confused...

First, there is very little "high temperature NOx" - probably less than 1
ppm - in wood gas because the flame temperature is lower than that of
hydrocarbons.

Second, there is very little "prompt" NOx because wood contains very little
nitrogen - probably less than 10 ppm. Other biomass, however, can be worse
offenders...

Third, conversion of the NOx to N2 and O2 will yield VERY little power at
this level.

Any other opinions out there?

Cheers, Tom Reed BEF GASWORKS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harmon Seaver" <hseaver@cybershamanix.com>
To: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 5:15 PM
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers

> Has anyone ever tried cleaning the NOx out of the woodgas prior to
feeding it
> to an engine by, say, running it thru a catalytic convertor? Or any other
> method? Seems like that would greatly enhance the power of the woodgas,
and,
> since cars do it that way for the exhaust, why not for a gasifier?
>
>
> --
> Harmon Seaver
> CyberShamanix
> http://www.cybershamanix.com
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Mon Jun 24 20:48:22 2002
From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>
Message-ID: <20020625114828.GA13560@cybershamanix.com>

Well, maybe I am confused. I got the idea somewhere that a lot of NOx was
being created in the gasifier, just as it is in an IC engine, simply because the
major component of air is nitrogen, not that it's a component of the fuel.

On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 06:05:55AM -0600, Tom Reed wrote:
> Dear Harmon:
>
> Sounds like you may be confused...
>
> First, there is very little "high temperature NOx" - probably less than 1
> ppm - in wood gas because the flame temperature is lower than that of
> hydrocarbons.
>
> Second, there is very little "prompt" NOx because wood contains very little
> nitrogen - probably less than 10 ppm. Other biomass, however, can be worse
> offenders...
>
> Third, conversion of the NOx to N2 and O2 will yield VERY little power at
> this level.
>
> Any other opinions out there?
>
> Cheers, Tom Reed BEF GASWORKS
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Harmon Seaver" <hseaver@cybershamanix.com>
> To: <gasification@crest.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 5:15 PM
> Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
>
>
> > Has anyone ever tried cleaning the NOx out of the woodgas prior to
> feeding it
> > to an engine by, say, running it thru a catalytic convertor? Or any other
> > method? Seems like that would greatly enhance the power of the woodgas,
> and,
> > since cars do it that way for the exhaust, why not for a gasifier?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Harmon Seaver
> > CyberShamanix
> > http://www.cybershamanix.com
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> >
> >
>

--
Harmon Seaver
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From claush at et.dtu.dk Mon Jun 24 22:25:58 2002
From: claush at et.dtu.dk (Claus Hindsgaul)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>
Message-ID: <1025015175.1667.6.camel@ip7071120>

tir, 2002-06-25 kl. 14:05 skrev Tom Reed:
> First, there is very little "high temperature NOx" - probably less than 1
> ppm - in wood gas because the flame temperature is lower than that of
> hydrocarbons.

I don't quite agree on that.

Our measurements of emissions from an IC engine[1] fueled by superficial
wood gas (mixed from flask without e.g. tars and NH3) showed NOx
emissions for lambda<1.5. Indeed they were lower than for natural gas
with this engine, but not negligible.

At the Biomass Conference in Amsterdam last week, a poster claimed that
80-100% of NH3 was converted to NOx during flame(!) combustion.

At the same conference Markus Kleinhappl presented measurements of NH3
levels in the gas from their double fire gasifier in Graz in Austria to
150-800 mg/Nm3. He claimed that a limit of <55 mg/Nm3 should be met for
engine operation.

Here at the DTU two-stage gasifier we also have massive amounts of NH3
in our gas condensate. We have not yet measured the NH3 concentration in
our gas. Tar is no longer an issue here, but it may be necessary to
remove some NH3 from the gas in order to meet NOx-regulations.

Fortunately NH3 is miscible in water so I expect it to be easy obtain
lower levels using water scrubbers. Only if there are tars in the gas,
the NH3 contaminated water needs special treatment. Otherwise it may be
processed at (Danish) biological surridge plants.

Can anybody elaborate on NH3 and NOx in wood gas and engine exhaust?
Measurements of either would be very interesting.

Claus Hindsgaul

[1] Jesper Ahrenfeldt, Torben Kvist Jensen, Ulrik Henriksen and
Jesper Schramm: "Experiments with Wood Gas Engines". SAE paper
2001-01-3681, September 2001

--
Research Assistant M. Sc. Claus Hindsgaul
MEK, DTU, Building 120 - DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
Phone: (+45) 4525 4174 - FAX: (+45) 4593 5761
claush@mek.dtu.dk, http://www.et.dtu.dk/Halmfortet

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From mnorris at dekaresearch.com Mon Jun 24 23:39:14 2002
From: mnorris at dekaresearch.com (Mike Norris)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
Message-ID: <BF9F15B6F927D611B59F000255C705A0A29848@EXCHANGE1>

I don't believe there is much point in "cleaning" the wood gas as the
original question focused on. My simplified view of a gasifier for NOx
formation is the fuel is burned very rich, where the low temperature and
oxygen starved atmosphere suppress the formation of NOx. Any NOx that is
formed is likely to be reduced to N2 as carbon and hydrogen radicals
complete for the O atom within the gasifier.

Some of the nitrogen in the fuel or air will be reduced (as opposed to
oxidized) to NH3 and HCN. These species are less stable than N2 and more
likely to form NOx, when the wood gas is burned with additional air in an
engine. I can not think of a good way to extract N2 from NH3 and HCN
without oxidizing the whole mixture. By the way, NH3 should make a dandy
fuel as it has 40% of the heating value of kerosene.

The main source of NOx in the exhaust of the engine is likely to be "Thermal
NOx" resulting from relatively long residence times at high temperature in
the presence of oxygen. The thermal NOx is formed in the secondary
combustion process, when the wood gas is burned with air. I believe the
Thermal NOx problem using woodgas
is the same as with any other fuel. Thermal NOx can be controlled by
burning at a fairly cool temperature (Adiabatic flame temps < 1300 deg C).
This can be accomplished by adding significant amounts of excess air or
recycling significant amounts of exhaust gas. Actually I would expect wood
gas to burn at a fairly
low temperature due to the low energy density of the fuel.

Dr. Mike Norris
Staff Scientist
DEKA Research and Development
Manchester NH

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Claus Hindsgaul [SMTP:claush@et.dtu.dk]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 10:26 AM
> To: gasification
> Subject: Re: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
>
> tir, 2002-06-25 kl. 14:05 skrev Tom Reed:
> > First, there is very little "high temperature NOx" - probably less
> than 1
> > ppm - in wood gas because the flame temperature is lower than that of
> > hydrocarbons.
>
> I don't quite agree on that.
>
> Our measurements of emissions from an IC engine[1] fueled by superficial
> wood gas (mixed from flask without e.g. tars and NH3) showed NOx
> emissions for lambda<1.5. Indeed they were lower than for natural gas
> with this engine, but not negligible.
>
> At the Biomass Conference in Amsterdam last week, a poster claimed that
> 80-100% of NH3 was converted to NOx during flame(!) combustion.
>
> At the same conference Markus Kleinhappl presented measurements of NH3
> levels in the gas from their double fire gasifier in Graz in Austria to
> 150-800 mg/Nm3. He claimed that a limit of <55 mg/Nm3 should be met for
> engine operation.
>
> Here at the DTU two-stage gasifier we also have massive amounts of NH3
> in our gas condensate. We have not yet measured the NH3 concentration in
> our gas. Tar is no longer an issue here, but it may be necessary to
> remove some NH3 from the gas in order to meet NOx-regulations.
>
> Fortunately NH3 is miscible in water so I expect it to be easy obtain
> lower levels using water scrubbers. Only if there are tars in the gas,
> the NH3 contaminated water needs special treatment. Otherwise it may be
> processed at (Danish) biological surridge plants.
>
> Can anybody elaborate on NH3 and NOx in wood gas and engine exhaust?
> Measurements of either would be very interesting.
>
> Claus Hindsgaul
>
>
> [1] Jesper Ahrenfeldt, Torben Kvist Jensen, Ulrik Henriksen and
> Jesper Schramm: "Experiments with Wood Gas Engines". SAE paper
> 2001-01-3681, September 2001
>
>
> --
> Research Assistant M. Sc. Claus Hindsgaul
> MEK, DTU, Building 120 - DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
> Phone: (+45) 4525 4174 - FAX: (+45) 4593 5761
> claush@mek.dtu.dk, http://www.et.dtu.dk/Halmfortet
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tami.bond at noaa.gov Tue Jun 25 00:41:01 2002
From: tami.bond at noaa.gov (Tami Bond)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>
Message-ID: <3D189CDC.DF59BCEE@noaa.gov>

> Any other opinions out there?

I agree... what is gasification temperature? 'Thermal' NOx isn't
significant for temperatures below about 1400 C.

I don't understand why NOx removal would add power, either but would be
happy to learn what I'm missing.

Further, I wonder whether a standard exhaust cat wouldn't choke up or
make worse stuff (HCN?) from the woodgas.

Tami

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tami.bond at noaa.gov Tue Jun 25 01:01:59 2002
From: tami.bond at noaa.gov (Tami Bond)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <002001c21af4$d2ebb400$a081e2d1@hp>
Message-ID: <3D18A1D5.691202F1@noaa.gov>

Oh, I should have read those more detailed messages before I responded
to Tom...

I think Harmon was talking about cleaning NOx out *before* the engine,
yes? So the relevant temp would be gasification temp, not engine temp
which would be a fair bit higher. The issue raised by Claus is
different-- cleaning up the woodgas to affect the final exhaust content.

Claus says:

> Our measurements of emissions from an IC engine[1] fueled by superficial
> wood gas (mixed from flask without e.g. tars and NH3) showed NOx
> emissions for lambda<1.5. Indeed they were lower than for natural gas
> with this engine, but not negligible.

It is interesting that woodgas produces lower emissions than natural
gas. I guess the gasification/engine sequence might be similar to the
'rich-quench-lean' strategy for NOx reduction in turbines, just a little
more physically spread out. Never thought about that before!

> At the Biomass Conference in Amsterdam last week, a poster claimed that
> 80-100% of NH3 was converted to NOx during flame(!) combustion.
> At the same conference Markus Kleinhappl presented measurements of NH3...

Questions following this and Mike's info:

- What is adiabatic flame temp (range) of woodgas?
- Does most NOx in final exhaust come from thermal mechanism or NH3
conversion?
- Where does the NH3 in woodgas come from? Mike says either air or fuel,
but Tom says there is low N in the feedstock. The source matters because
you might expect to have NOx problems with different feedstocks if the
fuel is the major source.

Tami

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From gelman at daf-trade.com Wed Jun 26 03:38:00 2002
From: gelman at daf-trade.com (Ilya Gelman)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: coal gasifiers used in CHP plants
Message-ID: <13716480157.20020626144022@daf-trade.com>

Hi to all.

First of all I want to know that I`m in the right group.
I`m researching and interesting in coal gasifiers used in CHP plants.

Thank you.

Ilya Gelman (Mr)

Russia

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From parikh at me.iitb.ac.in Wed Jun 26 04:24:22 2002
From: parikh at me.iitb.ac.in (Prof P P Parikh)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <006101c21c40$a9088df0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0206261350510.17335-100000@epsilon.me.iitb.ac.in>

Nox in producer gas is a myth. Lower temperatures and oxugen defficiency
will not make this happen. Yes, nox in engine exhaust is a good
possibility as with any other fuel. I will look for data and write
back. Shashikanth did measure NOX in SIPGE.
Mrs Parikh

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Prof. (Mrs.) P.P.Parikh Phone Office : 5723496, 5767548
Dept. of Mechanical Engg. 5722545 Ext. 7548 / 8385
I.I.T. Bombay Home : 5704646
Mumbai 400 076 INDIA Fax Office : 5723496, 5723480

email : parikh@me.iitb.ac.in
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Wed Jun 26 04:43:31 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
Message-ID: <003f01c21ced$efdf2240$12ff58db@newpc>

Dear Gasification Colleagues,

It is easy to understand the confusion that exists about gasification in a
general sense as the phenomenon can be found anywhere you create fire.
However, for this interest group to include gasifying stoves is in my
opinion incorrect, as they should be identified by their correct name of
double burning or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers call them,
and as such stay in the stoves forum.

For people researching gasification and interested in using gas to use
separately for whatever end use, this is the one group who can offer the
most assistance and information on the subject, particularly if it is for
engine applications. Those of us who actually work in this field of
technology have made a commitment to see gasification fulfill an important
role as a source of renewable energy and chemical feedstock. To cross
pollinate gasification with close coupled combustion, then discuss adapting
these stoves for engines is less than helpful to those who seek accurate
information about gasification.

While it might be important for individuals to buy a small gasifier, it is
equally important for the manufacturer to find enough individuals to create
a market. Then, instead of saying how much are small gasifiers, ask
yourself - how much am I prepared to pay for one. This is a valid question,
so state your financial ability to pay for your commitment to renewable
energy.

Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a manufacturer first), get
a quote and order 50. Then onsell to those who just want one unit. If this
isn't a solution for you specifically, then you have to accept that the only
way to own one, is to build it yourself. Since I posted the design for a
small gasifier on the Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list has
written to me saying "I'm ready to go, what's next?"

Last August in Northern Ireland, two French engineering students working at
ITI (Innovation Technologies Ireland) built one out of salvaged scrap steel
and I shared their excitement of having it flaring gas within 3 minutes of
ignition. I'll see if I can find the photographs and ask Graeme to put them
up on the Fluidyne Archive - www.fluidynenz.250x.com. This will take a
couple of days.

Gasification is very addictive and a lot of fun . . . so let's discuss
making gas and not heat, unless it's burning gas!

Doug Williams

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Wed Jun 26 04:45:15 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
Message-ID: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>

Dear Colleagues,

During the years that we have been playing with producer gas, both in
engines for power generation and for process heat in timber kilns, at no
time has NOx been an emission problem.

Although gasifier temperatures are high, it appears that it just doesn't
happen in this process although I suppose anything is possible given certain
conditions existing.

The adiabatic flame temperature of clean producer gas ie tar free has never
exceeded 1100 degrees Celcius, in our experience, and in fact is one of the
measures we use to check to see if tar is present in the gas stream.

Hope this helps.

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tombreed at attbi.com Wed Jun 26 07:38:04 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and True Flame temperatures
In-Reply-To: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <000801c21d05$6fcbe2b0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Graeme and all:

Glad to have confirmation of my NOx suspicions from Graeme.

~~~~~~~~~~
However, I would warn all about flame temperatures measured with
thermocouples. The thermocouples radiate the heat transferred by the flame
VERY efficiently, and so can come to a temperature as low as half the true
flame temperature. This can be fixed using a suction thermocouple which
increases the velocity and heat transfer over the thermocouple (and the cost
and complexity of the measurement).

The adiabatic flame temperature of most fuels is about 2000 C +/- 200 C.
(See North American Handbook, Vol 1). Acetylene in air is 2632, CO is 2468,
H2 is 2210, methane is 1920, methanol is 1910 and PRODUER GAS is 1654 C
(because it is so dilute).

If you hold a platinum wire (or nichrome) in a methane Bunsen burner flame,
it will reach a yellow to white heat, 1000 to 1100 C, even though the true
flame temperature is 1920.

So beware most quoted "flame temperatures".

Yours truly, TOM REED BEF GASWORKS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
To: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 2:43 AM
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> During the years that we have been playing with producer gas, both in
> engines for power generation and for process heat in timber kilns, at no
> time has NOx been an emission problem.
>
> Although gasifier temperatures are high, it appears that it just doesn't
> happen in this process although I suppose anything is possible given
certain
> conditions existing.
>
> The adiabatic flame temperature of clean producer gas ie tar free has
never
> exceeded 1100 degrees Celcius, in our experience, and in fact is one of
the
> measures we use to check to see if tar is present in the gas stream.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Doug Williams
> FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tombreed at attbi.com Wed Jun 26 07:41:47 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:00 2004
Subject: Whoops, NOx and True Flame temperatures
Message-ID: <001301c21d05$fc65fee0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Doug, Graeme and all:

Whoops! Sorry my last post was to Graeme when it should have been to Doug
Williams (father?). I DO know the difference....

TOM REED
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Reed" <tombreed@attbi.com>
To: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>; <gasification@crest.org>;
"Stoves" <Stoves@crest.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 5:34 AM
Subject: NOx and True Flame temperatures

> Dear Graeme and all:
>
> Glad to have confirmation of my NOx suspicions from Graeme.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> However, I would warn all about flame temperatures measured with
> thermocouples. The thermocouples radiate the heat transferred by the
flame
> VERY efficiently, and so can come to a temperature as low as half the true
> flame temperature. This can be fixed using a suction thermocouple which
> increases the velocity and heat transfer over the thermocouple (and the
cost
> and complexity of the measurement).
>
> The adiabatic flame temperature of most fuels is about 2000 C +/- 200 C.
> (See North American Handbook, Vol 1). Acetylene in air is 2632, CO is
2468,
> H2 is 2210, methane is 1920, methanol is 1910 and PRODUER GAS is 1654 C
> (because it is so dilute).
>
> If you hold a platinum wire (or nichrome) in a methane Bunsen burner
flame,
> it will reach a yellow to white heat, 1000 to 1100 C, even though the true
> flame temperature is 1920.
>
> So beware most quoted "flame temperatures".
>
> Yours truly, TOM REED BEF GASWORKS
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
> To: <gasification@crest.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 2:43 AM
> Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
>
>
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > During the years that we have been playing with producer gas, both in
> > engines for power generation and for process heat in timber kilns, at no
> > time has NOx been an emission problem.
> >
> > Although gasifier temperatures are high, it appears that it just doesn't
> > happen in this process although I suppose anything is possible given
> certain
> > conditions existing.
> >
> > The adiabatic flame temperature of clean producer gas ie tar free has
> never
> > exceeded 1100 degrees Celcius, in our experience, and in fact is one of
> the
> > measures we use to check to see if tar is present in the gas stream.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Doug Williams
> > FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
> >
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> >
> >
>

From psanders at ilstu.edu Wed Jun 26 11:24:31 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <003f01c21ced$efdf2240$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020626100445.01904900@mail.ilstu.edu>

Doug and all,

I can agree with Doug about "stoves" issues: Doug said "so let's discuss
[on the Gasification list-serve] making gas and not heat, unless it's
burning gas! "

Therefore, I will keep my "gasification list-serve" questions on the topic
of making and burning gas, and not about other "stove" issues.

Those from the Gasification list who contacted me about small-scale
gasifiers will receive appropriate extra messages "off list".

Doug, please help me with the following that comes from your message. You
wrote about small gasifiers that: "their correct name of double burning
or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers call them." I have
been on the Stoves list for over a year and this is the first time I have
heard this terminology and that there are commercial manufacturers of
them. Also, what someone calls a "smokeless stove" is possibly not a
true gasifier stove. Please tell me what you have in mind. What
commercial stoves, etc.

Also please provide the specific address so I can see your earlier
contribution. You wrote:
"Since I posted the design for a
small gasifier on the Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list has
written to me saying "I'm ready to go, what's next?" " I probably did
not look today at the correct place.

We also have not even established what is "small" in gasifier terms.

I GREATLY appreciate you knowledge, and I will strive to keep to the issues
of "gasification".

I am sending this message to our colleagues on the "Stoves" list. They
(we) can discuss this topic there also, noting that only those who are
subscribed to both lists can post to both lists.

Stovers, let's make sure that anything to the Gasification list is
SPECIFIC about gasification.

Paul

At 08:36 PM 6/26/02 +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
>Dear Gasification Colleagues,
>
>It is easy to understand the confusion that exists about gasification in a
>general sense as the phenomenon can be found anywhere you create fire.
>However, for this interest group to include gasifying stoves is in my
>opinion incorrect, as they should be identified by their correct name of
>double burning or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers call them,
>and as such stay in the stoves forum.
>
>For people researching gasification and interested in using gas to use
>separately for whatever end use, this is the one group who can offer the
>most assistance and information on the subject, particularly if it is for
>engine applications. Those of us who actually work in this field of
>technology have made a commitment to see gasification fulfill an important
>role as a source of renewable energy and chemical feedstock. To cross
>pollinate gasification with close coupled combustion, then discuss adapting
>these stoves for engines is less than helpful to those who seek accurate
>information about gasification.
>
>While it might be important for individuals to buy a small gasifier, it is
>equally important for the manufacturer to find enough individuals to create
>a market. Then, instead of saying how much are small gasifiers, ask
>yourself - how much am I prepared to pay for one. This is a valid question,
>so state your financial ability to pay for your commitment to renewable
>energy.
>
>Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a manufacturer first), get
>a quote and order 50. Then onsell to those who just want one unit. If this
>isn't a solution for you specifically, then you have to accept that the only
>way to own one, is to build it yourself. Since I posted the design for a
>small gasifier on the Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list has
>written to me saying "I'm ready to go, what's next?"
>
>Last August in Northern Ireland, two French engineering students working at
>ITI (Innovation Technologies Ireland) built one out of salvaged scrap steel
>and I shared their excitement of having it flaring gas within 3 minutes of
>ignition. I'll see if I can find the photographs and ask Graeme to put them
>up on the Fluidyne Archive - www.fluidynenz.250x.com. This will take a
>couple of days.
>
>Gasification is very addictive and a lot of fun . . . so let's discuss
>making gas and not heat, unless it's burning gas!
>
>Doug Williams
>
>
>-
>Gasification List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
>Gasification List Moderator:
>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>www.webpan.com/BEF
>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

From tombreed at attbi.com Wed Jun 26 12:30:01 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
In-Reply-To: <003f01c21ced$efdf2240$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <009701c21d2e$39fd7c10$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Doug and All:

Doug's opinions below form the basis for an important discussion - "when is
gasification really just combustion". There is in fact a continuum of
operation between pyrolysis, gasification and combustion at both the
microscopic and macroscopic level. The exact boundary can't be nailed down
exactly, but it is important for all of us to understand the issues. I have
seen drag racers recently with flames coming out their exhaust pipes.
However, I don't think I want to call them "gasifiers".

Doug seems to be saying below that if you pipe the gas created by partial
combustion (in a downdraft or inverted downdraft or fluidized bed or updraft
"gasifier") to a separate device (engine, burner, chemical process) you have
a "true" gasifier; if you burn it immediately in close coupled mode it is
not really a gasifier at all. While I see some basis for this claim I don't
agree.

In our WoodGas stoves partial combustion gas is generated by flaming
pyrolysis in a zone 2-3 cm thick down inside the bed. The gas then passes
through a layer of characol which converts more of the gas to CO and H2.
The gas that issues from the charcoal many cm above the flaming pyrolysis
zone is then burned immediately. However, we could easily add a 6 inch or 6
foot chimney and inject air at the top for very similar combustion. By
Doug's thinking the first would be a combustor and the 2nd and 3d would be
gasifiers.

In the U.S. the difference between combustion and gasification has become
formalized in the laws relating to incentive credits for gasifiers that
don't apply to combustion. I have been involved in helping write the legal
definitions. Something like.."If you can establish a level BETWEEN the
gasifier zone and the combustion zone at which a gas sample will have an
energy value of more than 2 MJ/scm (50 Btu/scf) it is a close coupled
gasifier/combustor combination". If not, not. Since $$$ are involved, this
is obviously an important definition.

The close coupled gasifier/combustor combination has a number of advantages.
Optimal gasification of bone dry wood puts 17.8 MJ/kg into chemical energy,
but still leaves 3.3 MJ/kg in the sensible heat of the ~750 C gas coming off
the charcoal pile. If this is burned immediately you can approach 100%
efficiency in the gas conversion. If you have to cool the gas to room
temperature you lose 16% of the energy to coolant. Furthermore, close
coupled combustion burns all the volatile tar vapors up. Finally close
coupling saves space and our 1.5 V WoodGas CampStove is only 7 inches tall
and 5 inches in diameter.

So, I will restate that if you have producer gas in a section of the unit,
it is a close coupled gasifier/combustor.

> Dear Gasification Colleagues,
>
> It is easy to understand the confusion that exists about gasification in a
> general sense as the phenomenon can be found anywhere you create fire.
> However, for this interest group to include gasifying stoves is in my
> opinion incorrect, as they should be identified by their correct name of
> double burning or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers call
them,
> and as such stay in the stoves forum.
>
> For people researching gasification and interested in using gas to use
> separately for whatever end use, this is the one group who can offer the
> most assistance and information on the subject, particularly if it is for
> engine applications. Those of us who actually work in this field of
> technology have made a commitment to see gasification fulfill an important
> role as a source of renewable energy and chemical feedstock. To cross
> pollinate gasification with close coupled combustion, then discuss
adapting
> these stoves for engines is less than helpful to those who seek accurate
> information about gasification.
>
> While it might be important for individuals to buy a small gasifier, it is
> equally important for the manufacturer to find enough individuals to
create
> a market. Then, instead of saying how much are small gasifiers, ask
> yourself - how much am I prepared to pay for one. This is a valid
question,
> so state your financial ability to pay for your commitment to renewable
> energy.
>
> Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a manufacturer first),
get
> a quote and order 50. Then onsell to those who just want one unit. If
this
> isn't a solution for you specifically, then you have to accept that the
only
> way to own one, is to build it yourself. Since I posted the design for a
> small gasifier on the Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list has
> written to me saying "I'm ready to go, what's next?"
>
> Last August in Northern Ireland, two French engineering students working
at
> ITI (Innovation Technologies Ireland) built one out of salvaged scrap
steel
> and I shared their excitement of having it flaring gas within 3 minutes of
> ignition. I'll see if I can find the photographs and ask Graeme to put
them
> up on the Fluidyne Archive - www.fluidynenz.250x.com. This will take a
> couple of days.
>
> Gasification is very addictive and a lot of fun . . . so let's discuss
> making gas and not heat, unless it's burning gas!
>
> Doug Williams
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Wed Jun 26 13:23:57 2002
From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
In-Reply-To: <003f01c21ced$efdf2240$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <20020626162413.GD16059@cybershamanix.com>

I think what Doug means is that we have a gas-l list and a stoves list,
people who want to discuss either should do so on the appropriate list, we don't
want the gas-l list to become the stoves list. I'm on both, both are good, but
different.
However, Tom brings up another point that is of great interest to me. I've
been looking seriously at building a Tesla turbine to be fueled by woodgas
and/or steam. On another list, someone working with the Tesla turbine said they
didn't see any need for either cooling or filtering woodgas before feeding it to
the turbine, although they did think that perhps steam could be created in the
gasification process or along with it and fed with the woodgas. Has anyone tried
this with *any* sort of turbine? As Toms says, this seems to be a much more
efficient use, at least in stoves.
I understand why it needs to be both cooled and filtered for an IC piston
engine -- does this also hold true for turbines?

On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 10:26:28AM -0600, Tom Reed wrote:
> Dear Doug and All:
>
> Doug's opinions below form the basis for an important discussion - "when is
> gasification really just combustion". There is in fact a continuum of
> operation between pyrolysis, gasification and combustion at both the
> microscopic and macroscopic level. The exact boundary can't be nailed down
> exactly, but it is important for all of us to understand the issues. I have
> seen drag racers recently with flames coming out their exhaust pipes.
> However, I don't think I want to call them "gasifiers".
>
> Doug seems to be saying below that if you pipe the gas created by partial
> combustion (in a downdraft or inverted downdraft or fluidized bed or updraft
> "gasifier") to a separate device (engine, burner, chemical process) you have
> a "true" gasifier; if you burn it immediately in close coupled mode it is
> not really a gasifier at all. While I see some basis for this claim I don't
> agree.
>
> In our WoodGas stoves partial combustion gas is generated by flaming
> pyrolysis in a zone 2-3 cm thick down inside the bed. The gas then passes
> through a layer of characol which converts more of the gas to CO and H2.
> The gas that issues from the charcoal many cm above the flaming pyrolysis
> zone is then burned immediately. However, we could easily add a 6 inch or 6
> foot chimney and inject air at the top for very similar combustion. By
> Doug's thinking the first would be a combustor and the 2nd and 3d would be
> gasifiers.
>
> In the U.S. the difference between combustion and gasification has become
> formalized in the laws relating to incentive credits for gasifiers that
> don't apply to combustion. I have been involved in helping write the legal
> definitions. Something like.."If you can establish a level BETWEEN the
> gasifier zone and the combustion zone at which a gas sample will have an
> energy value of more than 2 MJ/scm (50 Btu/scf) it is a close coupled
> gasifier/combustor combination". If not, not. Since $$$ are involved, this
> is obviously an important definition.
>
> The close coupled gasifier/combustor combination has a number of advantages.
> Optimal gasification of bone dry wood puts 17.8 MJ/kg into chemical energy,
> but still leaves 3.3 MJ/kg in the sensible heat of the ~750 C gas coming off
> the charcoal pile. If this is burned immediately you can approach 100%
> efficiency in the gas conversion. If you have to cool the gas to room
> temperature you lose 16% of the energy to coolant. Furthermore, close
> coupled combustion burns all the volatile tar vapors up. Finally close
> coupling saves space and our 1.5 V WoodGas CampStove is only 7 inches tall
> and 5 inches in diameter.
>
> So, I will restate that if you have producer gas in a section of the unit,
> it is a close coupled gasifier/combustor.
>
> Yours truly, TOM REED BEF GASWORKS
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
> To: <gasification@crest.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 2:36 AM
> Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
>
>
> > Dear Gasification Colleagues,
> >
> > It is easy to understand the confusion that exists about gasification in a
> > general sense as the phenomenon can be found anywhere you create fire.
> > However, for this interest group to include gasifying stoves is in my
> > opinion incorrect, as they should be identified by their correct name of
> > double burning or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers call
> them,
> > and as such stay in the stoves forum.
> >
> > For people researching gasification and interested in using gas to use
> > separately for whatever end use, this is the one group who can offer the
> > most assistance and information on the subject, particularly if it is for
> > engine applications. Those of us who actually work in this field of
> > technology have made a commitment to see gasification fulfill an important
> > role as a source of renewable energy and chemical feedstock. To cross
> > pollinate gasification with close coupled combustion, then discuss
> adapting
> > these stoves for engines is less than helpful to those who seek accurate
> > information about gasification.
> >
> > While it might be important for individuals to buy a small gasifier, it is
> > equally important for the manufacturer to find enough individuals to
> create
> > a market. Then, instead of saying how much are small gasifiers, ask
> > yourself - how much am I prepared to pay for one. This is a valid
> question,
> > so state your financial ability to pay for your commitment to renewable
> > energy.
> >
> > Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a manufacturer first),
> get
> > a quote and order 50. Then onsell to those who just want one unit. If
> this
> > isn't a solution for you specifically, then you have to accept that the
> only
> > way to own one, is to build it yourself. Since I posted the design for a
> > small gasifier on the Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list has
> > written to me saying "I'm ready to go, what's next?"
> >
> > Last August in Northern Ireland, two French engineering students working
> at
> > ITI (Innovation Technologies Ireland) built one out of salvaged scrap
> steel
> > and I shared their excitement of having it flaring gas within 3 minutes of
> > ignition. I'll see if I can find the photographs and ask Graeme to put
> them
> > up on the Fluidyne Archive - www.fluidynenz.250x.com. This will take a
> > couple of days.
> >
> > Gasification is very addictive and a lot of fun . . . so let's discuss
> > making gas and not heat, unless it's burning gas!
> >
> > Doug Williams
> >
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

--
Harmon Seaver
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com

From patravis at energyproducts.com Wed Jun 26 13:46:02 2002
From: patravis at energyproducts.com (Pat Travis)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
Message-ID: <sd199659.064@energyproducts.com>

Dear Tom and GAS-L subscribers,

When defining or putting a "label" onto a
process such as gasification there are two distinct audiences that must be
considered from a commercial standpoint. The first is the regulatory and
technical community and the second is the general public.

EPI uses 3 terms for our energy systems. The first,
"Combustion", is very straight forward and covers projects utilizing standard
fluidized bed combustors which generate heat for process or power
applications.

The second, "Gasification",  is used when we produce
a low Btu gas (LBG) in an oxygen deficient atmosphere and burn the LBG in a
second piece of equipment utilizing a specially designed LBG burner, such as a
gas boiler, or by injecting it directly into an existing coal fired boiler as a
reburn gas. In either case, the LBG is transferred to a separate
piece of equipment for combustion. This is done without cooling the LBG,
therefore radiant losses from transporting the LBG between the gasifier and the
end use device is the only energy loss. This type of two part
process is easy for the public to understand and the one I typically find
associated with gasification. The same definition applies to processes where the
LBG or MBG is cooled prior to use, such as in an engine or turbine.

The third, "Staged Combustion", is used to describe what some
people may consider a close coupled gasifier. In this process we combine a
fluidized bed gasifier bottom with the upper section from a combustor.
We generate LBG in the lower portion of the vessel and when it reaches
a specific elevation above the gasifier section, combustion air (including dirty
process exhaust gases with a high VOC content) is injected and the LBG is
ignited. This provides energy for process applications and/or for power
production. Most lay people do not consider this close coupled system a
gasifier. Therefore while we could call it "Staged Gasification" or a "Close
Coupled Gasifier", we have elected to call it staged combustion.

I leave it to those better qualified than myself to set the
legal definitions.

Patrick Travis     Energy Products of
Idaho (EPI)
>>> "Tom Reed" <tombreed@attbi.com> 06/26/02 09:26AM
>>>Dear Doug and All:Doug's opinions below form the basis
for an important discussion - "when isgasification really just
combustion". There is in fact a continuum ofoperation between
pyrolysis, gasification and combustion at both themicroscopic and
macroscopic level. The exact boundary can't be nailed downexactly, but it is
important for all of us to understand the issues. I haveseen drag racers
recently with flames coming out their exhaust pipes.However, I don't think I
want to call them "gasifiers".Doug seems to be saying below that if you
pipe the gas created by partialcombustion (in a downdraft or inverted
downdraft or fluidized bed or updraft"gasifier") to a separate device
(engine, burner, chemical process) you havea "true" gasifier; if you burn it
immediately in close coupled mode it isnot really a gasifier at all.
While I see some basis for this claim I don'tagree.In our WoodGas
stoves partial combustion gas is generated by flamingpyrolysis in a zone 2-3
cm thick down inside the bed. The gas then passesthrough a layer of
characol which converts more of the gas to CO and H2.The gas that issues
from the charcoal many cm above the flaming pyrolysiszone is then burned
immediately. However, we could easily add a 6 inch or 6foot chimney
and inject air at the top for very similar combustion. ByDoug's
thinking the first would be a combustor and the 2nd and 3d would
begasifiers.In the U.S. the difference between combustion and
gasification has becomeformalized in the laws relating to incentive
credits for gasifiers thatdon't apply to combustion. I have been
involved in helping write the legaldefinitions. Something like.."If
you can establish a level BETWEEN thegasifier zone and the combustion zone
at which a gas sample will have anenergy value of more than 2 MJ/scm (50
Btu/scf) it is a close coupledgasifier/combustor combination". If not,
not. Since $$$ are involved, thisis obviously an important
definition.The close coupled gasifier/combustor combination has a number
of advantages.Optimal gasification of bone dry wood puts 17.8 MJ/kg into
chemical energy,but still leaves 3.3 MJ/kg in the sensible heat of the ~750
C gas coming offthe charcoal pile. If this is burned immediately you
can approach 100%efficiency in the gas conversion. If you have to cool
the gas to roomtemperature you lose 16% of the energy to coolant.
Furthermore, closecoupled combustion burns all the volatile tar vapors
up. Finally closecoupling saves space and our 1.5 V WoodGas CampStove
is only 7 inches talland 5 inches in diameter.So, I will restate
that if you have producer gas in a section of the unit,it is a close coupled
gasifier/combustor.Yours
truly,
TOM REED            BEF
GASWORKS----- Original Message -----From: "Graeme Williams"
<graeme@powerlink.co.nz>To: <gasification@crest.org>Sent:
Wednesday, June 26, 2002 2:36 AMSubject: GAS-L: Small Scale
Gasifiers> Dear Gasification Colleagues,>> It is
easy to understand the confusion that exists about gasification in a>
general sense as the phenomenon can be found anywhere you create fire.>
However, for this interest group to include gasifying stoves is in my>
opinion incorrect, as they should be identified by their correct name of>
double burning or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers
callthem,> and as such stay in the stoves forum.>> For
people researching gasification and interested in using gas to use>
separately for whatever end use, this is the one group who can offer the>
most assistance and information on the subject, particularly if it is
for> engine applications. Those of us who actually work in this
field of> technology have made a commitment to see gasification fulfill
an important> role as a source of renewable energy and chemical
feedstock. To cross> pollinate gasification with close coupled
combustion, then discussadapting> these stoves for engines is less
than helpful to those who seek accurate> information about
gasification.>> While it might be important for individuals to buy
a small gasifier, it is> equally important for the manufacturer to find
enough individuals tocreate> a market. Then, instead of saying
how much are small gasifiers, ask> yourself - how much am I prepared to
pay for one. This is a validquestion,> so state your financial
ability to pay for your commitment to renewable> energy.>>
Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a manufacturer
first),get> a quote and order 50. Then onsell to those who just
want one unit. Ifthis> isn't a solution for you specifically,
then you have to accept that theonly> way to own one, is to build it
yourself. Since I posted the design for a> small gasifier on the
Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list has> written to me saying
"I'm ready to go, what's next?">> Last August in Northern Ireland,
two French engineering students workingat> ITI (Innovation
Technologies Ireland) built one out of salvaged scrapsteel> and I
shared their excitement of having it flaring gas within 3 minutes of>
ignition. I'll see if I can find the photographs and ask Graeme to
putthem> up on the Fluidyne Archive - <A
href="http://www.fluidynenz.250x.com. /">www.fluidynenz.250x.com.
This will take a> couple of days.>> Gasification is very
addictive and a lot of fun . . . so let's discuss> making gas and not
heat, unless it's burning gas!>> Doug
Williams>>> -> Gasification List Archives:>
<A
href="http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/">http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/>>
Gasification List Moderator:> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,
Reedtb2@cs.com> <A
href="http://www.webpan.com/BEF">www.webpan.com/BEF> List-Post:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification@crest.org">mailto:gasification@crest.org>>
List-Help: <<A
href="mailto:gasification-help@crest.org">mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>>
List-Unsubscribe: <<A
href="mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>>
List-Subscribe: <<A
href="mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>>>
Sponsor the Gasification List: <A
href="http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html">http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html>
-> Other Gasification Events and Information:> <A
href="http://www.bioenergy2002.org/">http://www.bioenergy2002.org> <A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html
Bioenergy> <A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html
Gasification> <A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html
Carbon>>-Gasification List Archives:<A
href="http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/">http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/Gasification
List Moderator:Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,
Reedtb2@cs.com<A
href="http://www.webpan.com/BEF">www.webpan.com/BEFList-Post: <<A
href="mailto:gasification@crest.org">mailto:gasification@crest.org>List-Help:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification-help@crest.org">mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>List-Unsubscribe:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>List-Subscribe:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>Sponsor
the Gasification List: <A
href="http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html">http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html-Other
Gasification Events and Information:<A
href="http://www.bioenergy2002.org/">http://www.bioenergy2002.org<A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html
Bioenergy<A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html
Gasification<A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html
Carbon

From joflo at yifan.net Wed Jun 26 14:41:46 2002
From: joflo at yifan.net (Joel Florian)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Turbine fired by woodchips
In-Reply-To: <009701c21d2e$39fd7c10$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20020626101025.009f6ee0@yifan.net>

Dear Harmon (and those who might be interested),

You asked if anyone has tried running wood gas through a turbine without
filtering or cooling.

I have on my desk a paper titled "Ash Deposition in a Wood-Fired Gas
Turbine" by K. W. Ragland, M.K. Misra, D. J. Aerts, C. A. Palmer. From the
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin -- Madison.
This was graciously sent to my by Dan White of
http://www.geocities.com/ufoengines/.

The abstract reads as follows:

"A small four-stage gas turbine was directly fired with woodchips using a
novel downdraft, gravel-bed combustor for a total of 250 hours of
tests. The average turbine blockage due to deposits was 0.19 percent per
hour. The composition of deposits was studied using plasma emission
spectroscopy and x-ray diffraction. The main consituents of the deposits
were CaO, Mgo, and K2SO4. The deposits contained 5 to 15 percent potassium
and 0.5 to 3 percent sulfur."

Excerpts from the intro : "A combined gas turbine-steam turbine cycle is
thermodynamically more efficient than the steam turbine alone as a source
of electricity and heat. Direct firing of a gas turbine with biomass is
potentially more cost effective than indirect firing using a heat
exchanger, or gasification of biomass prior to combustion. Although
considerable work has been doen on deposits from coal-fired gas turbine
combustors (Logan et al., 1990; Spiro et al., 1987, 1990 Wenglarz and Fox,
1990), little work has been reported on deposits from wood-fired gas
turbine combustors.... A novel gravel-bed, downdraft combustor for a
direct-fired biomass gas turbien cycle is being developed (Ragland and
Aerts, 1992, 1989; Ragland et al., 1991). The combustor is designed to
promote intense combustion in a thin zone and to control particulate growth
by using high excess air...."

Salient points from the body: 2cm woodchips fed from lock hopper into a
combustor fed with air pressurized approaching 5 atm. Outlet temp held to
900 C by excess air. Turbine rated at 400 hp @ 51000 rpm. Run at 80 %
speed with net power of 75 hp or less. Bearings failed because some of the
refractory gravel got into the turbine. 5400 kg of yellow poplar chips and
370 kg of aspen were burned during the tests

Conclusion: A four-stage Allison 250-C20B gas turbine was run at low power
on woodchips for 130 hours of tests. inspected and cleaned and run for
another 122 hours using a direct fired gravel bed combustor. The deposits
were 1mm to 1.6 mm thick on the nozzles and 0.1 to 0.5 mm thick on the
rotors. The average turbine blockage was 0.19 percent per hour. the main
deposits were calcium oxide, magnesium oxide, and potassium
sulfate. Although the potassium content of the wood was 0.1 percent and
sulfur content was only 0.007 percent potassium and sulfur play an
important role in formation of deposits on the turbine nozzles and
rotors. Further work is needed to determine the extent to which hot gas
cleanup may be required between the combustor and turbine when using
woodchips."

Interesting -- but not enough of a resounding success to change state of
the art......

Joel Florian.
Happily burning spruce sawdust in Alaska

At 11:24 AM 6/26/02 -0500, you wrote:
> I think what Doug means is that we have a gas-l list and a stoves list,
>people who want to discuss either should do so on the appropriate list, we
>don't
>want the gas-l list to become the stoves list. I'm on both, both are good, but
>different.
> However, Tom brings up another point that is of great interest to me. I've
>been looking seriously at building a Tesla turbine to be fueled by woodgas
>and/or steam. On another list, someone working with the Tesla turbine said
>they
>didn't see any need for either cooling or filtering woodgas before feeding
>it to
>the turbine, although they did think that perhps steam could be created in the
>gasification process or along with it and fed with the woodgas. Has anyone
>tried
>this with *any* sort of turbine? As Toms says, this seems to be a much more
>efficient use, at least in stoves.
> I understand why it needs to be both cooled and filtered for an IC piston
>engine -- does this also hold true for turbines?
>
>
>On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 10:26:28AM -0600, Tom Reed wrote:
> > Dear Doug and All:
> >
> > Doug's opinions below form the basis for an important discussion - "when is
> > gasification really just combustion". There is in fact a continuum of
> > operation between pyrolysis, gasification and combustion at both the
> > microscopic and macroscopic level. The exact boundary can't be nailed down
> > exactly, but it is important for all of us to understand the issues. I have
> > seen drag racers recently with flames coming out their exhaust pipes.
> > However, I don't think I want to call them "gasifiers".
> >
> > Doug seems to be saying below that if you pipe the gas created by partial
> > combustion (in a downdraft or inverted downdraft or fluidized bed or
> updraft
> > "gasifier") to a separate device (engine, burner, chemical process) you
> have
> > a "true" gasifier; if you burn it immediately in close coupled mode it is
> > not really a gasifier at all. While I see some basis for this claim I
> don't
> > agree.
> >
> > In our WoodGas stoves partial combustion gas is generated by flaming
> > pyrolysis in a zone 2-3 cm thick down inside the bed. The gas then passes
> > through a layer of characol which converts more of the gas to CO and H2.
> > The gas that issues from the charcoal many cm above the flaming pyrolysis
> > zone is then burned immediately. However, we could easily add a 6 inch
> or 6
> > foot chimney and inject air at the top for very similar combustion. By
> > Doug's thinking the first would be a combustor and the 2nd and 3d would be
> > gasifiers.
> >
> > In the U.S. the difference between combustion and gasification has become
> > formalized in the laws relating to incentive credits for gasifiers that
> > don't apply to combustion. I have been involved in helping write the legal
> > definitions. Something like.."If you can establish a level BETWEEN the
> > gasifier zone and the combustion zone at which a gas sample will have an
> > energy value of more than 2 MJ/scm (50 Btu/scf) it is a close coupled
> > gasifier/combustor combination". If not, not. Since $$$ are involved,
> this
> > is obviously an important definition.
> >
> > The close coupled gasifier/combustor combination has a number of
> advantages.
> > Optimal gasification of bone dry wood puts 17.8 MJ/kg into chemical energy,
> > but still leaves 3.3 MJ/kg in the sensible heat of the ~750 C gas
> coming off
> > the charcoal pile. If this is burned immediately you can approach 100%
> > efficiency in the gas conversion. If you have to cool the gas to room
> > temperature you lose 16% of the energy to coolant. Furthermore, close
> > coupled combustion burns all the volatile tar vapors up. Finally close
> > coupling saves space and our 1.5 V WoodGas CampStove is only 7 inches tall
> > and 5 inches in diameter.
> >
> > So, I will restate that if you have producer gas in a section of the unit,
> > it is a close coupled gasifier/combustor.
> >
> > Yours truly, TOM REED BEF
> GASWORKS
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
> > To: <gasification@crest.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 2:36 AM
> > Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
> >
> >
> > > Dear Gasification Colleagues,
> > >
> > > It is easy to understand the confusion that exists about gasification
> in a
> > > general sense as the phenomenon can be found anywhere you create fire.
> > > However, for this interest group to include gasifying stoves is in my
> > > opinion incorrect, as they should be identified by their correct name of
> > > double burning or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers call
> > them,
> > > and as such stay in the stoves forum.
> > >
> > > For people researching gasification and interested in using gas to use
> > > separately for whatever end use, this is the one group who can offer the
> > > most assistance and information on the subject, particularly if it is for
> > > engine applications. Those of us who actually work in this field of
> > > technology have made a commitment to see gasification fulfill an
> important
> > > role as a source of renewable energy and chemical feedstock. To cross
> > > pollinate gasification with close coupled combustion, then discuss
> > adapting
> > > these stoves for engines is less than helpful to those who seek accurate
> > > information about gasification.
> > >
> > > While it might be important for individuals to buy a small gasifier,
> it is
> > > equally important for the manufacturer to find enough individuals to
> > create
> > > a market. Then, instead of saying how much are small gasifiers, ask
> > > yourself - how much am I prepared to pay for one. This is a valid
> > question,
> > > so state your financial ability to pay for your commitment to renewable
> > > energy.
> > >
> > > Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a manufacturer first),
> > get
> > > a quote and order 50. Then onsell to those who just want one unit. If
> > this
> > > isn't a solution for you specifically, then you have to accept that the
> > only
> > > way to own one, is to build it yourself. Since I posted the design for a
> > > small gasifier on the Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list has
> > > written to me saying "I'm ready to go, what's next?"
> > >
> > > Last August in Northern Ireland, two French engineering students working
> > at
> > > ITI (Innovation Technologies Ireland) built one out of salvaged scrap
> > steel
> > > and I shared their excitement of having it flaring gas within 3
> minutes of
> > > ignition. I'll see if I can find the photographs and ask Graeme to put
> > them
> > > up on the Fluidyne Archive - www.fluidynenz.250x.com. This will take a
> > > couple of days.
> > >
> > > Gasification is very addictive and a lot of fun . . . so let's discuss
> > > making gas and not heat, unless it's burning gas!
> > >
> > > Doug Williams
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > Gasification List Archives:
> > > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> > >
> > > Gasification List Moderator:
> > > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> > >
> > > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > > -
> > > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>--
>Harmon Seaver
>CyberShamanix
>http://www.cybershamanix.com
>
>-
>Gasification List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
>Gasification List Moderator:
>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>www.webpan.com/BEF
>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From CAVM at aol.com Wed Jun 26 14:52:47 2002
From: CAVM at aol.com (CAVM@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Turbine fired by woodchips
Message-ID: <182.a2dd946.2a4b676a@aol.com>

Is this direct fired turbine similar to the process used by Bioten? They
have a fluidized bed combustion unit fueled by biomass which powers a hot air
turbine to produce electrical power.

The system in Red Boiling Springs, TN uses about 15 tons per hour of biomass
to produce about 8 MW of electricity and 50 MBTU of heat. Steam is not used
in this system.

Neal Van Milligen
Kentucky Enrichment Inc.
CAVM@AOL.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From joflo at yifan.net Wed Jun 26 15:21:48 2002
From: joflo at yifan.net (Joel Florian)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Turbine fired by woodchips
In-Reply-To: <182.a2dd946.2a4b676a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20020626110810.0094c550@yifan.net>

I just did a search on Bioten and it appears that their whole facility in
Red Boiling Springs was auctioned the 13th of this month. There's a lot I
don't understand.

If you're interested, I can fax the diagram of what I have.

Joel,
Alaska

At 02:52 PM 6/26/02 -0400, you wrote:
>Is this direct fired turbine similar to the process used by Bioten? They
>have a fluidized bed combustion unit fueled by biomass which powers a hot air
>turbine to produce electrical power.
>
>The system in Red Boiling Springs, TN uses about 15 tons per hour of biomass
>to produce about 8 MW of electricity and 50 MBTU of heat. Steam is not used
>in this system.
>
>Neal Van Milligen
>Kentucky Enrichment Inc.
>CAVM@AOL.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Wed Jun 26 15:49:39 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
In-Reply-To: <sd199659.064@energyproducts.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020626140200.0191f100@mail.ilstu.edu>

Patrick and all,

Your explanation is excellent. Because your message did not make it
through to the "Stoves list serve", I am including it
below.

However, I must disagree with your conclusion. You wrote:
Most lay people do not consider this close coupled system a
gasifier. Therefore while we could call it "Staged
Gasification" or a "Close Coupled Gasifier", we have
elected to call it staged combustion.

Except for one year on the Stoves list serve, I am about as much
of a "lay person" as can be found. I definitely want the
word "Gasifier" or "Gasification" into the title
because the word "Combustion" is where the confusion takes
place. The word "combustion" is a lot like the word
"burn". Neither "combustion" nor
"burn" assists the lay person to appreciate what is happening
when the process of gasification becomes identifiably distinct from
simple "burning."

Yes, I like your explanation and I like the use of the word
"staged" or the words "close-coupled", (or perhaps
"closely staged"). But we do need to be sure that anyone
reading about these small "combustion chambers" (the name I use
to avoid calling them "stoves" that implies cooking) realizes
that gasification occurs, and that is "closely coupled" or
"staged" with whatever happens next.

And herein lies the problem. What would you call the "whatever
happens next" when the gases are mixed with air and
"consumed."??? We cannot use the word
"combustion" because it is too vague. Patrick's full
message (below) has a definition for "combustion" that
somehow is not the same as what happens to the gases after they are
produced.

I am just the interested lay person, so my next suggestion might be
useless: Could we call that "consuming of the
gases" to be considered as "flaring" (or perhaps
"flaming")????

If so, does that lead to the name of "combustion chamber for
gasification followed by close-coupled flaring"???   Or it
could be a "gasifier with close-coupled
flaring"    I think that captures what we have been
calling "small scale gasifiers".   I suspect that
there are some large gasifiers what have close-coupled
flaring.

Whatever happens about the final terminology, this discussion has been
helpful to me. It has also helped clarify the fairly wide gap
between those who do "big gasifiers" and those who do
"small gasifiers" (meaning the REALLY small ones.)

I look forward to future sharing of gasifier knowledge with you
all.

Paul

At 10:24 AM 6/26/02 -0700, Pat Travis wrote:
Dear Tom and GAS-L
subscribers,

When defining or putting a "label" onto a process
such as gasification there are two distinct audiences that must be
considered from a commercial standpoint. The first is the regulatory and
technical community and the second is the general public.

EPI uses 3 terms for our energy systems. The first,
"Combustion", is very straight forward and covers projects
utilizing standard fluidized bed combustors which generate heat for
process or power applications.

The second, "Gasification", is used when we
produce a low Btu gas (LBG) in an oxygen deficient atmosphere and burn
the LBG in a second piece of equipment utilizing a specially designed LBG
burner, such as a gas boiler, or by injecting it directly into an
existing coal fired boiler as a reburn gas. In either case, the LBG is
transferred to a separate piece of equipment for combustion. This is done
without cooling the LBG, therefore radiant losses from transporting the
LBG between the gasifier and the end use device is the only energy loss.
This type of two part process is easy for the public to understand and
the one I typically find associated with gasification. The same
definition applies to processes where the LBG or MBG is cooled prior to
use, such as in an engine or turbine.

The third, "Staged Combustion", is used to
describe what some people may consider a close coupled gasifier. In this
process we combine a fluidized bed gasifier bottom with the upper section
from a combustor. We generate LBG in the lower portion of the vessel and
when it reaches a specific elevation above the gasifier section,
combustion air (including dirty process exhaust gases with a high VOC
content) is injected and the LBG is ignited. This provides energy for
process applications and/or for power production. Most lay people do not
consider this close coupled system a gasifier. Therefore while we could
call it "Staged Gasification" or a "Close Coupled
Gasifier", we have elected to call it staged
combustion.

I leave it to those better qualified than myself to set the
legal definitions.

Patrick Travis Energy Products of
Idaho (EPI)

Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 -
7/00
Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of
2001-2003
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State
University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice:
309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items:
www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

From arnt at c2i.net Wed Jun 26 19:17:43 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <006101c21c40$a9088df0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>
Message-ID: <20020626234739.66fb58a5.arnt@c2i.net>

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 13:54:35 +0530,
Prof P P Parikh <parikh@me.iitb.ac.in> wrote in message
<Pine.GSO.4.21.0206261350510.17335-100000@epsilon.me.iitb.ac.in>:

> Nox in producer gas is a myth. Lower temperatures and oxugen
> defficiency will not make this happen. Yes, nox in engine exhaust is
> a good possibility as with any other fuel. I will look for data and
> write back. Shashikanth did measure NOX in SIPGE.
> Mrs Parikh

..your findings are in agreement with Mikko Hupa's work:
Kapitel 2.3 Kväveoxiderna. [Chapter 2.3 (the) Nitrogenoxides.]
Inverkan av vatten och väte i förbränningsprocessen
[Effect of water and hydrogen in (the) combustion process],
by Docent Mikko Hupa, Åbo Akademi, Finland, source book title:
Vattnets roll i förbränningen [Impact of water in combustion],
IVA Rapport 324, 27 May 1986, Isbn 91 7082 417 7

..essence of his theorem: NOx, NitrogenOxides
Fuel containing chemically bound Nitrogen decomposes
through cyanide, HCN to:

...either:
CxHyNz + heat ---> 2 HCN + 3 O2 ---> H2O + 2 CO2 + 2 NO
(combustion in oxidizing process environment, NOX is formed)

...or:
CxHyNz + heat ---> 2 HCN + O2---> H2 + 2 CO + N2
(thermochemical gasification in reducing process environment,
No NOX, N2 is formed instead.)

..myself, I just translated and used some of it, and some more.
(And IIIIIIIII did it myyyyyyyyyyyyyy waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay. ;-)
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/199903/msg00055.html
on http://www.ivar.rl.no/IDybden/avlop/analyse.biopellets.cfm
Translate from norwegian: http://www.tranexp.com/InterTran.cgi )

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From arnt at c2i.net Wed Jun 26 19:19:10 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: coal gasifiers used in CHP plants
In-Reply-To: <13716480157.20020626144022@daf-trade.com>
Message-ID: <20020627000002.06a192e7.arnt@c2i.net>

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 14:40:22 +0700,
Ilya Gelman <gelman@daf-trade.com> wrote in message
<13716480157.20020626144022@daf-trade.com>:

> Hi to all.
>
> First of all I want to know that I`m in the right group.
> I`m researching and interesting in coal gasifiers used in CHP plants.

..if you are looking into thermochemical gasification,
welcome onboard. Tell us more. Where in Russia are you?

..I wasnt aware of coal gasifiers in CHP plants in Russia,
are these common, or do you plan to make them common?
In my understanding, Russia and California share the power
shortage problem. Good business to be made both places.
I'm stuck in Norway there power is cheap to buy, but expensive
to make and transport on the grid.

> Thank you.
>
> Ilya Gelman (Mr)
>
> Russia

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From arnt at c2i.net Wed Jun 26 19:20:26 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <003f01c21ced$efdf2240$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <20020627001921.2a495ce9.arnt@c2i.net>

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 20:36:27 +1200,
"Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz> wrote in message
<003f01c21ced$efdf2240$12ff58db@newpc>:
>
> Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a manufacturer
> first), get a quote and order 50. Then onsell to those who just want
> one unit. If this isn't a solution for you specifically, then you
> have to accept that the only way to own one, is to build it yourself.

..0. First prove it can be run _profitably_.
If you, the gasifier producer can not do it, who else can?
Build it, pipe gas to a gen set, plug that to the grid,
dump in fuel, fire it up, sell power and pay your taxes.

> Last August in Northern Ireland, two French engineering students
> working at ITI (Innovation Technologies Ireland) built one out of
> salvaged scrap steel and I shared their excitement of having it
> flaring gas within 3 minutes of ignition. I'll see if I can find the

..3 minutes? On their first try? Not bad. ;-)

> photographs and ask Graeme to put them up on the Fluidyne Archive -
> www.fluidynenz.250x.com. This will take a couple of days.

..I'd like to see a figure the inside of their gasifier.
A good one starts up in half a minute from cold. ;-)

> Gasification is very addictive and a lot of fun... so let's discuss
> making gas and not heat, unless it's burning gas!

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From arnt at c2i.net Wed Jun 26 19:21:41 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
In-Reply-To: <sd199659.064@energyproducts.com>
Message-ID: <20020627004921.511c8e20.arnt@c2i.net>

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:24:00 -0700,
"Pat Travis" <patravis@energyproducts.com> wrote in message
<sd199659.064@energyproducts.com>:

> Dear Tom and GAS-L subscribers,
>
> When defining or putting a "label" onto a process such as gasification
> there are two distinct audiences that must be considered from a
> commercial standpoint. The first is the regulatory and technical
> community and the second is the general public.

..I beg to differ: I see _3_ different such distinct audiences:
the first is the regulatory community, the second is the general
public, and the _third_ is technological (but still clueless) community.

..face it, whether it is power from thermochemical gasification,
or bandwidth throttling and metering thru penguin* boxes, it is
still "black magic". (Yeah, I do both.) ( * Gnu/Linux)

> EPI uses 3 terms for our energy systems. The first, "Combustion", is
> very straight forward and covers projects utilizing standard fluidized
> bed combustors which generate heat for process or power applications.

..agreed.

> The second, "Gasification", is used when we produce a low Btu gas
> (LBG) in an oxygen deficient atmosphere and burn the LBG in a second
> piece of equipment utilizing a specially designed LBG burner, such as
> a gas boiler, or by injecting it directly into an existing coal fired
> boiler as a reburn gas. In either case, the LBG is transferred to a
> separate piece of equipment for combustion. This is done without
> cooling the LBG, therefore radiant losses from transporting the LBG
> between the gasifier and the end use device is the only energy loss.
> This type of two part process is easy for the public to understand and
> the one I typically find associated with gasification. The same
> definition applies to processes where the LBG or MBG is cooled prior
> to use, such as in an engine or turbine.

..ahem, "gasification" is also having germs fart in some goo.

..ok, I see there are $$$ involved in this sudden interest in
re-defining gasification. As in: have gasifier, will travel.
(And I, IIIII did it myyyyyyyyyyyy waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay. ;-)
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/199903/msg00055.html
on 'http://www.ivar.rl.no/IDybden/avlop/analyse.biopellets.cfm'
Translate from norwegian: 'http://www.tranexp.com/InterTran.cgi')

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From marshbro at mcbridebc.net Wed Jun 26 20:07:47 2002
From: marshbro at mcbridebc.net (Marsh Bros.)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Drying Hog Fuel
Message-ID: <NCBBLLMMALLPGKENGIBNGEICCEAA.marshbro@mcbridebc.net>

Dear all:

I am looking for a design for drying hog fuel. Chips are produced by putting
slabs, edgings, and trim ends from a hardwood sawmill through a knife hog.
Chips produced are approximately 2x2x1/4 inches. MC could be up to 100%, or
50% water by weight. The chips are to be used for feeding a stratified
down-draft gasifier. Any ideas on the best way to dry these chips? What is
the maximum MC I could get away with?

Secondly, we are filtering our gas by passing it through a large vertical
tube filled with washed rocks and cascading water. It seems to produce clean
cool gas, but what is the best way to filter my waste water? The water
obviously gets contaminated with tars and fly ash. We would rather not put
this stuff back through our circ pump, but we also want a way to recycle the
waste back into our fuel pile. Currently using a barrel filled with hog fuel
as a filter. Any better ideas?

Phil Marsh
Marsh Bros.
Ph (250) 569-2795
Fax (250) 569-2247

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From jamespdunham at hotmail.com Wed Jun 26 20:20:04 2002
From: jamespdunham at hotmail.com (jim dunham)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Drying Hog Fuel
Message-ID: <F143ZTuG5wQ0l8HvNuS00000e18@hotmail.com>

Depends on your volume.

Assuming at least a ton or more per hour, you probably need a rotary drum
dryer. Many used ones available.

We convert to a biomass burner, so operation is quite reasonable and the
output very foregiving. Your input MC will vary considerably and this drives
most driers into an operators nightmare. The drum accepts it.

Jim Dunham
Enviro Energy Corp.
816-452-6663

>From: "Marsh Bros." <marshbro@mcbridebc.net>
>To: "Gasification" <gasification@crest.org>
>Subject: GAS-L: Drying Hog Fuel
>Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 17:13:29 -0700
>
>Dear all:
>
>I am looking for a design for drying hog fuel. Chips are produced by
>putting
>slabs, edgings, and trim ends from a hardwood sawmill through a knife hog.
>Chips produced are approximately 2x2x1/4 inches. MC could be up to 100%, or
>50% water by weight. The chips are to be used for feeding a stratified
>down-draft gasifier. Any ideas on the best way to dry these chips? What is
>the maximum MC I could get away with?
>
>Secondly, we are filtering our gas by passing it through a large vertical
>tube filled with washed rocks and cascading water. It seems to produce
>clean
>cool gas, but what is the best way to filter my waste water? The water
>obviously gets contaminated with tars and fly ash. We would rather not put
>this stuff back through our circ pump, but we also want a way to recycle
>the
>waste back into our fuel pile. Currently using a barrel filled with hog
>fuel
>as a filter. Any better ideas?
>
>Phil Marsh
>Marsh Bros.
>Ph (250) 569-2795
>Fax (250) 569-2247
>
>
>
>-
>Gasification List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
>Gasification List Moderator:
>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>www.webpan.com/BEF
>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From arnt at c2i.net Wed Jun 26 21:33:55 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Turbine fired by woodchips
In-Reply-To: <182.a2dd946.2a4b676a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20020627020301.0bff7f54.arnt@c2i.net>

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 11:20:40 -0800,
Joel Florian <joflo@yifan.net> wrote in message
<4.2.0.58.20020626110810.0094c550@yifan.net>:

> I just did a search on Bioten and it appears that their whole facility
> in Red Boiling Springs was auctioned the 13th of this month. There's
> a lot I don't understand.
>
> If you're interested, I can fax the diagram of what I have.

..you can do even better: put it on your web site and post the url here.

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From CAVM at aol.com Wed Jun 26 23:25:38 2002
From: CAVM at aol.com (CAVM@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Turbine fired by woodchips
Message-ID: <96.287bec99.2a4bdf9d@aol.com>

I just did a search on Bioten and it appears that their whole facility in
Red Boiling Springs was auctioned the 13th of this month. There's a lot I
don't understand.

I saw that it was for sale, one of the original engineers on the project, Joe Rizzie, bought the plant as I understand it. It was designed and built as a TVA project.

C. Van Milligen
Kentucky Enrichment Inc

From tombreed at attbi.com Thu Jun 27 09:06:05 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020626140200.0191f100@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <006801c21dda$e4aa0960$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Paul and All:

We are in a morass of terminology and ineveitably
we will each develop our own subset.

However, to me "Flaring" has two bad
connotations. The "flare" at a refinery is typically a visible waste of
energy that could be used for other purposes. In any case, it is a
diffusion flame, since no air has been mixed with it to make it a clean flame,
so it is filling the air with particulates and more.

In our WoodGas stove we have solved two
problems.

1)   Making a combustible gas from
wood

2)   Sufficient turbulent mixing of that
gas with air to maximize heating rate and minimize emissions.

So we call it a WoodGas CookStove and I hope to
post an invitation to those who would like to try it on my website this
month.

Your
pal,
TOM
REED
BEF STOVEWORKS
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Paul S.
Anderson
To: <A title=patravis@energyproducts.com
href="mailto:patravis@energyproducts.com">Pat Travis ; <A
title=tombreed@attbi.com
href="mailto:tombreed@attbi.com">tombreed@attbi.com ; <A
title=gasification@crest.org
href="mailto:gasification@crest.org">gasification@crest.org ; <A
title=Stoves@crest.org href="mailto:Stoves@crest.org">Stoves@crest.org ;
<A title=graeme@powerlink.co.nz
href="mailto:graeme@powerlink.co.nz">graeme@powerlink.co.nz
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 1:58
PM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
Defined
Patrick and all,Your explanation is excellent.
Because your message did not make it through to the "Stoves list serve", I am
including it below.However, I must disagree with your
conclusion. You wrote: Most lay people do not consider
this close coupled system a gasifier. Therefore while we could call it "Staged
Gasification" or a "Close Coupled Gasifier", we have elected to call it staged
combustion.Except for one year on the Stoves list serve, I am
about as much of a "lay person" as can be found. I definitely want the
word "Gasifier" or "Gasification" into the title because the word "Combustion"
is where the confusion takes place. The word "combustion" is a lot like
the word "burn". Neither "combustion" nor "burn" assists the lay person
to appreciate what is happening when the process of gasification becomes
identifiably distinct from simple "burning." Yes, I like your
explanation and I like the use of the word "staged" or the words
"close-coupled", (or perhaps "closely staged"). But we do need to be
sure that anyone reading about these small "combustion chambers" (the name I
use to avoid calling them "stoves" that implies cooking) realizes that
gasification occurs, and that is "closely coupled" or "staged" with whatever
happens next.And herein lies the problem. What would you call
the "whatever happens next" when the gases are mixed with air and
"consumed."???   We cannot use the word "combustion" because it is
too vague. Patrick's full message (below) has a definition for
"combustion" that somehow is not the same as what happens to the gases
after they are produced.I am just the interested lay person, so my
next suggestion might be useless:   Could we call that "consuming of
the gases" to be considered as "flaring" (or perhaps "flaming")????If
so, does that lead to the name of "combustion chamber for gasification
followed by close-coupled flaring"???   Or it could be a "gasifier
with close-coupled flaring"    I think that captures what we
have been calling "small scale gasifiers".   I suspect that there
are some large gasifiers what have close-coupled flaring.
Whatever happens about the final terminology, this discussion has been
helpful to me. It has also helped clarify the fairly wide gap between
those who do "big gasifiers" and those who do "small gasifiers" (meaning the
REALLY small ones.) I look forward to future sharing of gasifier
knowledge with you all.PaulAt 10:24 AM 6/26/02 -0700, Pat
Travis wrote:
Dear Tom and GAS-L
subscribers, When defining or putting a
"label" onto a process such as gasification there are two distinct audiences
that must be considered from a commercial standpoint. The first is the
regulatory and technical community and the second is the general
public. EPI uses 3 terms for our energy
systems. The first, "Combustion", is very straight forward and covers
projects utilizing standard fluidized bed combustors which generate heat for
process or power applications. The second,
"Gasification", is used when we produce a low Btu gas (LBG) in an
oxygen deficient atmosphere and burn the LBG in a second piece of equipment
utilizing a specially designed LBG burner, such as a gas boiler, or by
injecting it directly into an existing coal fired boiler as a reburn gas. In
either case, the LBG is transferred to a separate piece of equipment for
combustion. This is done without cooling the LBG, therefore radiant losses
from transporting the LBG between the gasifier and the end use device is the
only energy loss. This type of two part process is easy for the public to
understand and the one I typically find associated with gasification. The
same definition applies to processes where the LBG or MBG is cooled prior to
use, such as in an engine or turbine. The
third, "Staged Combustion", is used to describe what some people may
consider a close coupled gasifier. In this process we combine a fluidized
bed gasifier bottom with the upper section from a combustor. We generate LBG
in the lower portion of the vessel and when it reaches a specific elevation
above the gasifier section, combustion air (including dirty process exhaust
gases with a high VOC content) is injected and the LBG is ignited. This
provides energy for process applications and/or for power production. Most
lay people do not consider this close coupled system a gasifier. Therefore
while we could call it "Staged Gasification" or a "Close Coupled Gasifier",
we have elected to call it staged combustion. <FONT
size=1>I leave it to those better qualified than myself to set the legal
definitions. Patrick
Travis     Energy Products of Idaho
(EPI)
Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 -
7/00
Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of
2001-2003
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL 61790-4400   Voice: 309-438-7360;
FAX: 309-438-5310E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: <A
href="http://www.ilstu.edu/~psanders"
EUDORA="AUTOURL">www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

From tombreed at attbi.com Thu Jun 27 09:08:43 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: Fw: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
Message-ID: <007301c21dda$fb3621a0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

From jim at organix.org Thu Jun 27 10:15:57 2002
From: jim at organix.org (Jim Wimberly)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
In-Reply-To: <sd199659.064@energyproducts.com>
Message-ID: <022f01c21de4$db8990d0$9225d940@jim>

To all subscribers of the gasification
list:

It seems to me that clarifying
terminology is one of the most important functions this group can serve.
As Tom Reed put it this morning, "we are in morass of terminology", although I
consider the "we" to be not just the bioenergy folks but society at
large.

Despite the recent postings on this
thread, I think that the term "gasification" needs further clarification,
regardless of whether we're talking small-scale or large-scale.
Specifically, I am concerned that close-coupled or two-stage systems not be
confused (and lumped together terminology-wise) with systems that produce a
syngas that can be conveyed/stored for subsequent use (either for "burning" in a
separate "combustion" system, used as fuel in an engine, or as a feedstock for
other processes [e.g., fermentation into ethanol, acetic acid,
etc]).

The need for terminology clarification
regarding gasification is increasing almost daily. Numerous vendors are
now using the term -- some apparently based on technical merit, others
apparently for marketing purposes. My concern is that regulators,
politicians, and other policy makers are being confused (and sometimes
intentionally misled) by this term.

In my opinion, one reason the term
"gasification" is increasingly being used is because it is more attractive and
gets more attention (and potential support) than the term "combustion" (which is
often associated with "incineration", which is unfortunate as the latter has
evolved to having substantial negative connotation in our society).

The confusion that results from misuse
of this terminology may be advantageous to some people under certain conditions,
but works against all of us in the long run.

So let's keep this discussion going...
I'd like to see a consensus on use of the term gasification among bioenergy
folks that can also be used in our communications with the various external
audiences and interested parties.

Personally, I like the definitions provided by Pat Travis; the
followup points from Paul Anderson have merit, but I think use of the term
"combustion" to describe the ultimate fate of the syngas under certain
conditions is appropriate.

Here are a few links that shed some
additional light on the term in question (none of which provide truly succinct
definitions of the term):
<A
href="http://www.gasification.org/story/explaine/explaine.html">http://www.gasification.org/story/explaine/explaine.html
<A
href="http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/projects/ia_tech_gas.htm">http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/projects/ia_tech_gas.htm
<A
href="http://www.woodgas.com/Gasification.htm"><FONT
size=2>http://www.woodgas.com/Gasification.htm<FONT
size=2> (with all due respect to Dr. Reed, the term "wood gas" is fine for
certain situations, but not applicable to the gasified product from non-woody
biomass feedstocks)

Jim Wimberly
Foundation for Organic Resources
Management

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
<A title=patravis@energyproducts.com
href="mailto:patravis@energyproducts.com">Pat Travis
To: <A title=tombreed@attbi.com
href="mailto:tombreed@attbi.com">tombreed@attbi.com ; <A
title=gasification@crest.org
href="mailto:gasification@crest.org">gasification@crest.org ; <A
title=Stoves@crest.org href="mailto:Stoves@crest.org">Stoves@crest.org ;
<A title=graeme@powerlink.co.nz
href="mailto:graeme@powerlink.co.nz">graeme@powerlink.co.nz
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 12:24
PM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
Defined

Dear Tom and GAS-L subscribers,

When defining or putting a "label" onto a
process such as gasification there are two distinct audiences that must
be considered from a commercial standpoint. The first is the regulatory and
technical community and the second is the general public.

EPI uses 3 terms for our energy systems. The first,
"Combustion", is very straight forward and covers projects utilizing standard
fluidized bed combustors which generate heat for process or power
applications.

The second, "Gasification",  is used when we
produce a low Btu gas (LBG) in an oxygen deficient atmosphere and burn the LBG
in a second piece of equipment utilizing a specially designed LBG burner, such
as a gas boiler, or by injecting it directly into an existing coal fired
boiler as a reburn gas. In either case, the LBG is transferred
to a separate piece of equipment for combustion. This is done without
cooling the LBG, therefore radiant losses from transporting the LBG between
the gasifier and the end use device is the only energy loss. This type of
two part process is easy for the public to understand and the one I
typically find associated with gasification. The same definition applies to
processes where the LBG or MBG is cooled prior to use, such as in an engine or
turbine.

The third, "Staged Combustion", is used to describe what
some people may consider a close coupled gasifier. In this process we
combine a fluidized bed gasifier bottom with the upper section from a
combustor. We generate LBG in the lower portion of the vessel and
when it reaches a specific elevation above the gasifier section, combustion
air (including dirty process exhaust gases with a high VOC content) is
injected and the LBG is ignited. This provides energy for process
applications and/or for power production. Most lay people do not consider
this close coupled system a gasifier. Therefore while we could call it "Staged
Gasification" or a "Close Coupled Gasifier", we have elected to call it staged
combustion.

I leave it to those better qualified than myself to set the
legal definitions.

Patrick Travis     Energy Products of
Idaho (EPI)
>>> "Tom Reed" <tombreed@attbi.com> 06/26/02
09:26AM >>>Dear Doug and All:Doug's opinions below form
the basis for an important discussion - "when isgasification really just
combustion". There is in fact a continuum ofoperation between
pyrolysis, gasification and combustion at both themicroscopic and
macroscopic level. The exact boundary can't be nailed downexactly, but it
is important for all of us to understand the issues. I haveseen drag
racers recently with flames coming out their exhaust pipes.However, I
don't think I want to call them "gasifiers".Doug seems to be saying
below that if you pipe the gas created by partialcombustion (in a
downdraft or inverted downdraft or fluidized bed or updraft"gasifier") to
a separate device (engine, burner, chemical process) you havea "true"
gasifier; if you burn it immediately in close coupled mode it isnot really
a gasifier at all. While I see some basis for this claim I
don'tagree.In our WoodGas stoves partial combustion gas is
generated by flamingpyrolysis in a zone 2-3 cm thick down inside the
bed. The gas then passesthrough a layer of characol which converts
more of the gas to CO and H2.The gas that issues from the charcoal many cm
above the flaming pyrolysiszone is then burned immediately. However,
we could easily add a 6 inch or 6foot chimney and inject air at the top
for very similar combustion. ByDoug's thinking the first would be a
combustor and the 2nd and 3d would begasifiers.In the U.S. the
difference between combustion and gasification has becomeformalized
in the laws relating to incentive credits for gasifiers thatdon't apply to
combustion. I have been involved in helping write the
legaldefinitions. Something like.."If you can establish a level
BETWEEN thegasifier zone and the combustion zone at which a gas sample
will have anenergy value of more than 2 MJ/scm (50 Btu/scf) it is a close
coupledgasifier/combustor combination". If not, not. Since $$$
are involved, thisis obviously an important definition.The close
coupled gasifier/combustor combination has a number of advantages.Optimal
gasification of bone dry wood puts 17.8 MJ/kg into chemical energy,but
still leaves 3.3 MJ/kg in the sensible heat of the ~750 C gas coming
offthe charcoal pile. If this is burned immediately you can approach
100%efficiency in the gas conversion. If you have to cool the gas to
roomtemperature you lose 16% of the energy to coolant. Furthermore,
closecoupled combustion burns all the volatile tar vapors up.
Finally closecoupling saves space and our 1.5 V WoodGas CampStove is only
7 inches talland 5 inches in diameter.So, I will restate that if
you have producer gas in a section of the unit,it is a close coupled
gasifier/combustor.Yours
truly,
TOM REED            BEF
GASWORKS----- Original Message -----From: "Graeme Williams"
<graeme@powerlink.co.nz>To: <gasification@crest.org>Sent:
Wednesday, June 26, 2002 2:36 AMSubject: GAS-L: Small Scale
Gasifiers> Dear Gasification Colleagues,>> It is
easy to understand the confusion that exists about gasification in a>
general sense as the phenomenon can be found anywhere you create fire.>
However, for this interest group to include gasifying stoves is in my>
opinion incorrect, as they should be identified by their correct name
of> double burning or smokeless stoves which commercial manufacturers
callthem,> and as such stay in the stoves forum.>>
For people researching gasification and interested in using gas to use>
separately for whatever end use, this is the one group who can offer
the> most assistance and information on the subject, particularly if it
is for> engine applications. Those of us who actually work in
this field of> technology have made a commitment to see gasification
fulfill an important> role as a source of renewable energy and chemical
feedstock. To cross> pollinate gasification with close coupled
combustion, then discussadapting> these stoves for engines is less
than helpful to those who seek accurate> information about
gasification.>> While it might be important for individuals to
buy a small gasifier, it is> equally important for the manufacturer to
find enough individuals tocreate> a market. Then, instead of
saying how much are small gasifiers, ask> yourself - how much am I
prepared to pay for one. This is a validquestion,> so state
your financial ability to pay for your commitment to renewable>
energy.>> Alternatively, decide on a size (discuss it with a
manufacturer first),get> a quote and order 50. Then onsell to
those who just want one unit. Ifthis> isn't a solution for
you specifically, then you have to accept that theonly> way to own
one, is to build it yourself. Since I posted the design for a>
small gasifier on the Fluidyne Archive last year,nobody on this list
has> written to me saying "I'm ready to go, what's
next?">> Last August in Northern Ireland, two French engineering
students workingat> ITI (Innovation Technologies Ireland) built one
out of salvaged scrapsteel> and I shared their excitement of having
it flaring gas within 3 minutes of> ignition. I'll see if I can
find the photographs and ask Graeme to putthem> up on the Fluidyne
Archive - <A
href="http://www.fluidynenz.250x.com. /">www.fluidynenz.250x.com.
This will take a> couple of days.>> Gasification is very
addictive and a lot of fun . . . so let's discuss> making gas and not
heat, unless it's burning gas!>> Doug
Williams>>> -> Gasification List Archives:>
<A
href="http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/">http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/>>
Gasification List Moderator:> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy
Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com> <A
href="http://www.webpan.com/BEF">www.webpan.com/BEF> List-Post:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification@crest.org">mailto:gasification@crest.org>>
List-Help: <<A
href="mailto:gasification-help@crest.org">mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>>
List-Unsubscribe: <<A
href="mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>>
List-Subscribe: <<A
href="mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>>>
Sponsor the Gasification List: <A
href="http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html">http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html>
-> Other Gasification Events and Information:> <A
href="http://www.bioenergy2002.org/">http://www.bioenergy2002.org>
<A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html
Bioenergy> <A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html
Gasification> <A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html
Carbon>>-Gasification List Archives:<A
href="http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/">http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/Gasification
List Moderator:Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,
Reedtb2@cs.com<A
href="http://www.webpan.com/BEF">www.webpan.com/BEFList-Post: <<A
href="mailto:gasification@crest.org">mailto:gasification@crest.org>List-Help:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification-help@crest.org">mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>List-Unsubscribe:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>List-Subscribe:
<<A
href="mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org">mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>Sponsor
the Gasification List: <A
href="http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html">http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html-Other
Gasification Events and Information:<A
href="http://www.bioenergy2002.org/">http://www.bioenergy2002.org<A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html
Bioenergy<A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html
Gasification<A
href="http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html">http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html
Carbon

From tmiles at trmiles.com Thu Jun 27 10:36:15 2002
From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <006701c21de8$002973d0$0401a8c0@tomslaptop>

Doug,

One should not conclude that gasifiers do not make NOx. We measured NOx from
the gasification of fuels with different nitrogen contents and found that,
for a given system, NOx generation is proportional to N content.

Comparisons of NOx reduction from gasification with staged combustion and
flue gas recirculation with SNCR (selective non catalytic reduction using
ammonia or urea) are welcome. To my knowledge, except for one large scale
sewage sludge system, efficiencies of staged combustion and FGR techniques
for high nitrogen fuels have not been published.

Regards,

Tom Miles

----- Original Message -----
From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
To: <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 1:43 AM
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From skelly at woodlandchemicals.com Thu Jun 27 12:42:24 2002
From: skelly at woodlandchemicals.com (Dr. Sue Kelly)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:01 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <3D1B4081.431C3BBD@woodlandchemicals.com>

Dear Mr. Miles:
Is the efficiency of the large scale sewage sludge system published? If so, can
we get a copy of it easily?
Thank you.
Dr. Sue Kelly

Tom Miles wrote:

> Doug,
>
> One should not conclude that gasifiers do not make NOx. We measured NOx from
> the gasification of fuels with different nitrogen contents and found that,
> for a given system, NOx generation is proportional to N content.
>
> Comparisons of NOx reduction from gasification with staged combustion and
> flue gas recirculation with SNCR (selective non catalytic reduction using
> ammonia or urea) are welcome. To my knowledge, except for one large scale
> sewage sludge system, efficiencies of staged combustion and FGR techniques
> for high nitrogen fuels have not been published.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom Miles
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
> To: <gasification@crest.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 1:43 AM
> Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
>
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > During the years that we have been playing with producer gas, both in
> > engines for power generation and for process heat in timber kilns, at no
> > time has NOx been an emission problem.
> >
> > Although gasifier temperatures are high, it appears that it just doesn't
> > happen in this process although I suppose anything is possible given
> certain
> > conditions existing.
> >
> > The adiabatic flame temperature of clean producer gas ie tar free has
> never
> > exceeded 1100 degrees Celcius, in our experience, and in fact is one of
> the
> > measures we use to check to see if tar is present in the gas stream.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Doug Williams
> > FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
> >
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> >
> >
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tmiles at trmiles.com Thu Jun 27 13:19:04 2002
From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <00cf01c21dfe$b0f37880$6501a8c0@tommain>

Dr. Kelly,

Three gasifiers were installed in 1984-1986 by (the former) Combustion Power
at the Hyperion sewage treatment plant in Los Angeles County. The sewage
sludge was dried using light oil to displace the water in the "Carver
Greenfield" process. The resulting dried powder was pneumatically conveyed
into a bubbling fluidized bed. Gas was staged using partial oxidation in
three stages before final combustion. Input N was about 8% if I recall. NOx
was reduced from several thousand ppm to 25 ppm. The plant was dismanteled
after they couldnt get the drying process to work properly.

Michael F. Lewis and Roger Haug presented papers about it at AICHE meetings
at the time. I had copies of Mike's papers, some of which were deleted by a
virus a few months ago. If you have access to databases that include
professional societies try searching for Lewis, Hyperion or sewage sludge
gasification. Let me know if you find something. If you don't I may be able
to find Mike.

I got the following reference on a search:
Four Stage, Fluidized Bed Gasification Process Minimizes NOX
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
... Page 1 FOUR STAGE, FLUIDIZED BED GASIFICATION PROCESS MINIMIZES NOX F.
Michael Lewis
Mechanical Process & Design Roger T. Haug Division Engineer Environmental
...
www.etis.net/balpyo/15icfbc/99-0205.PDF

The attached pdf contains part of a presentation that Mike and Dave Hoecke
(Enercon) presented at a conference on animal wastes in 1999. Dave has a
combustion company near Cleveland (Elyria). I think he is still Chairman of
an ASME Committee on Combustion Technologies. Please feel free to contact
Mike or Dave directly.

Regards,

Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Sue Kelly" <skelly@woodlandchemicals.com>
To: "Tom Miles" <tmiles@trmiles.com>
Cc: "gas" <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers

> Dear Mr. Miles:
> Is the efficiency of the large scale sewage sludge system published? If
so, can
> we get a copy of it easily?
> Thank you.
> Dr. Sue Kelly
>
> Tom Miles wrote:
>
> > Doug,
> >
> > One should not conclude that gasifiers do not make NOx. We measured NOx
from
> > the gasification of fuels with different nitrogen contents and found
that,
> > for a given system, NOx generation is proportional to N content.
> >
> > Comparisons of NOx reduction from gasification with staged combustion
and
> > flue gas recirculation with SNCR (selective non catalytic reduction
using
> > ammonia or urea) are welcome. To my knowledge, except for one large
scale
> > sewage sludge system, efficiencies of staged combustion and FGR
techniques
> > for high nitrogen fuels have not been published.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Tom Miles
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
> > To: <gasification@crest.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 1:43 AM
> > Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
> >
> > > Dear Colleagues,
> > >
> > > During the years that we have been playing with producer gas, both in
> > > engines for power generation and for process heat in timber kilns, at
no
> > > time has NOx been an emission problem.
> > >
> > > Although gasifier temperatures are high, it appears that it just
doesn't
> > > happen in this process although I suppose anything is possible given
> > certain
> > > conditions existing.
> > >
> > > The adiabatic flame temperature of clean producer gas ie tar free has
> > never
> > > exceeded 1100 degrees Celcius, in our experience, and in fact is one
of
> > the
> > > measures we use to check to see if tar is present in the gas stream.
> > >
> > > Hope this helps.
> > >
> > > Doug Williams
> > > FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > Gasification List Archives:
> > > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> > >
> > > Gasification List Moderator:
> > > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> > >
> > > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > > -
> > > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> > >
> > >
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>

an_waste.pdf

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Gasification Events and Information:
http://www.bioenergy2002.org
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pdf00031.pdf
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 77405 bytes
Desc: "http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon"
Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/gasification/attachments/20020627/ffe4d78f/pdf00031.obj
From skelly at woodlandchemicals.com Thu Jun 27 14:40:40 2002
From: skelly at woodlandchemicals.com (Dr. Sue Kelly)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <3D1B5C32.DBD1D845@woodlandchemicals.com>

Many thanks for that information, Tom. I will let you know if I find more
links, and if I need more details.
Sue

Tom Miles wrote:

> Dr. Kelly,
>
> Three gasifiers were installed in 1984-1986 by (the former) Combustion Power
> at the Hyperion sewage treatment plant in Los Angeles County. The sewage
> sludge was dried using light oil to displace the water in the "Carver
> Greenfield" process. The resulting dried powder was pneumatically conveyed
> into a bubbling fluidized bed. Gas was staged using partial oxidation in
> three stages before final combustion. Input N was about 8% if I recall. NOx
> was reduced from several thousand ppm to 25 ppm. The plant was dismanteled
> after they couldnt get the drying process to work properly.
>
> Michael F. Lewis and Roger Haug presented papers about it at AICHE meetings
> at the time. I had copies of Mike's papers, some of which were deleted by a
> virus a few months ago. If you have access to databases that include
> professional societies try searching for Lewis, Hyperion or sewage sludge
> gasification. Let me know if you find something. If you don't I may be able
> to find Mike.
>
> I got the following reference on a search:
> Four Stage, Fluidized Bed Gasification Process Minimizes NOX
> File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
> ... Page 1 FOUR STAGE, FLUIDIZED BED GASIFICATION PROCESS MINIMIZES NOX F.
> Michael Lewis
> Mechanical Process & Design Roger T. Haug Division Engineer Environmental
> ...
> www.etis.net/balpyo/15icfbc/99-0205.PDF
>
> The attached pdf contains part of a presentation that Mike and Dave Hoecke
> (Enercon) presented at a conference on animal wastes in 1999. Dave has a
> combustion company near Cleveland (Elyria). I think he is still Chairman of
> an ASME Committee on Combustion Technologies. Please feel free to contact
> Mike or Dave directly.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dr. Sue Kelly" <skelly@woodlandchemicals.com>
> To: "Tom Miles" <tmiles@trmiles.com>
> Cc: "gas" <gasification@crest.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 9:42 AM
> Subject: Re: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
>
> > Dear Mr. Miles:
> > Is the efficiency of the large scale sewage sludge system published? If
> so, can
> > we get a copy of it easily?
> > Thank you.
> > Dr. Sue Kelly
> >
> > Tom Miles wrote:
> >
> > > Doug,
> > >
> > > One should not conclude that gasifiers do not make NOx. We measured NOx
> from
> > > the gasification of fuels with different nitrogen contents and found
> that,
> > > for a given system, NOx generation is proportional to N content.
> > >
> > > Comparisons of NOx reduction from gasification with staged combustion
> and
> > > flue gas recirculation with SNCR (selective non catalytic reduction
> using
> > > ammonia or urea) are welcome. To my knowledge, except for one large
> scale
> > > sewage sludge system, efficiencies of staged combustion and FGR
> techniques
> > > for high nitrogen fuels have not been published.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Tom Miles
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Graeme Williams" <graeme@powerlink.co.nz>
> > > To: <gasification@crest.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 1:43 AM
> > > Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
> > >
> > > > Dear Colleagues,
> > > >
> > > > During the years that we have been playing with producer gas, both in
> > > > engines for power generation and for process heat in timber kilns, at
> no
> > > > time has NOx been an emission problem.
> > > >
> > > > Although gasifier temperatures are high, it appears that it just
> doesn't
> > > > happen in this process although I suppose anything is possible given
> > > certain
> > > > conditions existing.
> > > >
> > > > The adiabatic flame temperature of clean producer gas ie tar free has
> > > never
> > > > exceeded 1100 degrees Celcius, in our experience, and in fact is one
> of
> > > the
> > > > measures we use to check to see if tar is present in the gas stream.
> > > >
> > > > Hope this helps.
> > > >
> > > > Doug Williams
> > > > FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Gasification List Archives:
> > > > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> > > >
> > > > Gasification List Moderator:
> > > > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > > > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > > > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > > > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > > > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > > > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> > > >
> > > > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > > > -
> > > > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > > > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > Gasification List Archives:
> > > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> > >
> > > Gasification List Moderator:
> > > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> > >
> > > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > > -
> > > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> >
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Name: an_waste.pdf
> an_waste.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
> Encoding: base64
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Thu Jun 27 15:50:58 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined
In-Reply-To: <sd199659.064@energyproducts.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020627132100.0192a440@mail.ilstu.edu>

Jim and all (with copy to Stoves list because Jim's message
did not go there.)

Your statement that terminology IS important for the list serve is
appreciated and agreed.

I have gone to the 3 websites (below) and I recommend them to anyone who
has not seen them before.

As a novice, I can candidly state that I am so impressed with the large
and commercial gasification processes and installations. The work
by all of you in those fields is to be commended.

I agree with Jim that the same terminology needs to be appropriate for
both the large and the small installations.

I have come to understand that the process of "gasification" is
correctly viewed as ending when the gases have been created.

Therefore, gasification occurs with a piece of burning wood in an open
fire. But the "average person" does not see it or does
not care much about it. That gasification is just part of
"burning" the wood or part of "combustion" of the
wood.

For use on the Gasification and Stoves list serves, we really use the
word "gasify" in relation to the creation of the gases THAT ARE
IDENTIFIABLY REMOVED FROM THE LOCATION OF CREATION.

PERIOD.

In other words, what happens to the gases after being removed some
distance from the point of creation is NOT part of the issue of
gasification. The gases can be:
a. "scrubbed" or cleaned for "impurities"
b. cooled
c. compressed
d. stored
e. mixed with air (dangerous but with the intention to be
ignited soon (but separately) after creation)
f. literally "go up in smoke"
g. [other]

Now, most of us are concerned with one or more of these
"post-gasification" activities. But let us agree
that THEY are NOT "gasification". You might earn your
living because of your work with the "post-gasification"
activities, and such topics ARE discussed on the "Gasification"
list serve. Furthermore, these are really the INITIAL
"post-gasification" activities.

Following those INITIAL "post-gasification" activities, the
produced gases eventually are consumed in flames to give heat (exceptions
granted for fertilizer production and some other "non-burning"
"non-heat-generating" uses of some gases.)

What do we call that consumption in flames? Tom Reed wrote recently
that he did not like the term "flaring" because it is
associated with waste gases at refineries, etc. And I can accept
his comment. But Tom did not give us another term.

I had also suggested "flaming". Any comments? Or
any other terms?? [ a later thought added here: perhaps
another term is "oxidation of gases", but I doubt that the lay
person (or the illiterate people in Mozambique with whom I do my stoves
work) would get much understanding from that expression. ]

But please do NOT call it "combustion" or
"burning". Patrick is completely correct when he
wrote: The first [term], "Combustion",
is very straight forward and covers projects utilizing standard fluidized
bed combustors which generate heat for process or power applications.

Well, I am not sure what a "fluidized bed" is. I
just think of a fire as being combustion. Solid biomass becomes
heat, H2O, CO2, some ash, and some generally undesirable
by-products. That is combustion.

So I suggest that "flaming of gases" or "gas-flaming"
or something like that is a suitable name for what happens to most gases
produced by gasifiers. Production of the gases in a large or small
gasifier is not the issue, as Jim correctly notes.

Add in terms like "close-coupled" or "closely-staged"
or "closely-flamed" (I like that term) or "promptly
flamed" or something like that and you are understanding (and you
are able to explain to other people) what is going on in the
"small" devices.

Note that I did not say simply "small gasifiers" or
"simple gasifers" or "micro-gasifiers" because I want
the issue of "flaming of gases" to be seen as separate from the
creation of the gases.

But if I say "small gasifying heater" or "gasifying stove
- small scale model", I can define it once by saying that such a
heater or stove is a "small gasifer with close flaming".

For those who have read my earlier messages on the Stoves list serve, I
have consistently used the term "combustion chamber" when I
discuss the 4 components of "stoves"
1. Fuel
2. Combustion chamber (including how the important air is added to
the process)
3. Structure of the stove (legs, type of oven, etc)
4. Cooking practices.

Thanks for bearing with me as we went through this terminology
exercise. At least for me I am now able to meaningfully describe
without conflicting terms what constitutes and what goes on inside the
"combustion chamber'' of the stoves I am designing.

I leave it to others on the Gasification list to decide how they will
describe their "POST-gasification"
activities. As Jim wrote: "I think
use of the term
"combustion" to describe the ultimate fate of the syngas under
certain conditions is
appropriate." Perhaps his words
"under certain conditions" are the key. Be sure to
clarify the "certain conditions." Such as, if ONLY gas is
present and it is clearly not "closely coupled" with the
gasification stage, then the gas can be combusted (as in an internal
combustion engine). But when the people think of SOLID fuel turning
into useful heat (or electricity, etc), and those people see that as
combustion (and do not care about the process of gasification), then do
not be surprised when they do not understand the phrase "combustion
= gasification + combustion" (translated to be
"lay-person's combustion = gasification +
technical-jargon-combustion-under-certain-conditions"

You can try to explain that to the lay-person, but do not be surprised
when you have to say that
"technical-jargon-combustion-under-certain-conditions" means
the "flaming of the gases." (which is what it could
have been called from the start, as in
"combustion = gasification + flaming of the gases".)

Of course we could also comment on why "pyrolysis" has not been
part of the discussion.
"combustion = pyrolysis + gasification + flaming of the
gases"

Enough.

Smile :-) Biomass does
burn!! And in useful ways, too !!

Paul

At 09:13 AM 6/27/02 -0500, Jim Wimberly wrote:
To
all subscribers of the gasification list:

It seems to me that
clarifying terminology is one of the most important functions this group
can serve. As Tom Reed put it this morning, "we are in morass
of terminology", although I consider the "we" to be not
just the bioenergy folks but society at
large.

Despite the recent
postings on this thread, I think that the term "gasification"
needs further clarification, regardless of whether we're talking
small-scale or large-scale. Specifically, I am concerned that
close-coupled or two-stage systems not be confused (and lumped together
terminology-wise) with systems that produce a syngas that can be
conveyed/stored for subsequent use (either for "burning" in a
separate "combustion" system, used as fuel in an engine, or as
a feedstock for other processes [e.g., fermentation into ethanol, acetic
acid, etc]).

The need for
terminology clarification regarding gasification is increasing almost
daily. Numerous vendors are now using the term -- some apparently
based on technical merit, others apparently for marketing purposes.
My concern is that regulators, politicians, and other policy makers are
being confused (and sometimes intentionally misled) by this term.

In my opinion, one
reason the term "gasification" is increasingly being used is
because it is more attractive and gets more attention (and potential
support) than the term "combustion" (which is often associated
with "incineration", which is unfortunate as the latter has
evolved to having substantial negative connotation in our society).

----- Original Message -----
From: Pat Travis
To: tombreed@attbi.com ;
gasification@crest.org ;
Stoves@crest.org ;
graeme@powerlink.co.nz
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers Defined

Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 -
7/00
Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of
2001-2003
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State
University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice:
309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items:
www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

From LINVENT at aol.com Thu Jun 27 16:26:38 2002
From: LINVENT at aol.com (LINVENT@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: "gasifier definition"-regulatorily driven
Message-ID: <16b.fbad620.2a4cceda@aol.com>

In order to separate gasification from combustion, a certain step must be
taken and this is most important for regulatory reasons and technical
reasons. If a gasifier has the same properties as an incinerator, regardless
of the fact it may be a two stage combuster as some incinerators are, there
needs to be a defined point at which it is considered a gasifier and not an
incinerator. My recommendation on this is that the gas can be used physically
separately from the gasifier to qualify as a gasifier.
This has been an argument which I have posed to the regulators, if we
take the gasifier and put it in New Mexico and the gas is piped over to Texas
for use, who has jurisdiction? This cannot be said for close coupled systems
or for incinerators.
If gasifiers are put into the same category as incinerators, regulatory
concerns will prevent their deployment.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From horizon at allwest.net Thu Jun 27 17:28:28 2002
From: horizon at allwest.net (horizon)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Gasification
In-Reply-To: <sd199659.064@energyproducts.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c21e38$d4bf3da0$2625fad8@EdIngalls>

Please remove my e-mail addres from you
list.

Thanks

From psanders at ilstu.edu Thu Jun 27 17:39:39 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: "gasifier definition"-regulatorily driven
In-Reply-To: <16b.fbad620.2a4cceda@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020627164105.01923c90@mail.ilstu.edu>

LeLand used the term "close coupled" and he certainly is referring to the
large and very large gasification operations.

I was thinking of "close coupled" as "about 12 cm or 3 inches apart" as in
my small combustion chambers.

I do not want to start another discussion about this term, but I want to
point out that although the term is applicable to the very small "gasifiers
with flaming of gases", the terms "close coupled" and "staged" do not
distinguish the small ones from the big ones as I previously thought.

Paul

At 04:26 PM 6/27/02 -0400, LINVENT@aol.com wrote:
> In order to separate gasification from combustion, a certain step
> must be
>taken and this is most important for regulatory reasons and technical
>reasons. If a gasifier has the same properties as an incinerator, regardless
>of the fact it may be a two stage combuster as some incinerators are, there
>needs to be a defined point at which it is considered a gasifier and not an
>incinerator. My recommendation on this is that the gas can be used physically
>separately from the gasifier to qualify as a gasifier.
> This has been an argument which I have posed to the regulators, if we
>take the gasifier and put it in New Mexico and the gas is piped over to Texas
>for use, who has jurisdiction? This cannot be said for close coupled systems
>or for incinerators.
> If gasifiers are put into the same category as incinerators, regulatory
>concerns will prevent their deployment.
>
>Sincerely,
>Leland T. Taylor
> President
> Thermogenics Inc.
>7100-2nd St. NW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87107
>phone 505-761-5633 fax 505-341-0424
>Attached files are zipped and can be decompressed with <A
>HREF="http://www.aladdinsys.com/expander/">www.aladdinsys.com/expander/ </A>
>
>-
>Gasification List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
>Gasification List Moderator:
>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>www.webpan.com/BEF
>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From parikh at me.iitb.ac.in Fri Jun 28 03:18:26 2002
From: parikh at me.iitb.ac.in (Prof P P Parikh)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <BF9F15B6F927D611B59F000255C705A0A29848@EXCHANGE1>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0206281140170.3673-100000@epsilon.me.iitb.ac.in>

The point I would like to state is that low cal value fuel need not always
mean low temperatures! It is the cal value and stoichiomentric air-fuel
ratio together which define what can be called as mixture cal value! And
that is not much lower in case of producer-gas. It is better to measure
NOX in engine exhaust rather than go by assumptions.
Mrs Parikh
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Prof. (Mrs.) P.P.Parikh Phone Office : 5723496, 5767548
Dept. of Mechanical Engg. 5722545 Ext. 7548 / 8385
I.I.T. Bombay Home : 5704646
Mumbai 400 076 INDIA Fax Office : 5723496, 5723480

email : parikh@me.iitb.ac.in
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Mike Norris wrote:

> I don't believe there is much point in "cleaning" the wood gas as the
> original question focused on. My simplified view of a gasifier for NOx
> formation is the fuel is burned very rich, where the low temperature and
> oxygen starved atmosphere suppress the formation of NOx. Any NOx that is
> formed is likely to be reduced to N2 as carbon and hydrogen radicals
> complete for the O atom within the gasifier.
>
> Some of the nitrogen in the fuel or air will be reduced (as opposed to
> oxidized) to NH3 and HCN. These species are less stable than N2 and more
> likely to form NOx, when the wood gas is burned with additional air in an
> engine. I can not think of a good way to extract N2 from NH3 and HCN
> without oxidizing the whole mixture. By the way, NH3 should make a dandy
> fuel as it has 40% of the heating value of kerosene.
>
> The main source of NOx in the exhaust of the engine is likely to be "Thermal
> NOx" resulting from relatively long residence times at high temperature in
> the presence of oxygen. The thermal NOx is formed in the secondary
> combustion process, when the wood gas is burned with air. I believe the
> Thermal NOx problem using woodgas
> is the same as with any other fuel. Thermal NOx can be controlled by
> burning at a fairly cool temperature (Adiabatic flame temps < 1300 deg C).
> This can be accomplished by adding significant amounts of excess air or
> recycling significant amounts of exhaust gas. Actually I would expect wood
> gas to burn at a fairly
> low temperature due to the low energy density of the fuel.
>
>
> Dr. Mike Norris
> Staff Scientist
> DEKA Research and Development
> Manchester NH
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Claus Hindsgaul [SMTP:claush@et.dtu.dk]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 10:26 AM
> > To: gasification
> > Subject: Re: GAS-L: NOx and gasifiers
> >
> > tir, 2002-06-25 kl. 14:05 skrev Tom Reed:
> > > First, there is very little "high temperature NOx" - probably less
> > than 1
> > > ppm - in wood gas because the flame temperature is lower than that of
> > > hydrocarbons.
> >
> > I don't quite agree on that.
> >
> > Our measurements of emissions from an IC engine[1] fueled by superficial
> > wood gas (mixed from flask without e.g. tars and NH3) showed NOx
> > emissions for lambda<1.5. Indeed they were lower than for natural gas
> > with this engine, but not negligible.
> >
> > At the Biomass Conference in Amsterdam last week, a poster claimed that
> > 80-100% of NH3 was converted to NOx during flame(!) combustion.
> >
> > At the same conference Markus Kleinhappl presented measurements of NH3
> > levels in the gas from their double fire gasifier in Graz in Austria to
> > 150-800 mg/Nm3. He claimed that a limit of <55 mg/Nm3 should be met for
> > engine operation.
> >
> > Here at the DTU two-stage gasifier we also have massive amounts of NH3
> > in our gas condensate. We have not yet measured the NH3 concentration in
> > our gas. Tar is no longer an issue here, but it may be necessary to
> > remove some NH3 from the gas in order to meet NOx-regulations.
> >
> > Fortunately NH3 is miscible in water so I expect it to be easy obtain
> > lower levels using water scrubbers. Only if there are tars in the gas,
> > the NH3 contaminated water needs special treatment. Otherwise it may be
> > processed at (Danish) biological surridge plants.
> >
> > Can anybody elaborate on NH3 and NOx in wood gas and engine exhaust?
> > Measurements of either would be very interesting.
> >
> > Claus Hindsgaul
> >
> >
> > [1] Jesper Ahrenfeldt, Torben Kvist Jensen, Ulrik Henriksen and
> > Jesper Schramm: "Experiments with Wood Gas Engines". SAE paper
> > 2001-01-3681, September 2001
> >
> >
> > --
> > Research Assistant M. Sc. Claus Hindsgaul
> > MEK, DTU, Building 120 - DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
> > Phone: (+45) 4525 4174 - FAX: (+45) 4593 5761
> > claush@mek.dtu.dk, http://www.et.dtu.dk/Halmfortet
> >
> >
> > -
> > Gasification List Archives:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> > Gasification List Moderator:
> > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> > www.webpan.com/BEF
> > List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> > List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> > List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> > Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Gasification Events and Information:
> > http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Fri Jun 28 04:32:09 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
Message-ID: <006d01c21e7e$a6444600$10ff58db@newpc>

Dear Paul & Colleagues,

It's pleasing to see the Gasification List come alive again, and what's more
unveiling the issues that each of us in our own way are trying to resolve.
With such healthy input, surely our gasification technologies can be
presented in an orderly fashion to the less informed, and where possible
support those who strive on our behalf behind the scenes.

I have to say that in our debate on small gasifiers, the addition of stoves
just doesn't fit right in my mind, although you could call them process heat
gasifiers and try and find them in the "Yellow Pages".

Here in New Zealand there is a healthy market for such stoves and there must
have been 20 - 30 different models and sizes on a display I saw a few weeks
ago. I know the KENT brand was sold in the USA a few years ago, and they
made a big thing out of the emissions being far less than the US standards.
Possibly these types of stoves are a New Zealand development, as I know a
lot of work was done to perfect their design principle in the old DSIR
laboratories.

To read a nice explanation with diagrams, check this web page -
www.energywise.co.nz/content/pdf/demo59.pdf and hope the whole discussion on
these wood burners can be passed back to "Stoves".

The gasifier design that I mentioned can be found on the Fluidyne Archive -
www.fluidynenz.250x.com

I hope this clarifies some of the issues

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Fri Jun 28 04:33:26 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Adiobatic Flame Temperature
Message-ID: <006f01c21e7e$a7ef8500$10ff58db@newpc>

Hello Tom,

You are quite correct to have guessed we used K Wire thermocouples to read
our flame temperatures. Without the support of technical institutions
equipment, or the people to use it correctly, or even know that you can
measure any other way, we become locked into yet another technological
measuring trap.

I'm not even going to pretend I understand why we could have measured only
possibly half the actual flame temperature or why all the steel around the
flame didn't at least glow red, but then did it really matter? All we
wanted to do was run an engine without destroying it and dry some timber in
a kiln.

With the benefit of hindsight, is the pursuit of measurement to prove that
the process meets a theoretical figure, or the figure you measure from a
working process correct for the activity?

The correct temperature of an adiobatic clean producer gas flame may be
important, but is irrelevant if the gasification process is uneven with
fluctuating gas quality, or worse still, allowing uncracked hydrocarbons to
contaminate the gas stream. You could say "let this be a warning and don't
measure something unless it's known to be working correctly in the first
place" (and use the correct measuring procedure).

I hope these types of discussions continue, as they unlock our future and
dispell the mythology of the past.

Still learning the hard way

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From psanders at ilstu.edu Fri Jun 28 18:43:37 2002
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Small Scale Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <006d01c21e7e$a6444600$10ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20020628164809.01b3ebf0@mail.ilstu.edu>

Doug and all, ( am sending to the Stoves list also because this topic is
at the interface of interests between the two groups.)

Yes, the discussion is fruitful.

One thing I learned in your message below is just how different our
definitions can be.

For example, the web link you provided went to a site about what we call in
America "pellet stoves". Although gasification of wood mass takes place
(as it does in ALL burning), I and others on the Stoves list have not
thought of pellet stoves as being "gasifiers" and we on Stoves list do NOT
discuss much those heating device for the developed world.

When I refer to "small gasifying units", I mainly think of the size of 2 of
one-gallon cans or maybe as big as a 5 gallon (20 liter) bucket. and with
no moving parts except possibly adding on a very small fan for forced
convection.

So I feel that the issue of "gasification for domestic use in small stoves"
is still very much a valid topic for the Gasification list. The problems
of NOx and other such things are very important to domestic "burning units"
whether for cooking (stoves) or for heating (space heater or water heater).

Thanks very much for the document on the small gasifier that you have
designed (described as " 5 - 10 kW " on the Figure 4.2.3) . At first I
did not realize that what I wanted was the "Download the Pioneer Class
gasifier design article" that is in the "Anniversary project" archive file.
http://www.fluidynenz.250x.com/

And now that I have the document, I will need to study it to understand
well your design. But I can tell right from the start that I like the size
of it. For me, your design is on the "large-side of the small-size
gasifiers". In comparison, my stuff is in the "micro-gasifier size" and
so much smaller.

This leads me to additional questions, but I leave them for a later message.

Paul

At 08:20 PM 6/28/02 +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
>Dear Paul & Colleagues,
>
>It's pleasing to see the Gasification List come alive again, and what's more
>unveiling the issues that each of us in our own way are trying to resolve.
>With such healthy input, surely our gasification technologies can be
>presented in an orderly fashion to the less informed, and where possible
>support those who strive on our behalf behind the scenes.
>
>I have to say that in our debate on small gasifiers, the addition of stoves
>just doesn't fit right in my mind, although you could call them process heat
>gasifiers and try and find them in the "Yellow Pages".
>
>Here in New Zealand there is a healthy market for such stoves and there must
>have been 20 - 30 different models and sizes on a display I saw a few weeks
>ago. I know the KENT brand was sold in the USA a few years ago, and they
>made a big thing out of the emissions being far less than the US standards.
>Possibly these types of stoves are a New Zealand development, as I know a
>lot of work was done to perfect their design principle in the old DSIR
>laboratories.
>
>To read a nice explanation with diagrams, check this web page -
>www.energywise.co.nz/content/pdf/demo59.pdf and hope the whole discussion on
>these wood burners can be passed back to "Stoves".
>
>The gasifier design that I mentioned can be found on the Fluidyne Archive -
>www.fluidynenz.250x.com
>
>I hope this clarifies some of the issues
>
>Doug Williams
>FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
>
>
>-
>Gasification List Archives:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
>Gasification List Moderator:
>Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
>www.webpan.com/BEF
>List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
>Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Gasification Events and Information:
>http://www.bioenergy2002.org
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Sat Jun 29 03:04:52 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Drying Hog Fuel
Message-ID: <001e01c21f3b$a5b613e0$12ff58db@newpc>

Hello Phil,

I can understand your quandary of producing mountains of chip in minutes,
and then trying to dry them to stop the problems of rapid decay. No matter
what you end up doing, it will cost money, but it has to be considered as an
investment that will not only improve the quality of your gas, but possibly
solve some of your tar problems at the same time.

Because we have resolved the wet chip problem for both coppice willow and
wood chip fuel piles in a fairly simple way, the size of your storage area
can be increased depending on what sort of seasonal buffer you may need.

The fuel is stored in bunkers to a depth of 8 - 9 feet, with box channels
across the bunker with grill tops that blow air up through the fuel pile.
The channels pass through the wall where a continuous phlenum chamber right
down the side wall brings in the air (and heat if you have some) from a
large paddle fan.

The holes through the wall (about 2 foot centres) have a hinged board cover
that can be opened from the phlenum side so you can close the channels as
the bunker is emptied or divert it to the next bunker.

At Rural Generation in Northern Ireland, they actually use their grain
drying bunkers and I have some photos of the piles just after being cut. We
had a similar system at Long Ashton Research Station in the UK but smaller,
so can say for sure it does a good job, even with just air blown through.
Ideally you need the moisture down to about 15% but the rule has to be, the
drier you get, the better the gas.

There is however a very important point to consider and it's the fines. The
fines work their way to the bottom of these piles and when you scoop them
out with the loader, there is a big slug of fines in the bucket. When you
dump this into the fuel hopper, they can upset the gasification process.

As you say that your gasifier is a stratified down draught, the drier fuel
should be excellent, but why are you collecting tar in the wash water? My
understanding about these systems is they consume the tar by what Tom Reed
refers to as flaming pyrolysis. Have you asked Tom for any advice on this
problem, or is it from some other technical source?

The photographs of the bunker dryers are posted on the Fluidyne Archive -
www.fluidynenz.250x.com and if you have a question, get it in fast as I'm in
Australia from 03 - 22 July.

Regards,

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tombreed at attbi.com Sat Jun 29 09:13:30 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <004c01c21f6e$48d99d80$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Sue and All:

We need some careful analyses to sort out the following chemistry relative
to NOx and NH3.

Under the conditions of high temperature combustion NOx is likely to be
formed simply from the air, thermodynamically stable. Lower temperatures
make less NOx.

At lower combustion temperatures no thermodynamic NOx is formed, but prompt
NOx can be formed from nitrogen contained in the fuel.

Gasification temperatures are too low to form NOx from the air, so wood
gasification does not make NOx, as Doug Williams says.

However, the reducing conditions of gasification CAN make ammonia, NH3. I
believe NH3 dissociates easily at combustion temperatures to N2 and H2O, not
NOx. Anyone know otherwise?

So, maybe a gasification/combustor system makes less NOx than a straight
combustor.

If anyone springs with the cash, I would love to test all this out on a
laboratory wood pellet stove I'm thinking of making, with extra controls and
emissions tests.

Onward, TOM REED BEF GASWORKS/STOVEWORKS

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From marshbro at mcbridebc.net Sat Jun 29 10:53:28 2002
From: marshbro at mcbridebc.net (Marsh Bros.)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: RE: Drying Hog Fuel
In-Reply-To: <001e01c21f3b$a5b613e0$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <NCBBLLMMALLPGKENGIBNCEIKCEAA.marshbro@mcbridebc.net>

Doug:

Thank you for your reply. Your system would be easy for us to duplicate
since we already have the concrete bunker silos, would just have to add the
duct work. We had considered this method already but had discarded the idea
when it was suggested to us we might be creating a very large fire hazard.
What are your thoughts / experience relating to fuel pile fire hazard?

Secondly, how fast can we dry chips in this manner? Our proposed fuel
consumption will be about 1/2 MT of dry fuel per hour, requiring us to dry
about 1 green tonne per hour. We could use two or three bunkers in rotation
with forced air and heat, but how long does it take to dry a pile 8 or 9
feet in depth? We produce hog fuel at a steady rate of about 45 MT (green)
per day, 5 days a week. We need enough of a buffer to carry us through
week-ends and shut-downs.

As to tar in our wash water, it is just an assumption on my part that some
of this stuff will always get through. Our wash water gets a nice charcoal
colour to it and it definitely has some fly ash in it. Since we are running
a small prototype for testing purposes, and certainly do not know a lot
about gasification, we likely have technical problems that we are not even
aware of! We can produce a combustible gas, but as to quality, at this point
we really have no idea.

Phil Marsh
Marsh Bros.
Ph (250) 569-2795
Fax (250) 569-2247

-----Original Message-----
From: Graeme Williams [mailto:graeme@powerlink.co.nz]
Sent: June 29, 2002 12:07
To: marshbro@mcbridebc.net
Cc: gasification@crest.org
Subject: Drying Hog Fuel

Hello Phil,

The photographs of the bunker dryers are posted on the Fluidyne Archive -
www.fluidynenz.250x.com and if you have a question, get it in fast as I'm in
Australia from 03 - 22 July.

Regards,

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From cpeacocke at care.demon.co.uk Sat Jun 29 11:45:57 2002
From: cpeacocke at care.demon.co.uk (Cordner Peacocke)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: NOx and Gasifiers
In-Reply-To: <004001c21ced$f0d34640$12ff58db@newpc>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629163647.00a947a8@pop3.demon.co.uk>

Dear All,

For those of you interested in NOx formation, and also very importantly,
HCN and also NH3, I would refer you to the VTT Publication 369:

Behaviour of fuel bound nitrogen in gasification and in high temperature
NH3 removal processes, Jukka Leppälahti, VTT Publications 369, Espoo,
Finland 1998. ISBN 951-38-5349-7.

Peat, wood and coal are covered for pyrolysis and gasification conditions.

All you need on the mechanisms of formation are presented in this
compilation of 9 papers. Dr. Leppälahti's work is also found in several
major journals [http://www.sciencedirect.com/ for example will allow
searches, but downloads only for subscribers]. Rather then speculate on
formation of these species, research what has been done and then comment.

Cordner Peacocke

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From arnt at c2i.net Sat Jun 29 16:07:05 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: "gasifier definition"-regulatorily driven
In-Reply-To: <16b.fbad620.2a4cceda@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20020629162129.231901b5.arnt@c2i.net>

Gas listers,

..first, _what_ gasification are we defining?

..to me, it appears we discuss _thermochemical_ gasification,
so let us use _that_ term here, no?

..having a zillion germs fart in some goo, is _also_ gasification.
It to can be close coupled etc. I like to refer to fart gas making,
as _biochemical_ gasification.

..our 3 clueless audience communities, run & rules the world.
You want influence, be _clear_, and, _of_interest_.

..not ready to market your technology, gasifier etc, _duck_.

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From arnt at c2i.net Sat Jun 29 16:07:49 2002
From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Batch loaded gasifiers - small ones
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020628175344.01b37210@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <20020629170011.204ddc46.arnt@c2i.net>

On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 18:13:46 -0500,
"Paul S. Anderson" <psanders@ilstu.edu> wrote in message
<4.3.1.2.20020628175344.01b37210@mail.ilstu.edu>:
>
> 2. The above named small gasifiers drive off the gases and create
> "char". Tom's stoves (combustion units) will then in a second phase
> burn (consume) the char, leaving only ash. But Ron Larson and I like
> to remove the batch of char, and then reload with fresh biomass fuel
> for more gasification. Reasons: Ron wants to save char.

..like, as charcoal, for say cooking fuel or catalyzers?

> I want to protect my fragile stove from the "forge-like" heat of the
> burning of the char.

..use the ash for heat insulation. Old WWII trick, known as
the "V-hearth" in 'Gengas', chk 'cone ash' in my figure in url:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/199903/msg00055.html

> Question: What do the commercial gasifiers do about char production?

..anyone?

> Do you consume it right on the spot, with either simultaneous
> consumption of char while gasifying other fuel OR as a second phase of
> the burning process? Or does anyone remove the char from the
> gasifier, and if so, for what purposes?

..if you do thermochemical gasification of biomass, your _primary_
fuel are tar vapors. I burn a lot of them in my tar flare, adding
to the stability of the processes. My secondary fuel, charcoal,
doubles as the primary catalyzer, and is consumed. I have not
tested how much charcoal can augered out without excessive loss of
process stability, my sewer pellets experience suggests "a lot".

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From cpeacocke at care.demon.co.uk Sat Jun 29 17:04:06 2002
From: cpeacocke at care.demon.co.uk (Cordner Peacocke)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Batch loaded gasifiers - small ones
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020628175344.01b37210@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20020629212309.00a84170@pop3.demon.co.uk>

In answer to the question on:

''what does one do with the char?''

In some cases, the char is used for filtering any water from the process,
as a gas filter media in the process, and it can be dried [if used for
water filtration] and returned to the gasifier. Some can be used for
start-up, if you operate in batch mode and any excess does not have much
value. A portion can be recycled back to the gasifier during operation, but
not too much, otherwise excess ash in the gasifier can be a problem. This
''recycling'' gradually concentrates the ash for disposal to landfill, use
in aggregates, or returned to the land, but requires careful management.

If you are using rice husks, then the char, containing the ash (up to 20wt%
in some cases in the starting material) is a major problem, as over 2-30wt%
of your starting rice husks. In China, this is their biggest problem,
apart from the wastewater. It is simply piled up and burnt.

Cordner Peacocke

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From tombreed at attbi.com Sun Jun 30 08:52:58 2002
From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Pellet stove combustors and lambda sensors
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20020628164809.01b3ebf0@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <01ac01c22034$93fe4ce0$0680fd0c@TOMBREED>

Dear Doug, Paul and All:

I have long been interested in the automatic pellet heating stoves and
believe it is not a gasifier stove in the sense I like to use the term.
(There was a discussion here last week about close-coupled gasifiers. It is
NOT one.)

The action is as follows:

Pellets fall onto the 3 to 4 inch diameter grate and are ignited
electrically, while a combustion air fan comes on and provides excess air.

As the first layer of pellets burn they produce volatiles and charcoal in a
process I call "flaming combustion". Since there is a great excess of air,
all the volatiles and characoal are burned with the excess air and no
identifyable gas is created except locally down in the mass.

If too deep a pile is made, all the excess air will be consumed and you will
have CO and HC emissions. If it is really deep you will have an updraft
gasifier. So the controls are careful to maintain the correct depth so that
excess air is present.

~~~~~~~~~
Excess air reduces efficiency of heating and burning, so it can't be too
much. It is my impression that in Europe there are now pellet stoves that
incorporate lambda (air/fuel) meter sensors and regulate pile depth to
minimize excess air and maximize efficiency and clean combustion. I haven't
heard that any pellet stoves in the U.S. do this. Any comments?

Yours truly, TOM REED

> Doug and all, ( am sending to the Stoves list also because this topic is
> at the interface of interests between the two groups.)
>
> Yes, the discussion is fruitful.
>
> One thing I learned in your message below is just how different our
> definitions can be.
>
> For example, the web link you provided went to a site about what we call
in
> America "pellet stoves". Although gasification of wood mass takes place
> (as it does in ALL burning), I and others on the Stoves list have not
> thought of pellet stoves as being "gasifiers" and we on Stoves list do NOT
> discuss much those heating device for the developed world.
>
> When I refer to "small gasifying units", I mainly think of the size of 2
of
> one-gallon cans or maybe as big as a 5 gallon (20 liter) bucket. and
with
> no moving parts except possibly adding on a very small fan for forced
> convection.
>
> So I feel that the issue of "gasification for domestic use in small
stoves"
> is still very much a valid topic for the Gasification list. The problems
> of NOx and other such things are very important to domestic "burning
units"
> whether for cooking (stoves) or for heating (space heater or water
heater).
>
> Thanks very much for the document on the small gasifier that you have
> designed (described as " 5 - 10 kW " on the Figure 4.2.3) . At first I
> did not realize that what I wanted was the "Download the Pioneer Class
> gasifier design article" that is in the "Anniversary project" archive
file.
> http://www.fluidynenz.250x.com/
>
> And now that I have the document, I will need to study it to understand
> well your design. But I can tell right from the start that I like the
size
> of it. For me, your design is on the "large-side of the small-size
> gasifiers". In comparison, my stuff is in the "micro-gasifier size" and
> so much smaller.
>
> This leads me to additional questions, but I leave them for a later
message.
>
> Paul
>
>
> At 08:20 PM 6/28/02 +1200, Graeme Williams wrote:
> >Dear Paul & Colleagues,
> >
> >It's pleasing to see the Gasification List come alive again, and what's
more
> >unveiling the issues that each of us in our own way are trying to
resolve.
> >With such healthy input, surely our gasification technologies can be
> >presented in an orderly fashion to the less informed, and where possible
> >support those who strive on our behalf behind the scenes.
> >
> >I have to say that in our debate on small gasifiers, the addition of
stoves
> >just doesn't fit right in my mind, although you could call them process
heat
> >gasifiers and try and find them in the "Yellow Pages".
> >
> >Here in New Zealand there is a healthy market for such stoves and there
must
> >have been 20 - 30 different models and sizes on a display I saw a few
weeks
> >ago. I know the KENT brand was sold in the USA a few years ago, and they
> >made a big thing out of the emissions being far less than the US
standards.
> >Possibly these types of stoves are a New Zealand development, as I know a
> >lot of work was done to perfect their design principle in the old DSIR
> >laboratories.
> >
> >To read a nice explanation with diagrams, check this web page -
> >www.energywise.co.nz/content/pdf/demo59.pdf and hope the whole discussion
on
> >these wood burners can be passed back to "Stoves".
> >
> >The gasifier design that I mentioned can be found on the Fluidyne
Archive -
> >www.fluidynenz.250x.com
> >
> >I hope this clarifies some of the issues
> >
> >Doug Williams
> >FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION
> >
> >
> >-
> >Gasification List Archives:
> >http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
> >
> >Gasification List Moderator:
> >Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> >www.webpan.com/BEF
> >List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> >List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> >List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
> >
> >Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> >-
> >Other Gasification Events and Information:
> >http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> >http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> >http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> >http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
> Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
> Rotary University Teacher Grantee to Mozambique >10 mo of 2001-2003
> Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
> Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
> E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
>
>
> -
> Gasification List Archives:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
>
> Gasification List Moderator:
> Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com
> www.webpan.com/BEF
> List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
>
> Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Gasification Events and Information:
> http://www.bioenergy2002.org
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
> http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Sun Jun 30 21:06:00 2002
From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:02 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Drying Hog Fuel
In-Reply-To: <NCBBLLMMALLPGKENGIBNCEIKCEAA.marshbro@mcbridebc.net>
Message-ID: <002101c2209b$cfb8a700$09ff58db@newpc>

Dear Phil,

I've had a look through the files and unfortunately I don't have any written
record of the drying times at Long Ashton as it was a separate activity at
times when I wasn't there. Much the same thing at RGL in Londonderry, as
the photographs were taken during the harvest demonstration for the Biomass
Energy Conference in Belfast, February 2000.

I do know that the moisture level drops dramatically within 3 days, but
that's all I remember other than just ambient air without heating still does
a good job. My suggestion would be to do a trial in just one bunker using a
makeshift air system. I guess you can obtain flexible 100mm plastic
drainage pipe in coils where you are, and lay a few rows out across the
bunker down one side and connecting into a simple wooden box phlenum at the
front. Then you can fiddle around and see just what is possible before you
get really serious.

Make sure you do weight samples before you start, then measure hourly until
you get it down to 15% - 20% MC. As for a fire in the pile, it's not
something I've experienced with dry piles. Certainly wet chip will start
heating without the air flow and I can remember the piles at Long Ashton
steaming in the rain, 3 hours after they were cut.

Something we were told about drying timber here in New Zealand was that if
you can drop the MC below 10%, then the cells won't take up the water again
if it gets wet. Whilst that may be true, it won't stop fungus or rot
forming in the long term.

It's not easy to communicate with the guy who actually runs the RGL
installation to get a quick answer about the drying times, but I should be
there again in September and will make a point of obtaining a lot more
specific details to add to the Fluidyne Archive.

There is nothing wrong with black scrubber water, unless it stinks of
phenols. Carbon dust will turn it black, ash will tinge it purple, but all
you need to do is let it settle in a jar for a few days and see if the water
clears. You can buy simple pH test strips or rolls, and you want the water
to test out at about 8 - 9 pH. In our experience, if the water is alkaline
then the tar levels are minimal which causes the water to become acetic, and
I'm sure the local pharmacist (chemist) will have some test papers if you
ask. Don't forget though, that these are very simple guides and don't
purport to be an analysis of the water.

When you burn the gas, if you are able to measure its temperature with
simple K wire thermocouples, again the tar if present will give you a
reading of over 1100 degrees Celsius. You will also feel high heat
radiation and see a strong colouring of the flame. Really clean tar and
dust free gas burns almost invisibly and hardly radiates heat, making it
easy to pass your hand quickly through the flame. Again, these are simple
DIY tests as guides before you waste money on lab testing, but certainly
accurate enough to indicate what's happening in the gas making. Please post
your results as you progress as this is an important part of making it all
work, everywhere.

Doug Williams
FLUIDYNE GASIFICATION

: RE: Drying Hog Fuel

> Doug:
>
> Thank you for your reply. Your system would be easy for us to duplicate
> since we already have the concrete bunker silos, would just have to add
the
> duct work. We had considered this method already but had discarded the
idea
> when it was suggested to us we might be creating a very large fire hazard.
> What are your thoughts / experience relating to fuel pile fire hazard?
>
> Secondly, how fast can we dry chips in this manner? Our proposed fuel
> consumption will be about 1/2 MT of dry fuel per hour, requiring us to dry
> about 1 green tonne per hour. We could use two or three bunkers in
rotation
> with forced air and heat, but how long does it take to dry a pile 8 or 9
> feet in depth? We produce hog fuel at a steady rate of about 45 MT (green)
> per day, 5 days a week. We need enough of a buffer to carry us through
> week-ends and shut-downs.
>
> As to tar in our wash water, it is just an assumption on my part that some
> of this stuff will always get through. Our wash water gets a nice charcoal
> colour to it and it definitely has some fly ash in it. Since we are
running
> a small prototype for testing purposes, and certainly do not know a lot
> about gasification, we likely have technical problems that we are not even
> aware of! We can produce a combustible gas, but as to quality, at this
point
> we really have no idea.
>
> Phil Marsh
> Marsh Bros.
> Ph (250) 569-2795
> Fax (250) 569-2247
>

-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/

BioEnergy Lists: Gasifiers & Gasification

June 2002 Gasification Archive