From venusengineers at eth.net Sun Sep 1 02:32:04 2002 From: venusengineers at eth.net (krishnaswamy) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:06 2004 Subject: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? In-Reply-To: <20020827114133.24916.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00de01c251a1$11972da0$8296fea9@trk> Dear Luiz, Fred, Kevin,Verma, et al,   I think we need to take a nuanced approach and desist from making sweeping generalisations about gasification economics which may not be valid for all countries. While it is true that the cost of biomass harvesting (a labour intensive activity) in developed economies may be quite high and the soil productivity lower thus rendering the cost advantage unattractive, the situation in India (and other tropical countries) is entirely different.   For instance, we have installed several gasification systems for both thermal and electrical applications (replacing fossil fuels such as Light Diesel Oil, High Speed Diesel & Heavy Furnace Oil) at various geographical locations in India, and in most cases the total capital investment has been recovered from 12-18 months. The brief economics are as follows. I have given the figures in US currency (and in Indian Rs. in brackets) considering exchange rate of Rs. 48/00 per US $.    1) Landed cost of biomass/kg = 2.08 US cents (Re. 1.00) 2) Calorific equivalence of High Speed oil Diesel (or other oil) to biomass = 1:3.5 (Considering cold gas efficiency 85%) 3) Equivalent cost of biomass for 1 Lt. of = 2.08 x 3.5 = 7.29 cents (Rs. 3.50) 4) Cost of O & M on the gasification system/ lt of oil equivalent = 3.65 cents ( Rs. 1.75) 5) Interest and amortisation costs/lt. of oil equivalent = 4.06 cents(Rs. 1.95)(@ 17.5% p.a. on straight-line basis) 6) Total cost of biomass energy/ lt of oil equivalent = 15 cents (Rs. 7.20) 7) Landed cost of oil/lt. = 40.21 US Cents (Rs. 19.30) 8) Savings in diesel in switching to biomass gasification/lt of oil equivalent =  25.21 cents (Rs. 12.10)   You will therefore find that biomass is extremely attractive on economic considerations alone in this neck of the woods. The numbers are valid for both thermal and electrical applications and, from 01-04-02, the delivered cost of fossil fuels is benchmarked to world prices (barring cross subsidies to the transport and domestic sectors). Since the cost of diesel is currently partly cross-subsidised by gasoline, the real savings would certainly be brighter in a more equitable world.     So all of us need not spread doom and gloom about its future till the dawn of a golden era when fossil fuel depletion, mandatory carbon trading, and other such extraneous props will underpin the biomass economy.   I also agree with Fred that the biomass productivity based on per hectare yields are lower than the ground reality.     Regards.   T R Krisnaswamy, Energreen Power Ltd., First Floor, 'Ashroff', # 1, Second Street, Nandanam Extension, Chennai, TN, India - 600 035. Tel : 91(44) 4321339, 4322499 e-mail : energreenpower@lycos.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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 t.dixon at sri.org.au Sun Sep 1 10:48:54 2002 From: t.dixon at sri.org.au (Terry Dixon) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:06 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience Message-ID: Dear Tom and All, Ah ah ah ah !!! The sobering questioning of hard (and harsh !) reality ! Excellent. The inevitable shift in focus from the R&D perspective to the commercial reality perspective. I'll be very interested to read the responses to this one. For me (in the Australian sugar industry context, and I dare say in a similar context for many others), the issues that you question, of annual operating hours and maintenance period hours, are CRUCIAL for commercial reality and viability long term. Unless gasification can deliver at 4500+ hours, maybe 8000+, continuous (no shutdowns), and overhaul of 8000+ hours, then forget it !!! Terry Dixon Sugar Research Institute AUSTRALIA ----- Forwarded by Terry Dixon/SRI on 02/09/2002 04:34 ----- "Tom Miles" s.com> cc: Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience 01/09/2002 16:05 What has the experience been with engines and gasifiers? What are the maintenace requirements? What is the typical annual use, 2000 hours? Are there any that operate 6000 to 8000 hours per year? What is the expected life? What are the actual maintenance intrevals? What facilities and equipment are necessary for engine maintenance that are different than for automotive or diesel power generation? What engines (make and model) work well: Waukesha? Caterpiller? Lister? The most used engines for producer gas seem to be modified natural gas or LP engines or diesels that are run as dual fueled. Are oil and air filter change intrevals the same for producer gas as for LP? Every 150 hours? What other maintenance needs to be done?What is the expected engine life compared with actual engine life for LP or duel fueled diesels on producer gas? Can we expect an overhaul with producer gas after 2000 hours? Is engine life 10000 hours? After than what needs to be done? What has the experience been with converting existing diesels to dual fueled applications? Good? Bad? What works and what doesn't work? What is a practical genset size? Do the 500 kWe engine-gensets that we have seen promoted actually survive? If you were doing distributed generation at 200 kWe what would you use? Four 50 kWe or larger gensets? What's the experience with derating? What's the actual power production for an engine rated for LP or diesel? If you were sizing a new system for 200 kWe how would you specify the engine? We understand from the more successful gasifier-genset suppliers that engine applications need a well organized "support system." What support does a 50-200 kWe gasogen need? Moisture in the fuel. If I make "bad" gas because of wet fuel does the engine care? What kinds of problems result from wet fuel? What range of gasifier fuel moisture can an engine tolerate without excessive derating? Where does one go for engine experience or information about the use of engines with gasifiers(what documents or web links)? Are there test block benchmark performance tests for producer gas? These are a lot of ignorant questions from one who is often asked for direction. Until I use a gasogen to keep my own electronics on standby I'll have to rely on the experience of others. Thank you for your contributions. Kind regards, Tom Miles ------------------------------- This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original message. Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost by any mistaken delivery of the email. ------------------------------- - Gasification List 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 hseaver at cybershamanix.com Sun Sep 1 12:14:54 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:06 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020901191511.GA12389@cybershamanix.com> Having rebuilt many engines, I'd think 8000 hours is really pushing it. You might get that out of a diesel, but no where near that from a non-diesel and even then there will be a lot of efficiency lost before anywhere near that many hours. And that's not taking problems from tars, etc. into consideration at all. My plan is to buy several used diesel engines, always keeping at least one fully funtioning unit in reserve and then just rebuilding as need be. It's not all that big a deal to rebuild -- unless, I suppose, you're paying a shop to do it for you, which would be pretty expensive. Also, expecting there to be *no* shutdowns is extremely unrealistic -- if you don't do the proper periodic maintenance, your engines won't last long. Changing oil, adjusting valves, etc. is crucial. It might also be that using reciprocating IC engines just isn't a good idea in the long run -- perhaps turbines, especially the Tesla turbine, could well prove to be the most cost effective way to go, and perhaps also with the addition of some steam. On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 04:45:12AM +1000, Terry Dixon wrote: > Dear Tom and All, > > Ah ah ah ah !!! The sobering questioning of hard (and harsh !) reality ! > Excellent. The inevitable shift in focus from the R&D perspective to the > commercial reality perspective. I'll be very interested to read the > responses to this one. For me (in the Australian sugar industry context, > and I dare say in a similar context for many others), the issues that you > question, of annual operating hours and maintenance period hours, are > CRUCIAL for commercial reality and viability long term. Unless > gasification can deliver at 4500+ hours, maybe 8000+, continuous (no > shutdowns), and overhaul of 8000+ hours, then forget it !!! > > Terry Dixon > Sugar Research Institute > AUSTRALIA > > ----- Forwarded by Terry Dixon/SRI on 02/09/2002 04:34 ----- > > "Tom Miles" > > s.com> cc: > Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience > 01/09/2002 > 16:05 > > > > > > > What has the experience been with engines and gasifiers? What are the > maintenace requirements? What is the typical annual use, 2000 hours? Are > there any that operate 6000 to 8000 hours per year? What is the expected > life? What are the actual maintenance intrevals? What facilities and > equipment are necessary for engine maintenance that are different than for > automotive or diesel power generation? What engines (make and model) work > well: Waukesha? Caterpiller? Lister? > > The most used engines for producer gas seem to be modified natural gas or > LP engines or diesels that are run as dual fueled. Are oil and air filter > change intrevals the same for producer gas as for LP? Every 150 hours? What > other maintenance needs to be done?What is the expected engine life > compared with actual engine life for LP or duel fueled diesels on producer > gas? Can we expect an overhaul with producer gas after 2000 hours? Is > engine life 10000 hours? After than what needs to be done? > > What has the experience been with converting existing diesels to dual > fueled applications? Good? Bad? What works and what doesn't work? > > What is a practical genset size? Do the 500 kWe engine-gensets that we have > seen promoted actually survive? If you were doing distributed generation at > 200 kWe what would you use? Four 50 kWe or larger gensets? > > What's the experience with derating? What's the actual power production for > an engine rated for LP or diesel? If you were sizing a new system for 200 > kWe how would you specify the engine? > > We understand from the more successful gasifier-genset suppliers that > engine applications need a well organized "support system." What support > does a 50-200 kWe gasogen need? > > Moisture in the fuel. If I make "bad" gas because of wet fuel does the > engine care? What kinds of problems result from wet fuel? What range of > gasifier fuel moisture can an engine tolerate without excessive derating? > > Where does one go for engine experience or information about the use of > engines with gasifiers(what documents or web links)? Are there test block > benchmark performance tests for producer gas? > > These are a lot of ignorant questions from one who is often asked for > direction. Until I use a gasogen to keep my own electronics on standby I'll > have to rely on the experience of others. Thank you for your contributions. > > Kind regards, > > Tom Miles > > > > > ------------------------------- > > This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is > for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential > and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or > distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please > notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original > message. > > Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost > by any mistaken delivery of the email. > > ------------------------------- > > > > - > Gasification List 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: > List-Help: > List-Unsubscribe: > List-Subscribe: > > 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 snkm at btl.net Sun Sep 1 12:52:20 2002 From: snkm at btl.net (Peter Singfield) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:06 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience Message-ID: <3.0.32.20020902024227.009a6e90@wgs1.btl.net> At 02:15 PM 9/1/2002 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: > It might also be that using reciprocating IC engines just isn't a good idea in >the long run -- perhaps turbines, especially the Tesla turbine, could well prove >to be the most cost effective way to go, and perhaps also with the addition of >some steam. > Or -- How about a conventional biomass furnace/boiler and steam turbine?? What purpose gasification?? What difference between gasification and well designed combustion furnace?? What specific advantages are there to going gasification?? The goal is higher over all thermal efficiencies for a reasonable price with at least the reliability of the system to be replaced -- no?? Tesla turbine superseding the steam turbine?? Seriously -- you joke -- right?? I can detail the problems with steam -- starts with exceptional temperatures and pressures to get into the right ball park for high "over-all" efficiencies. Steam Turbines are only expensive when having to handle those high temperatures. You can marry an Ormat refrigerant working fluid turbine system to any conventional bagasse fired boiler -- end up with double the thermal efficiencies -- and double the reliability. Ormat or any geothermal turbine system. And at half the cost of a "gasifier" -- The name of this game is converting thermal energy in biomass to usable "power" at an efficient rate -- reliability for extended periods. I am presently accumulating old style Lister Diesels -- but built new from India. 6 HP -- 650 RPM -- huge heavy reliable. I will convert one to a uniflow steam engine operating with butane as working fluid. It will be reliable -- A simple combustion process is all that will be required. No special fuel "conditioning" -- such a compressing (pellets) -- sizing (chipping -- etc) or drying to within special limits for proper operation. Marry a Hurst boiler to an Ormat -- and forget gasification running IC engines. Ormats run 30 years and more -- no maintenance!! Hurst follows close behind -- Fuel is near anything -- to 55% humidity. What are you beating your brains over?? Plus -- you can get quotes for all the above in a week or less -- from 100 kw to 10 megs worth of biomass power -- and up and running in less than 8 months! We do not lack for solutions -- we lack the vision to apply them. Peter Singfield Belize > >On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 04:45:12AM +1000, Terry Dixon wrote: >> Dear Tom and All, >> >> Ah ah ah ah !!! The sobering questioning of hard (and harsh !) reality ! >> Excellent. The inevitable shift in focus from the R&D perspective to the >> commercial reality perspective. I'll be very interested to read the >> responses to this one. For me (in the Australian sugar industry context, >> and I dare say in a similar context for many others), the issues that you >> question, of annual operating hours and maintenance period hours, are >> CRUCIAL for commercial reality and viability long term. Unless >> gasification can deliver at 4500+ hours, maybe 8000+, continuous (no >> shutdowns), and overhaul of 8000+ hours, then forget it !!! >> >> Terry Dixon >> Sugar Research Institute >> AUSTRALIA >> >> ----- Forwarded by Terry Dixon/SRI on 02/09/2002 04:34 ----- >> >> "Tom Miles" >> >> s.com> cc: >> Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience >> 01/09/2002 >> 16:05 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> What has the experience been with engines and gasifiers? What are the >> maintenace requirements? What is the typical annual use, 2000 hours? Are >> there any that operate 6000 to 8000 hours per year? What is the expected >> life? What are the actual maintenance intrevals? What facilities and >> equipment are necessary for engine maintenance that are different than for >> automotive or diesel power generation? What engines (make and model) work >> well: Waukesha? Caterpiller? Lister? >> >> The most used engines for producer gas seem to be modified natural gas or >> LP engines or diesels that are run as dual fueled. Are oil and air filter >> change intrevals the same for producer gas as for LP? Every 150 hours? What >> other maintenance needs to be done?What is the expected engine life >> compared with actual engine life for LP or duel fueled diesels on producer >> gas? Can we expect an overhaul with producer gas after 2000 hours? Is >> engine life 10000 hours? After than what needs to be done? >> >> What has the experience been with converting existing diesels to dual >> fueled applications? Good? Bad? What works and what doesn't work? >> >> What is a practical genset size? Do the 500 kWe engine-gensets that we have >> seen promoted actually survive? If you were doing distributed generation at >> 200 kWe what would you use? Four 50 kWe or larger gensets? >> >> What's the experience with derating? What's the actual power production for >> an engine rated for LP or diesel? If you were sizing a new system for 200 >> kWe how would you specify the engine? >> >> We understand from the more successful gasifier-genset suppliers that >> engine applications need a well organized "support system." What support >> does a 50-200 kWe gasogen need? >> >> Moisture in the fuel. If I make "bad" gas because of wet fuel does the >> engine care? What kinds of problems result from wet fuel? What range of >> gasifier fuel moisture can an engine tolerate without excessive derating? >> >> Where does one go for engine experience or information about the use of >> engines with gasifiers(what documents or web links)? Are there test block >> benchmark performance tests for producer gas? >> >> These are a lot of ignorant questions from one who is often asked for >> direction. Until I use a gasogen to keep my own electronics on standby I'll >> have to rely on the experience of others. Thank you for your contributions. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Tom Miles >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> >> This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is >> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential >> and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or >> distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please >> notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original >> message. >> >> Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost >> by any mistaken delivery of the email. >> >> ------------------------------- >> >> >> >> - >> Gasification List 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: >> List-Help: >> List-Unsubscribe: >> List-Subscribe: >> >> 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: >List-Help: >List-Unsubscribe: >List-Subscribe: > >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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 hseaver at cybershamanix.com Sun Sep 1 15:46:13 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:06 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020902024227.009a6e90@wgs1.btl.net> Message-ID: <20020901224629.GB12389@cybershamanix.com> On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 02:45:03AM -0500, Peter Singfield wrote: > At 02:15 PM 9/1/2002 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: > > It might also be that using reciprocating IC engines just isn't a good > idea in > >the long run -- perhaps turbines, especially the Tesla turbine, could well > prove > >to be the most cost effective way to go, and perhaps also with the > addition of > >some steam. > > > > Or -- > > How about a conventional biomass furnace/boiler and steam turbine?? > > What purpose gasification?? To meet emission standards? > > What difference between gasification and well designed combustion furnace?? > I don't know about large-scale industrial furnaces/boilers, but the only really decent, clean-burning wood fired boilers for homes at least are gasifiers. Like the Kuenzel and Tarm. > What specific advantages are there to going gasification?? > > The goal is higher over all thermal efficiencies for a reasonable price > with at least the reliability of the system to be replaced -- no?? > > Tesla turbine superseding the steam turbine?? > The Tesla can be run on steam (most are, in fact) or combustion fired. > Seriously -- you joke -- right?? > Not at all. > I can detail the problems with steam -- starts with exceptional > temperatures and pressures to get into the right ball park for high > "over-all" efficiencies. > > Steam Turbines are only expensive when having to handle those high > temperatures. > Thats just one of the ways Teslas are better than conventional turbines -- cheaper to build and last longer. > You can marry an Ormat refrigerant working fluid turbine system to any > conventional bagasse fired boiler -- end up with double the thermal > efficiencies -- and double the reliability. > > Ormat or any geothermal turbine system. > Tesla turbines are also run with fluids in this manner. > And at half the cost of a "gasifier" -- > > The name of this game is converting thermal energy in biomass to usable > "power" at an efficient rate -- reliability for extended periods. > But you also have to meet clean air standards, at least in the US and Europe, and I'd think you'd have a bit of trouble doing that if the biomass isn't gasified, then the gas burned. Even in the small homesized wood burning boilers you see pretty horrific pollution except with the gasifiers. You may well be right about a closed fluid turbine system being the best solution. (rest snipped) -- 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 d.rl at virgin.net Sun Sep 1 16:43:35 2002 From: d.rl at virgin.net (David Reynolds-Lacey) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <00bf01c2517d$a6f940f0$0301a8c0@tomslaptop> Message-ID: <3D72B3DA.BB181463@virgin.net> Tom, You've kind of taken the wind out of my sails with your post because those are some of the questions that I was going to ask as part of my next post. I was also going to raise some questions about steam turbines and flash steam as an viable? alternative to gasification but now that seems to be being covered briefly but are there any more comments on steam? I append the other questions that I was going to ask. What are the advantages of running a diesel engine on gas if gas is to be the sole fuel (can it be?), I presume the engine will need to be converted to spark, so would it be better to use a petroleum engine? Is there a stage when a gas turbine becomes preferable to a reciprocating engine? What additional problems (if any) can one expect with a gas turbine and does the gas need to be pre-processed in any different way to gas for a reciprocating engine? Is it feasible to store producer gas? David - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 kchisholm at ca.inter.net Sun Sep 1 16:46:18 2002 From: kchisholm at ca.inter.net (Kevin Chisholm) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020902024227.009a6e90@wgs1.btl.net> Message-ID: <3D72B342.FCBE79D@ca.inter.net> Dear Harmon Harmon Seaver wrote: > > > > Tesla turbine superseding the steam turbine?? > > > The Tesla can be run on steam (most are, in fact) or combustion fired. > > > Seriously -- you joke -- right?? > > > > Not at all. > Is there anybody manufacturing Tesla Turbines? What is their efficiency? > > I can detail the problems with steam -- starts with exceptional > > temperatures and pressures to get into the right ball park for high > > "over-all" efficiencies. > > > > Steam Turbines are only expensive when having to handle those high > > temperatures. > > > > Thats just one of the ways Teslas are better than conventional turbines -- > cheaper to build and last longer. I understand that as an "expansion engine" a conventional steam turbine has an efficiency of about 85%. Would you agree or disagree with this? What would be a comparable "expansion engine efficiency" for a Tesla Turbine? > ...del...> > > And at half the cost of a "gasifier" -- > > > > The name of this game is converting thermal energy in biomass to usable > > "power" at an efficient rate -- reliability for extended periods. > > > But you also have to meet clean air standards, at least in the US and Europe, > and I'd think you'd have a bit of trouble doing that if the biomass isn't > gasified, then the gas burned. Even in the small homesized wood burning boilers > you see pretty horrific pollution except with the gasifiers. Small sized boiler and stove systems are exactly where you expect the greatest pollution problems. Any decent sized commercial boiler on biomass can be run with virtually perfect combustion efficiency, and virtually zero pollutant (unburned combustibles) escape. In general, a gasifier requires a better fuel than does a boiler which, in general, tends to raise the fuel cost for a gasifier. Say we consider a 100 kW electric output power plant: would anyone know the cost of a "Gasifier + engine" system, in comparison to a "Boiler + steam turbine" system? Another very important consideration is the likely need for a Stationary Engineer to operate the 100 kW steam gtenerating plant, while it may be possible to automate teh gasifier and engine system, to the point that continuous Staff presence is not required. This would make a big difference in the cost of power output. > Kindest regards, Kevin CHisholm - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 LINVENT at aol.com Sun Sep 1 17:08:45 2002 From: LINVENT at aol.com (LINVENT@aol.com) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience Message-ID: There are engine manufacturers who offer engines with 20,000 hours between overhauls providing the producer gas meets their stringent contaminant analysis. Just the cost of conducting the analysis is probably $15,000. They also offer a contract maintenance agreement with $.08/kwhr fee, they ship a replacement engine, take the old one and slide it out and bolt up a new one in a few hours. Acid and alkali neutralization filters are good answers if you can't clean the gas well enough to remove these contaminants. They are put in series with the existing filters. Gas cleaning is the key. Derating is 25-35%, depending upon the manufacturer and I am of the opinion that less derating can be achieved by customizing the engine appropriately. Caterpiller says 25% on 120 btu gas, but the dealers will not quote this. We have run engines for many hours and as long as the gas is clean and cool, and has most of the water removed, they show no execessive wear. Tires are a great fuel as the gas heating value is high and without sulfur, has no adverse impact upon the engine. We start the engine on the gas and run it on the gas. Wood and other fuels have also been used successfully. Leland T. Taylor President Thermogenics Inc. 7100-F 2nd St. NW Albuquerque, New Mexico USA 87107 Phone: 505-761-5633, fax: 341-0424, website: thermogenics.com. In order to read the compressed files forwarded under AOL, it is necessary to download Aladdin's freeware Unstuffit at aladdin.com. - Gasification List Archives: http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com www.webpan.com/BEF List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html - Other Gasification Events and Information: http://www.bioenergy2002.org http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Sun Sep 1 18:46:09 2002 From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Doom and gloom for gasification. Message-ID: <000f01c2522a$d2477e40$1eff58db@newpc> Hello David Thank you for presenting an excellent overall view of gasification, as even to express your own thoughts on a subject sometimes clarifies issues in the minds of others. I agree almost entirely with your observations as these concern everyone involved in this field of technology, especially me. Since we began 26 years ago, target markets, or specific applications has been the only market for gasifiers and no mass market has existed. The only determining factor has been too big or too small, so the eventual sales were again reduced to what we could guarantee to work. In making these sales, I personally went to each country (except South Africa and Mozambique) to install and train the local people, gradually acquiring the knowledge of what is important. This was of course after conducting a two year test on four units around the world. Before that, we spent nearly seven years perfecting our design. Without malice, how do you think I feel about you or anyone else copying our design without some exchange of licence fee? Furthermore having built your copy, where is your knowledge going to come from to operate the whole system, out of a book! Have you personally seen or worked with an engine gasifier? I ask these questions because this is the simplistic view so many observers have about gasification, and you cannot get a bunch of enthusiasts together to make it work because of perceived opportunity. Unfortunately the saddest thing about gasification is misplaced enthusiasm without the control of commercial realities. Personally I see nothing wrong with pockets bulging with cash, as it will be a new experience for me if and when it happens, and I also like the idea of being a monopoly in some sector of the market! Gasification is an evolving technology that gives its secrets up very reluctantly, but only in a staged sequence of equipment development. In May this year I spent the whole month hunched over my steam driven drawing board, and with indian ink and draughting pens, produced 28 detailed drawings. These were for every component needed to build the latest version of Fluidyne's Mega Class gasifier. How much do you think such a set of drawings would be worth to all those who know nothing about gasification? So I'll wrap up my concerns etc. with this thought. "If your technology is founded on public sector information or is copied instead of being developed by understanding the logic behind the need, you are likely to fail" There are plenty of places that can use gasifiers but it won't happen until the right equipment package is assembled and the suppliers have the knowledge to do it right. We do project negativity mainly from ignorance of what is going on elsewhere, which is a sound reason for this discussion group to stay focussed and supportive of each other where possible. You have my support if required. Regards, Doug Williams Fluidyne Gasification. NEW Death of an Eco-system Fluidyne Archive www.fluidynenz.250x.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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 hseaver at cybershamanix.com Sun Sep 1 20:21:57 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020902024227.009a6e90@wgs1.btl.net> Message-ID: <20020902032211.GA12768@cybershamanix.com> On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 09:39:30PM -0300, Kevin Chisholm wrote: > Dear Harmon > > Harmon Seaver wrote: > > > > > > > Tesla turbine superseding the steam turbine?? > > > > > The Tesla can be run on steam (most are, in fact) or combustion fired. > > > > > Seriously -- you joke -- right?? > > > > > > > Not at all. > > > Is there anybody manufacturing Tesla Turbines? What is > their efficiency? Nothing in commercial production that I know of at this point. Tesla was having Allis-Chalmers build them originally, but unforturnately he was one of the world's worst businessmen, and they faded into obscurity, despite being more efficient and cheaper to build than anything on the market at that time. There is a company which sounds as if it might begin production sometime soon -- www.bladeless.com. There are quite a few other people building prototypes, however. Here's one that says they'll be in production with a 200kw unit "end of 2002" http://www.geocities.com/viscotherm/tesla.htm > > > > I can detail the problems with steam -- starts with exceptional > > > temperatures and pressures to get into the right ball park for high > > > "over-all" efficiencies. > > > > > > Steam Turbines are only expensive when having to handle those high > > > temperatures. > > > > > > > Thats just one of the ways Teslas are better than conventional turbines -- > > cheaper to build and last longer. > > I understand that as an "expansion engine" a > conventional steam turbine has an efficiency of about > 85%. Would you agree or disagree with this? > What would be a comparable "expansion engine > efficiency" for a Tesla Turbine? Tesla claimed over 90%, check out the ViscoTherm site, they seem to be claiming much higher. > ...del...> > > > And at half the cost of a "gasifier" -- > > > > > > The name of this game is converting thermal energy in biomass to usable > > > "power" at an efficient rate -- reliability for extended periods. > > > > > But you also have to meet clean air standards, at least in the US and Europe, > > and I'd think you'd have a bit of trouble doing that if the biomass isn't > > gasified, then the gas burned. Even in the small homesized wood burning boilers > > you see pretty horrific pollution except with the gasifiers. > > Small sized boiler and stove systems are exactly where > you expect the greatest pollution problems. Any decent > sized commercial boiler on biomass can be run with > virtually perfect combustion efficiency, and virtually > zero pollutant (unburned combustibles) escape. Interesting. is it simply a matter of a bigger fire, more heat so nothing escapes? I guess that makes sense, most of the smaller boilers are usually kept smoldering away rather than hot enough for gasification. > > In general, a gasifier requires a better fuel than does > a boiler which, in general, tends to raise the fuel > cost for a gasifier. Say we consider a 100 kW electric > output power plant: would anyone know the cost of a > "Gasifier + engine" system, in comparison to a "Boiler > + steam turbine" system? > > Another very important consideration is the likely need > for a Stationary Engineer to operate the 100 kW steam > gtenerating plant, while it may be possible to automate > teh gasifier and engine system, to the point that > continuous Staff presence is not required. This would > make a big difference in the cost of power output. > > > Kindest regards, > > Kevin CHisholm > > - > 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: > List-Help: > List-Unsubscribe: > List-Subscribe: > > 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 Tk at tke.dk Mon Sep 2 03:19:32 2002 From: Tk at tke.dk (Thomas Koch) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <006101c25273$4f384680$6801a8c0@image.dk> Dear All I dont think there are big problems on the engine side. If the gas is clean the engine can operate as long as on natural gas. If you need references contact Jenbacher. I think the effort should be concentrated on gas quality and handling. Thomas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry Dixon" To: Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 8:45 PM Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience > Dear Tom and All, > > Ah ah ah ah !!! The sobering questioning of hard (and harsh !) reality ! > Excellent. The inevitable shift in focus from the R&D perspective to the > commercial reality perspective. I'll be very interested to read the > responses to this one. For me (in the Australian sugar industry context, > and I dare say in a similar context for many others), the issues that you > question, of annual operating hours and maintenance period hours, are > CRUCIAL for commercial reality and viability long term. Unless > gasification can deliver at 4500+ hours, maybe 8000+, continuous (no > shutdowns), and overhaul of 8000+ hours, then forget it !!! > > Terry Dixon > Sugar Research Institute > AUSTRALIA > > ----- Forwarded by Terry Dixon/SRI on 02/09/2002 04:34 ----- > > "Tom Miles" > > s.com> cc: > Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience > 01/09/2002 > 16:05 > > > > > > > What has the experience been with engines and gasifiers? What are the > maintenace requirements? What is the typical annual use, 2000 hours? Are > there any that operate 6000 to 8000 hours per year? What is the expected > life? What are the actual maintenance intrevals? What facilities and > equipment are necessary for engine maintenance that are different than for > automotive or diesel power generation? What engines (make and model) work > well: Waukesha? Caterpiller? Lister? > > The most used engines for producer gas seem to be modified natural gas or > LP engines or diesels that are run as dual fueled. Are oil and air filter > change intrevals the same for producer gas as for LP? Every 150 hours? What > other maintenance needs to be done?What is the expected engine life > compared with actual engine life for LP or duel fueled diesels on producer > gas? Can we expect an overhaul with producer gas after 2000 hours? Is > engine life 10000 hours? After than what needs to be done? > > What has the experience been with converting existing diesels to dual > fueled applications? Good? Bad? What works and what doesn't work? > > What is a practical genset size? Do the 500 kWe engine-gensets that we have > seen promoted actually survive? If you were doing distributed generation at > 200 kWe what would you use? Four 50 kWe or larger gensets? > > What's the experience with derating? What's the actual power production for > an engine rated for LP or diesel? If you were sizing a new system for 200 > kWe how would you specify the engine? > > We understand from the more successful gasifier-genset suppliers that > engine applications need a well organized "support system." What support > does a 50-200 kWe gasogen need? > > Moisture in the fuel. If I make "bad" gas because of wet fuel does the > engine care? What kinds of problems result from wet fuel? What range of > gasifier fuel moisture can an engine tolerate without excessive derating? > > Where does one go for engine experience or information about the use of > engines with gasifiers(what documents or web links)? Are there test block > benchmark performance tests for producer gas? > > These are a lot of ignorant questions from one who is often asked for > direction. Until I use a gasogen to keep my own electronics on standby I'll > have to rely on the experience of others. Thank you for your contributions. > > Kind regards, > > Tom Miles > > > > > ------------------------------- > > This email message (including any file attachments transmitted with it) is > for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential > and privileged information. Any unauthorised alteration, disclosure or > distribution is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please > notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original > message. > > Any confidentiality or legal professional privilege is not waived or lost > by any mistaken delivery of the email. > > ------------------------------- > > > > - > Gasification List 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: > List-Help: > List-Unsubscribe: > List-Subscribe: > > 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 Gavin at roseplac.worldonline.co.uk Mon Sep 2 03:47:35 2002 From: Gavin at roseplac.worldonline.co.uk (Gavin Gulliver-Goodall) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <20020902032211.GA12768@cybershamanix.com> Message-ID: I have snipped all the text to save space and time. Small wood burners do not run as cleanly and efficiently as gasifiers because to control gasification you need controlled air supplies and consequently some sort of feedback . Gasification boilers like Kuenzel, tarm and Kob are much more expensive than a "conventional" boiler because of this control and feedback loop however they can achieve much higher efficiencies and clean combustion= less logs to haul and less smoke to pollute so they are worth the money- if only you can convince the customers. In the UK people either burn wood because they like a pretty fire, or because they are too poor to pay for fossil fuels- preferring to pay in their own labour for "free" wood fuel The first type want an attractive stove with nice flames (the heat output is not an issue) the second cannot afford a sophisticated boiler even if it would halve their labour (of love?) cutting logs. Gavin Gavin Gulliver-Goodall 3G Energi, Tel +44 (0)1835 824201 Fax +44 (0)870 8314098 Mob +44 (0)7773 781498 E mail Gavin@3genergi.co.uk The contents of this email and any attachments are the property of 3G Energi and are intended for the confidential use of the named recipient(s) only. They may be legally privileged and should not be communicated to or relied upon by any person without our express written consent. If you are not an addressee please notify us immediately at the address above or by email at Gavin@3genergi.co.uk . Any files attached to this email will have been checked with virus detection software before transmission. However, you should carry out your own virus check before opening any attachment. 3G Energi accepts no liability for any loss or damage that may be caused by software viruses. - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 kchisholm at ca.inter.net Mon Sep 2 04:07:17 2002 From: kchisholm at ca.inter.net (Kevin Chisholm) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020902024227.009a6e90@wgs1.btl.net> Message-ID: <3D7352C8.3DF5C023@ca.inter.net> Dear Harmon I am one of the elder fellas that believes Carnot, and who also believes, thermodynamically speaking, that: 1: You can't get something for nothing and 2: As a matter of fact, you can't even break even. When one sees a machine that runs at 85% efficiency, there is not much potential for improvement..... thats where the "conventional" gas or steam turbine stands. When Tesla Advocates claim 101% to 105% turbine efficiency, warning bells go off. Then when Viscotherm claim an "engine efficiency" of 89% to 114%, in comparison to about 35% for a conventional gas turbine that respects Carnots Constraints, I sort of lose interest. It does not appear to me that there is much of a future in perpetual motion. I would suggest that biomass gasification is being done a great disservice by attaching it to the Tesla Turbine with its claims of greater than 100% efficiency. Harmon Seaver wrote: > ...del... time. There > is a company which sounds as if it might begin production sometime soon -- > www.bladeless.com. There are quite a few other people building prototypes, > however. > Here's one that says they'll be in production with a 200kw unit "end of > 2002" http://www.geocities.com/viscotherm/tesla.htm > ViscoTherm is claiming to have a turbine system whuich has an efficiency of greater than 100%. Perpetual Motion does not work. ...del... > > > gasified, then the gas burned. Even in the small homesized wood burning boilers > > > you see pretty horrific pollution except with the gasifiers. > > > > Small sized boiler and stove systems are exactly where > > you expect the greatest pollution problems. Any decent > > sized commercial boiler on biomass can be run with > > virtually perfect combustion efficiency, and virtually > > zero pollutant (unburned combustibles) escape. > > Interesting. is it simply a matter of a bigger fire, more heat so nothing > escapes? I guess that makes sense, most of the smaller boilers are usually kept > smoldering away rather than hot enough for gasification. > As Sherlock Holmes would often say "Elementary, my dear Watson." Any competent Combustion Engineer can easily set up a boiler to give high efficiencies and low pollutant outputs. Kevin Chisholm - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 ZBihari at ormat.com Mon Sep 2 04:50:28 2002 From: ZBihari at ormat.com (Zoli Bihari) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Efficiency Message-ID: <727CFCBBE1C3D41181FC005004201AA0018C2FFB@ormat-nt> Dear Kevin and all, Younger fellows, like me, still believe in Carnot and the Laws of Thermodynamics. The expression "efficiency" is so widely used and can be defined in so many ways :-)) As for me, till I'll see the definition of what they call "efficiency" I'll stay skeptic. BTW, I didn't noticed any real answer to the very real-life questions referred by Tom Miles. Regards Zoli Zoli Bihari R&D - Ormat Ltd. - Israel Tel:   972 (8) 9433894 Fax:  972 (8) 9439901 E-mail: zbihari@ormat.com ********************************************************************************** Confidentiality Warning. The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and subject to certain laws pertaining to the protection of proprietary information. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message in not the intended recipient, or the authorized agent thereof, the reader is hereby notified that retention or any dissemination, distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail or by telephone, and delete all copies of the original message. Thank you. **********************************************************************************   From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Mon Sep 2 06:15:07 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020902024227.009a6e90@wgs1.btl.net> Message-ID: <20020902131512.GB13027@cybershamanix.com> I'm not sure where Viscotherm is getting their figures, the other site I posted was much more conservative, as are most. The primary advantage of Tesla turbines, I think, is that they are both cheaper to build and longer lasting -- conventional bladed gas turbines have a fairly high burnout rate -- and most all recent work with them shows better efficiency as well. On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 09:00:08AM -0300, Kevin Chisholm wrote: > Dear Harmon > > I am one of the elder fellas that believes Carnot, and > who also believes, thermodynamically speaking, that: > 1: You can't get something for nothing > and > 2: As a matter of fact, you can't even break even. > > When one sees a machine that runs at 85% efficiency, > there is not much potential for improvement..... thats > where the "conventional" gas or steam turbine stands. > When Tesla Advocates claim 101% to 105% turbine > efficiency, warning bells go off. > > Then when Viscotherm claim an "engine efficiency" of > 89% to 114%, in comparison to about 35% for a > conventional gas turbine that respects Carnots > Constraints, I sort of lose interest. It does not > appear to me that there is much of a future in > perpetual motion. > > I would suggest that biomass gasification is being done > a great disservice by attaching it to the Tesla Turbine > with its claims of greater than 100% efficiency. > > > > Harmon Seaver wrote: > > > ...del... > time. There > > is a company which sounds as if it might begin production sometime soon -- > > www.bladeless.com. There are quite a few other people building prototypes, > > however. > > Here's one that says they'll be in production with a 200kw unit "end of > > 2002" http://www.geocities.com/viscotherm/tesla.htm > > > ViscoTherm is claiming to have a turbine system whuich > has an efficiency of greater than 100%. Perpetual > Motion does not work. > > ...del... > > > > gasified, then the gas burned. Even in the small homesized wood burning boilers > > > > you see pretty horrific pollution except with the gasifiers. > > > > > > Small sized boiler and stove systems are exactly where > > > you expect the greatest pollution problems. Any decent > > > sized commercial boiler on biomass can be run with > > > virtually perfect combustion efficiency, and virtually > > > zero pollutant (unburned combustibles) escape. > > > > Interesting. is it simply a matter of a bigger fire, more heat so nothing > > escapes? I guess that makes sense, most of the smaller boilers are usually kept > > smoldering away rather than hot enough for gasification. > > > As Sherlock Holmes would often say "Elementary, my dear > Watson." Any competent Combustion Engineer can easily > set up a boiler to give high efficiencies and low > pollutant outputs. > > Kevin Chisholm -- 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 LINVENT at aol.com Mon Sep 2 06:25:20 2002 From: LINVENT at aol.com (LINVENT@aol.com) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Viscotherm/Tesla Turbine Message-ID: Dear all, The claims of over 100% efficiency by Viscotherm need to be explained. I believe that their math is flawed. 30 lbm/hour of propane sounds like a lot more than 254 hp. From the size, however, there would be a lot of applications anyhow. Pollution claims are not backed up with emission data. That should be easy to do if they have proof of it. Leland T. Taylor President Thermogenics Inc. 7100-F 2nd St. NW Albuquerque, New Mexico USA 87107 Phone: 505-761-5633, fax: 341-0424, website: thermogenics.com. In order to read the compressed files forwarded under AOL, it is necessary to download Aladdin's freeware Unstuffit at aladdin.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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 hseaver at cybershamanix.com Mon Sep 2 06:27:50 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020902132806.GA13528@cybershamanix.com> On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 09:06:29PM -0400, LINVENT@aol.com wrote: > There are engine manufacturers who offer engines with 20,000 hours between > overhauls providing the producer gas meets their stringent contaminant > analysis. Just the cost of conducting the analysis is probably $15,000. They > also offer a contract maintenance agreement with $.08/kwhr fee, they ship a > replacement engine, take the old one and slide it out and bolt up a new one > in a few hours. And how much do the engines cost? What's their power rating and size? For the $15K analysis fee I could buy at least 5 large diesel truck engines in good shape, each capable of 100kw even with derating. (rest snipped) -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com - Gasification List Archives: http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, Reedtb2@cs.com www.webpan.com/BEF List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html - Other Gasification Events and Information: http://www.bioenergy2002.org http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Mon Sep 2 06:42:27 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <00bf01c2517d$a6f940f0$0301a8c0@tomslaptop> Message-ID: <20020902134245.GB13528@cybershamanix.com> On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:42:02AM +0100, David Reynolds-Lacey wrote: > Tom, > > You've kind of taken the wind out of my sails with > your post because those are some of the questions > that I was going to ask as part of my next post. I > was also going to raise some questions about steam > turbines and flash steam as an viable? alternative > to gasification but now that seems to be being > covered briefly but are there any more comments on > steam? > > I append the other questions that I was going to > ask. > > > What are the advantages of running a diesel engine > on gas if gas is to be the sole fuel (can it be?), > I presume the engine will need to be converted to > spark, so would it be better to use a petroleum > engine? No, you want the higher compression of the diesel. You can either convert to spark or just run small amounts of biodiesel (or straight waste vegetable oil) to provide ignition. > Is there a stage when a gas turbine becomes > preferable to a reciprocating engine? The gas turbines in sizes comparable to diesel truck engines (or even car engines) don't seem to be anywhere nearly as efficient, and although they have a lot less moving parts to wear out, the blades suffer badly from erosion and are very expensive to replace. That's why so many people are interested in building Tesla turbines -- obviously a turbine, if it were cheaper, longer lasting, and even just as efficient (35%) as a diesel engine would be more desirable. > What additional problems (if any) can one expect > with a gas turbine and does the gas need to be > pre-processed in any different way to gas for a > reciprocating engine? > > Is it feasible to store producer gas? > > David > > > > > > > > > > - > 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: > List-Help: > List-Unsubscribe: > List-Subscribe: > > 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 d.rl at virgin.net Mon Sep 2 18:46:27 2002 From: d.rl at virgin.net (David Reynolds-Lacey) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Now some gas experience questions. Message-ID: <3D74222D.8738E819@virgin.net> Dear All, As a follow up to Tom's questions plus a couple of my own about engines, I have a few gas questions. Is there an optimum temperature at which to produce gas i.e. if you make it a too low a temp or too high a temp what happens to the quality of the gas ? (I do realise that at a much too high temperature it would spontaneously ignite) What pre-processing of the gas is required before use in a reciprocating engine? Is it cost effectively possible to recover any other wood by-products (apart from char) from the process? I am particularly interested in ending up with gas, lumpwood charcoal and heat all of which I have use, in fact, a need, for. Would I therefore require to use small wood "lumps" to produce minimum charcoal fines. Is there a optimum size for the "lumps" and could say, 150 mm X 400 mm long logs split into 4, be used. I produce charcoal from logs of the size stated and larger at the moment and find that most fines are created when physically breaking the charred logs into the required sizes for charcoal. To what size would these (lumps or logs) naturally break down in the process, assuming careful handling when emptying? It seems that the production of smaller wood lumps is quite labour and energy intensive how ESSENTIAL is it. What is the optimal desired mc of the wood I presume bone dry - but what is the drying trade off considering drying costs. I am considering indirect heating of the wood in a retort type process by using the flue output (around 700C) of a lightly forced draft ,woodchip (or forest debris) burner. The burner, based on a Andrew Heggie design, will burn woodchip at up to 50 percent mc and give an output of >50kW(t) with CO at around 150ppm, will burn for around 5/6 hours on a batch feed. This will dispose of my forest debris in a useful way whilst keeping separated from my lumpwood charcoal. I have done this on a small (200 litre oil drum) scale with good results but in this case the container was housed inside the burner. I now propose to upscale to a 1.5 M diam X 1.5 M high container made from 8mm thick steel housed in an insulated "cosy" about of about 15 percent greater volume. Has anyone done anything like this? It would be good to know of any problems especially with the transfer of heat into a container of this size with a total surface area of about only 12 Sq M. Any available heat transfer figures would be invaluable. I also take this opportunity to set out below my plans, aspirations and implementation ideas referred to in my recent (also lengthy) post Unlike many off you, my Web site is not up and running yet, thus I have nowhere to refer you, therefore permit me to give below a brief details of who I am and what I am doing in order that you can get a " feel" for what I am all about. I retired from business 10 years ago at the age of 48 and since this time I have engaged in restoration, conservation and environmental activities. Most of my own work now is of an altruistic nature. I am well known locally to be passionate and outspoken about environmental matters and appear occasionally in the press but rarely on TV, preferring the visual anonymity (most valuable in a small community) of radio where I have recently completed a short series ("A walk in the woods") with the BBC. I am currently preparing another series "Woodland Biomass Energy - the real world" (working title), thus my interest in getting a combined charcoal, heat and power system up and running, although I do have a personal need for such a system in any event. I am (inter alia) a competent amateur (some say frustrated) mechanical engineer and have a well equipped CNC toolroom and fabrication shop. Five years ago I purchased a 60 ha much neglected and derelict Ancient semi-natural woodland and Site of Special Scientific Interest on the edge of the Wyre Forest in Worcestershire, England, I am hoping to acquire a further 100 ha shortly. I have set about restoring and conserving this woodland using traditional methods including short rotation coppicing. The work is being carried out through a not-for-profit organisation (Areley Wood Enterprises) founded and funded by me. The Wood has a long history in charcoal production, especially for use in iron making when the Industrial Revolution started a few miles away and gunpowder production, along with other traditional woodland products. Later coal was produced from the several mines in the wood, one of which was worked until the late 1920's and is believed to still have a workable seam. Charcoal and later, coal was also used to fire the brick kilns in the Wood, bricks and tiles made from the clay on the site were widely distributed throughout Worcestershire from the 16th C until the late 19th C. My own energy requirement and current plans. I require to produce 72.5 kVA, 415V, 3 phase (100 amps/phase) to run my toolroom and fabricating shop, which I intend to move from my home to a building at Areley Wood, I also require heating for the shop and for glasshouses. I have 6 dwellinghouses within 300M of the Wood and I hope to be able to supply them with hot water for heating etc. and possibly electrical power at a later date. This system will be my proving ground prior to moving on to my next scheme, which is to build 5 or 6 small industrial units with adjacent dwellings near to the Wood, all of which will (I envisage) be powered with biomass sourced from the Wood. I realise that small scale systems with the fuel source on the doorstep is the best, perhaps only at present, way forward. We have 1000's of hectares of land in the UK for which farmers are being paid to do nothing with and this land could be planted out with woodland, managed as coppice with standards and small "green field" light industrial developments with adjacent dwellings, of the type I plan to build, could be built alongside. This entire enterprise will be established and run as a not-for-profit enterprise, funded entirely from my own resources as I want no restrictions, bureaucracy, boards of Trustees or committees to waste valuable time pondering and deciding at these early stages, when manufacturing by committee just does not work, I just want to do it, I want to do it quickly and I want to do it myself. I hope to end up with a product that is easy for a competent person to build from supplied component parts and in which many parts can be easily fabricated on site from detailed drawings by the person/organisation, in order to keep bought in ready made parts, thus ownership cost, to the minimum. A value added advantage of the system that I envisage is that I could buy back the charcoal (from UK based users) if this was not required by them, as I have a ready market for it. The UK barbecue charcoal market is around GBP40M per annum, with (I believe) 97 percent percent imported, some from not very environmentally or ecologically friendly sources. Future implementation plans: If a usable and reliable product results from this exercise it is my intention, in the latter part of 2003 early 2004, to set up a fund (The Reynolds-Lacey Bioenergy Trust) starting with circa GPB1M which will provide targeted, strictly controlled (maybe in some instances matched) funding for the construction of the system by "qualifying" individuals or organisations. The funding may only be used for the purchase of components and materials for the construction of the equipment i.e. not for salaries, research fees, consultancy fees, feasibility studies and the like. Certain special tools and equipment, like welding equipment etc., to directly aid construction may qualify for funding, this could even be supplied on a loan basis and moved on to another "builder" on completion. The equipment must be operated from woodland produce, such as short rotation coppicing and the like, on or near the site. Priority would be given to projects where new woodland is to be planted and managed and funding would then be available for planting. Funded "Builders" may build the equipment for other "qualifiers" who do not have the resources, at a reasonable charge for the area (again audited), this would provide a small business opportunity for someone whose financial aspirations were not great, i.e someone who is happy to simply make a reasonable living. I emphasise that this is "hands on" funding, all funded projects will be strictly supervised and audited to maximise the spending of funds on ONLY the actual production of a REAL WORKING product. Obviously the drawings and components etc would be available for purchase by any other non qualifying person/organisation through a not-for -profit company or any other company that wished to manufacture under licence. The only reason that any arising Property Rights or copyrights etc. would be protected would be only to prevent exploitation of the design etc. for purely commercial reasons, the licence fee would be low and based on an reasonable percentage (audited) of the profit generated which would have to be deemed and proved reasonable. There is much fine tuning to do on this and I would consider any suggestions that you may wish to put forward. I would also invite interested parties who may be interested in acting as future Trusties, supervisors/ project auditors to make themselves known. However, please don't apply for funds yet there is a lot to do before we get to that stage! Rather than clutter up the list with this matter perhaps it may be better to contact me off list, especially if you already have a product (or an idea for one) or could make components that would fit the bill, but I don't want to buy the product ready built, I want to build it myself to start with, that way I learn very quickly. I do have a diesel 72.5 kVA, 3 phase generator with a six cylinder Perkins engine, I don't know if it will be usable for gas conversion but it works perfectly well on diesel. This is my proposed contribution to try to further biomass gasification usage. Other contributors, where possible, may also consider making a philanthropic gesture, perhaps if only to get their own idea off the ground via my scheme or to further their own research or " market ready" product profile (especially if it could be easily supplied in kit form), or maybe even just to further the gasification cause. With this in mind, I welcome any initially free contributions/ideas and/or physical help. I look forward to your responses. Incidentally, if you think it won't work, please say so and why, I do need to know. Regards, David PS It's 3.35 AM and I've only just seen the latest news from the Earth Summit - very sad. I would suggest that the compromise on the renewable energy target certainly has the fingerprints of the fossil fuel industry all over it. Well, maybe in another 10 years, who knows? - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 FMurrl at aol.com Tue Sep 3 11:27:11 2002 From: FMurrl at aol.com (FMurrl@aol.com) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? Message-ID: <116.167eabc0.2aa66646@aol.com> I think we need to take a nuanced approach and desist from making sweeping generalisations about gasification economics which may not be valid for all countries. While it is true that the cost of biomass harvesting (a labour intensive activity) in developed economies may be quite high and the soil productivity lower thus rendering the cost advantage unattractive, the situation in India (and other tropical countries) is entirely different. For instance, we have installed several gasification systems for both thermal and electrical applications (replacing fossil fuels such as Light Diesel Oil, High Speed Diesel & Heavy Furnace Oil) at various geographical locations in India, and in most cases the total capital investment has been recovered from 12-18 months. The brief economics are as follows. I have given the figures in US currency (and in Indian Rs. in brackets) considering exchange rate of Rs. 48/00 per US $. Mr. Krisnaswamy: Thanks for your note. I am glad that you ignored your own advice, and provided the details on your specific application. I personally feel that we need such specifics, rather than just generalizations. In fact, I disagree that my comments were generalizations. In fact, I believe that I said that my comments were limited to our experience in North America, based on North American costs and US tax structure. On the other hand, I am always interested in hearing about other jurisdictions where biomass is currently viable. It gives one hope. For those of us in the US, we will have to await the will of Congress and the pending energy legislation. Right now, it appears that large megawatt biomass systems await either the right tax structure (e.g. Section 45, IRC) or the right Renewable Portfolio Standard (currently in a handful of states, and under consideration by the federal congress). Regards, Fred Murrell Biomass Development Co. Bradenton Florida www.biomassdev.com From d.rl at virgin.net Tue Sep 3 13:59:47 2002 From: d.rl at virgin.net (David Reynolds-Lacey) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Thankyou Message-ID: <3D75303A.DBC63790@virgin.net> Thanks to all that have responded to date with suggestions and offers, some of whom I have replied to already. I hereby thank, on list, those to whom I haven't yet replied as I will be unexpectedly unavailable for short while but I will also respond to each of you direct on my return. I note with some surprise that several of you are Lurkers on this list, yet you appear to have a great deal to offer, perhaps you should be posting also. Thanks again for the encouraging support. David - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 Wed Sep 4 01:16:57 2002 From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: RE; Engine Experience Message-ID: <001401c253f3$ae6c80e0$14ff58db@newpc> Dear Tom M, Here is an attempt to answer your questions which I can only provide from experience we have acquired over the years. I appreciate you ask specific questions, but if you want to do it right, then the whole exercise begins with where the installation is to be located. Given we are talking about a gasifier that delivers tar free gas without some sort of exotic clean up system, almost any engine built as a generator set will do the job. Engine: The choice of engine should be one that is the most popular used locally, so that the servicing and spare parts are available if required. Outside of the USA, spark ignition gas engines as used for natural gas are not thick on the ground, making it necessary to carry consumable spares, usually two years supply. Spark plugs can be a major problem if dirty gas gets to the engine, or the engine is converted from diesel where the plug is deep in the head causing it to cook. Ceramic H.T ignition connectors can also be a problem and they don't like rough handling. Maintenance: Even though the gas can be very clean, the presence of moisture will ensure carbon blacks reach the engine. These are not harmful, but they do reach the oil, as does the moisture. Time or distance has never been the criteria for oil changes, and with producer gas, it is more important to monitor the oil condition and change it before the failure of its additive package causes acid erosion and excessive friction from loss of boundary lubrication. Because we used to make them, the addition of a bypass oil filter will control the moisture and keep the insoluble levels down; all of which can be monitored using the Blotter Spot Test. Unless excessive heating becomes a problem, oil filters are changed at the interval recommended by the manufacturer. Oil filter replacement should ensure the engine maker supplies them as replacement brands often have less filtering surface shortening service life. Air cleaner life can be monitored and determined by the pressure drop, which should not exceed 10" W.G. This is a choice you can opt for in places where dust isn't a problem. Best Choice of Engine: Dual Fuel: Where the genset is the only source of power, my choice is to recommend dual fuel diesels as there will always come a time for the gasification to stop. Where this option is preferred, the engine pistons should have austentic steel crowns for the top rings. Aluminium pistons do suffer from top groove hammering caused by reduced diesel flows on dual fuel. Valve seat recession can be a problem with cheap engines. Inlet manifolds with entry at one end will cause uneven gas flows to the cylinders and this results in unnatural bearing wear on the crankshaft. With appropriate modifications, this would be the cheapest option if you were buying new engines. Spark Ignition: Any of the engines made for natural gas are appropriate for producer gas, but most rely on turbo charging to get the power up and this introduces a potential problem in the after cooler if fitted. If dirty gas reaches the engine, the fine tubes on the cooler block with condensed tar. Not a problem 'if' your gas quality never changes. The same applies if the engine is a C.H.P system where the exhaust heat exchanger also blocks. Engine Life: Because producer gas derates the engine, it can never be pushed to reach the maximum output levels established with other fuels. Under these circumstances, the engine life should at least be equal to fossil fuel use, given the oil is monitored as previously mentioned. Engine Size: For 200kWe, you also must remember to add 50 or 60 cycle as one runs at 1500rpm and the other 1800rpm. This also highlights the need to ensure the ancillary electrical system of the gasifier matches the electrical frequency if the two are from separate supply. These are figures for naturally aspirated engines, as turbo engines were not considered appropriate for remote installations. Spark Ignition 50 Cycle 43 litre cylinder volume 60 Cycle 36 litre cylinder volume Diesel Dual Fuel 50 Cycle 35 litre cylinder volume 60 Cycle 29 litre cylinder volume As you can see, the cylinder volumes are considerable for a singular engine, so twin engines could offer a cost alternative. If you can take a risk, turbo engines seem to be the way to go, but until my associates show me their results from current testing, I will stick to that which I know best. The Dilemma: There are no engines specifically built for producer gas, and I would avoid any that have been modified internally for the purpose. The standard engine, other than pistons and valve seats is perfectly okay, if we just size them larger for our needs. Any internal modifications to a standard engine makes it an orphan and difficult to service if parts are required. In a do it yourself project, there are many opportunities to use old engines, but if you implement a commercial project, junking a new engine will kill your project and most likely your reputation. The engine remember, is part of an integrated system and it will only be as good as the gasifier. To interface the gasifier and engine is another system again - not so hard with a base load, but tricky with stand alone systems. For me to skip over the main points regarding engines fuelled with producer gas just doesn't do the subject justice. It should I hope indicate that there are plenty of engines to choose from for every size of project and they can work like 'Swiss Watches'. 8,000 Hours: I have not heard of any ordinary gasification system where the engine operates 24 hours a day, but there shouldn't be a problem if the gasifier can deliver an uninterrupted gas supply. This amounts to a 100% duty cycle for the gasifier, not impossible, but pretty demanding on components. Realistically I think you could certainly operate an engine to the maximum less the servicing requirement, with possibly improved life from never starting from cold. Fuel Moisture: The danger of high moisture levels in the fuel is that it can slow down the oxidation zone temperature and watery hydrocarbons (tar) enters the gas coolling and cleaning system (pretty messy). If the gasifier is of reasonable design, the oxidation temperature will stay high enough to handle say, up to 30% M.C. All this does is increase the amount of water condensate without the tar coming through the system. The engine might slow if the condensing moisture is carried through an undersized gas cooler in which case saturation of the filter system will reduce gas flows. It's better to have good fuel quality! Finally, if we accept that engines can do a great job generating power from a gasifier, given we do have to pay attention to detail, what's the problem? Without a doubt, it's the people we attempt to help to use their own resources. They don't follow operating procedures, change fuel specifications and become greater experts than those who supply the equipment. We do our best and they do their darndest! Hope this helps Regards 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 tbollman at twlakes.net Wed Sep 4 13:03:53 2002 From: tbollman at twlakes.net (tbollman) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Gas concentration and storage Message-ID: <01KM3Z9H57B88ZF8DO@SMTP00.InfoAve.Net> I was wondering if anyone on this list could address the possiblity of compressing producer gas and storing it in LP style gas cylinders? Also, I am curious wether or not anyone has addressed the possibility of filtering ? producer gas with the goal of removing (or reducing) the inert nitrogen. It seems to me that the BTU/Cubic meter could be greatly enhanced if the inert compounds in the gas could be eliminated/reduced. - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 dschmidt at undeerc.org Wed Sep 4 13:16:55 2002 From: dschmidt at undeerc.org (Schmidt, Darren) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Gas concentration and storage Message-ID: <601A55066596D211A7AD00104BC6FB25010D6D66@BACKOFFICE> I do not have the numbers off the top of my head, but it requires extremely high pressures to liquefy syngas (H2, CH4, CO, CO2, N2) LP (C3H8) works great in tanks because it is densified as a liquid under reasonable pressures in a tank. As the tank nozzle is opened to the atmosphere, useable vapor is produced. I think if you run the numbers you will find that it would not be practical to provide storage tanks due to high pressure requirements or lack of sufficient storage density to be economically attractive. Anyone want to run the numbers and post? -----Original Message----- From: tbollman [mailto:tbollman@twlakes.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 5:07 PM To: gasificationcrestorg Subject: GAS-L: Gas concentration and storage I was wondering if anyone on this list could address the possiblity of compressing producer gas and storing it in LP style gas cylinders? Also, I am curious wether or not anyone has addressed the possibility of filtering ? producer gas with the goal of removing (or reducing) the inert nitrogen. It seems to me that the BTU/Cubic meter could be greatly enhanced if the inert compounds in the gas could be eliminated/reduced. - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 Schultz.Karl at epamail.epa.gov Wed Sep 4 13:35:49 2002 From: Schultz.Karl at epamail.epa.gov (Schultz.Karl@epamail.epa.gov) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: nitrogen rejection Message-ID: Visit our website for information on nitrogen rejection. Go to the "library" and download our report (now somewhat dated) entitled: Technical and Economic Assessment of Potential to Upgrade Gob Gas to Pipeline Quality. The gas is different but the main contaminant is nitrogen. Technologies have advanced since this publication and costs have gone down. Karl H. Schultz Coalbed Methane Program U.S. Environmental Protection Agency www.epa.gov/coalbed - 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: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: 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 cicbcal at cal2.vsnl.net.in Wed Sep 4 23:30:52 2002 From: cicbcal at cal2.vsnl.net.in (Kollol Dey) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Rice - Husk Message-ID: <016501c254ae$226e6ca0$486dc5cb@kdey>   I wish to know if any study has been done on gasifying rice - husk using a fluidised bed gasifier - say of the Winkler type?   Understand in a moving bed gasifier (updraft / downdraft / crossdraft) if one has to use rice-husk as feed stock, then it has got to be briquetted as otherwise (that is if used directly without briquetting) consistence in gas quality and quantity from large gasifiers (say 500 KWe and above) is difficult to ensure, which makes power generation virtually impossible.   Comments please.   Regards   K.Dey. From tombreed at attbi.com Thu Sep 5 10:12:40 2002 From: tombreed at attbi.com (Tom Reed) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Rice - Husk In-Reply-To: <016501c254ae$226e6ca0$486dc5cb@kdey> Message-ID: <006401c254c7$95898d00$9888fd0c@TOMBREED> Dear Kollol:   There have been lost of gasifiers, FB and bubbling bed for rice hulls.  See..   "A Study of ...Rice Huk-to-Energy Systems and Equipment" by L. Velupillai et al, Lousiana State Univ. Ag Center Press,  (1997) call 225 388 8349.  Also visit Prime Energy Systems at   http://www.prmenergy.com   Also our site at www.woodgas.com   Yours truly,                                    TOM REED                  BEF GASWORKS  
----- Original Message -----
From: Kollol Dey To: gasification@crest.org Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 1:26 AM Subject: GAS-L: Rice - Husk   I wish to know if any study has been done on gasifying rice - husk using a fluidised bed gasifier - say of the Winkler type?   Understand in a moving bed gasifier (updraft / downdraft / crossdraft) if one has to use rice-husk as feed stock, then it has got to be briquetted as otherwise (that is if used directly without briquetting) consistence in gas quality and quantity from large gasifiers (say 500 KWe and above) is difficult to ensure, which makes power generation virtually impossible.   Comments please.   Regards   K.Dey. From tmiles at trmiles.com Fri Sep 6 07:32:47 2002 From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Draft Specs for 200 kWe CHP Message-ID: <00a701c255ba$4a078500$0301a8c0@tomslaptop> Thank you for the varied responses to my engine questions. I see in many areas the potential for cost effective CHP systems in the 200 kWe size range. 100-200We is probably the most common size for diesel generation in the northern tier logging and sawmill communities from Canada-Alaska-East and NW RUssia, Scanadinavia, N Ireland and back to the Canadian maritimes. It is a size that is probably less fequently found, but suitable for application, in Asia, Africa and Latin America. It is also probably a common size for LP and gas engines in remote communites in North America. 200 kWe is a size suitable for commercial applications in North America. Wood pellet producers are looking for new bulk markets. The recent increase in wood pellet production in Europe (2 million tons per year) and North America (1 million tons per year) makes a convenient bulk fuel available at an affordable cost. (A hospital in Quebec is burning wood pellets from Western Canada for less than $100/ton delivered.) So fuels could include sawdust, shavings, chips, pellets, etc.      There are several suppliers on this list that either have delivered systems of this size or would like to. But we have very few working examples of working gasifiers with heat recovery that are in productive operation. There's the Volund project, Ankur, Energreen and some others that have been mentioned. I heard that System Johannson had installed a community CHP system in South Africa but I can not find anything about their systems.   I'd like to develop draft specifications here online for a 200 kWe CHP system that we could use to discuss what we could expect in cost and performance from various parts of the system: engine-generator, gas cleaning (wet and dry), wastewater water treatment, gasifiers, fuel preparation and handling, heating systems, controls for various applications, etc. I don't think anyone's business is threatened by this kind of discussion. In fact some may find opportunities. Several companies - Ankur, Energreen, Fluidyne, Thermogenics - have been generous in sharing information to date. I will post any suitable links or information on the CREST Gasification website http://www.repp.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html   The biggest risk is keeping anyone on topic. This group is more volatile than any of the fuels we're dealing with.   Tom      From tmiles at trmiles.com Sun Sep 8 13:31:38 2002 From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Draft Specs for 200 kWe CHP In-Reply-To: <00a701c255ba$4a078500$0301a8c0@tomslaptop> Message-ID: <003601c2577e$b4d1cf60$6601a8c0@tommain> All,   After receiving several notes of encouragement I have created a web page for information, links, documents or images related to discussing specifications for a 200 kWe CHP system. Any one who wants to put up their project for comment or showcase an operating system is welcome to contribute.    http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html   It is a "blank page" with a list of categories for discussion and links to suppliers and publications.    Based on operating experience, what are the performance requirements or benchmarks we should look for in a 200 kWe CHP system on both the heat side and the power side? What capacity, how many hours of operation, availability, etc.   Tom Miles   From ascent at wilnetonline.net Mon Sep 9 00:44:09 2002 From: ascent at wilnetonline.net (ascent@wilnetonline.net) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Glow Plugs Message-ID: <04f401c257dd$91fa8ae0$a379a4ca@wilnetonline.net> Dear All,   We are looking for specific information and experience on use of glow plugs instead of spark plugs for 1500 rpm engines.  Any feedback will be very welcome.  We are particularly interested in knowing recent experience with use of glow plugs in natural gas engines.   Thanks,     Ms Ingrid Fernandes - Manager Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,"Ankur", Near Old Sama Jakat NakaBaroda 390 008, IndiaPhones : 0265 793098/794021 * Fax : 794042 Web Site : www.ankurscientific.com From selva at me.iitb.ac.in Mon Sep 9 04:00:30 2002 From: selva at me.iitb.ac.in (N.Selvakumar (PE/PPP)) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Self Ignition Teperature of Producer Gas Message-ID: Dear All, What will happen if I mix hot Producer Gas (Temperature of gas around 400-450C) with air (room temperature). 1. Presence of H2 specie in producer gas will self ignite the gas at what temperature. 2. The dilution ratio of gas to air 3 to 5 (by volume), will this dilution ratio avoid self ignition (Since stochiometric A/F ratio for Producer gas is 0.98 by volume). Mixing of air to hot producer gas in this range of dilution ratio will avoid danger of explosion, Am I correct?.. What I have doubt is Fundamentals of premixing of high temperature producer gas with room Temperature of air. I welcome all healthy discussion. With Regards, Selvakumar With Regards, Selvakumar ============================================================================== | Teleph:022-5722545 Extno:8378/8385/7386 N.Selvakumar PE | C/O Prof.(Mrs.) P.P.Parikh.| Dept of Mech Engg. | Want to Know more about My Work, Plz Visit IITB, Mumbai. 400 076. | India | www.me.iitb.ac.in/garp ========================================================================== Renewable energy is green, clean and is the future energy source. So join us in developing sophisticated technology package . Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Mon Sep 9 05:12:03 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Glow Plugs In-Reply-To: <04f401c257dd$91fa8ae0$a379a4ca@wilnetonline.net> Message-ID: <20020909121200.GB1235@cybershamanix.com> As far as I know, glow plugs are only used to pre-heat the combustion chambers of diesel engines, they do not provide ignition. There are, of course, model airplane engines that use glow plugs for ignition, but that is a totally different concept, and, I might add, they don't last long. On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 01:51:50PM +0530, ascent@wilnetonline.net wrote: > Dear All, > > We are looking for specific information and experience on use of glow plugs instead of spark plugs for 1500 rpm engines. Any feedback will be very welcome. We are particularly interested in knowing recent experience with use of glow plugs in natural gas engines. > > Thanks, > > > Ms Ingrid Fernandes - Manager > Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt. Ltd., > "Ankur", Near Old Sama Jakat Naka > Baroda 390 008, India > Phones : 0265 793098/794021 * Fax : 794042 > Web Site : www.ankurscientific.com -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From pbadger at bioenergyupdate.com Mon Sep 9 05:34:44 2002 From: pbadger at bioenergyupdate.com (Phillip C. Badger) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Prototype and Intellectual Property for sale Message-ID: FOR SALE 6-MW Aero-derivative Turbine BIOPOWER PLANT The BIOTEN power plant is a third generation, modular system based on an aero-derivative turbine fueled with powdered wood burned in a pressurized combustion chamber. The present owners of the plant are selling the plant due to the lack of a Green Power Purchase Agreement. The plant and intellectual property represent over a $25 million investment. Main Equipment: · GE LM 1500 generator and power turbine modified from gas to biomass fuel, model LM 1500 PB104.E417-120GE-E 1552335 · Power Turbine 7 LM 1500 PB 104 s/n 417-120 10 coupling corp. Turbine shaft, 400C high speed The BIOTEN process will be sold as is at Red Boiling Springs, Tennessee, with a one plant license and access to BIOTEN’s intellectual property for you use by the one plant. The price for the plant and accompanying intellectual property license for the plant is US$850,000. It will be the responsibility of the purchasing party to dismantle and move the power plant and equipment at the purchaser’s expense. In addition, BIOTEN will also consider sale of BIOTEN Corporation and the BIOTEN process patents and proprietary knowledge. For additional information and a complete listing of the equipment contact Phillip C. Badger, General Bioenergy, Inc., P.O. Box 26, Florence, Alabama 35630 USA, phone +1 256 740 5634, fax +1 256 740 5635, email pbadger@bioenergyupdate.com. Normal office hours are 8:00am until 5:00pm, Central Daylight Time, Monday through Friday. This offer is for a limited time. If you are interested in this opportunity, do not delay. Other terms and conditions apply. Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From dschmidt at undeerc.org Mon Sep 9 07:43:21 2002 From: dschmidt at undeerc.org (Schmidt, Darren) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Self Ignition Temperature of Producer Gas Message-ID: <601A55066596D211A7AD00104BC6FB25010D6D78@BACKOFFICE> Good question. Work we have done in this area is confidential. However what I can tell you is that your conditions are close to the borderline of ignition vs no ignition. I do not know if there is any public data available to help you. You may need to do some experiments to prove it to yourself. I can assure you that when hydrogen is mixed with other gasses the potential for auto ignition changes, and your statement about avoiding autoignition is likely correct. However your concentrations of hydrogen are higher than the concentrations I am familiar with. I cannot say for sure whether you are at the autoignition temperature or not. -----Original Message----- From: N.Selvakumar (PE/PPP) [mailto:selva@me.iitb.ac.in] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 6:56 AM To: gasification@crest.org Subject: GAS-L: Self Ignition Teperature of Producer Gas Dear All, What will happen if I mix hot Producer Gas (Temperature of gas around 400-450C) with air (room temperature). 1. Presence of H2 specie in producer gas will self ignite the gas at what temperature. 2. The dilution ratio of gas to air 3 to 5 (by volume), will this dilution ratio avoid self ignition (Since stochiometric A/F ratio for Producer gas is 0.98 by volume). Mixing of air to hot producer gas in this range of dilution ratio will avoid danger of explosion, Am I correct?.. What I have doubt is Fundamentals of premixing of high temperature producer gas with room Temperature of air. I welcome all healthy discussion. With Regards, Selvakumar With Regards, Selvakumar ============================================================================ == | Teleph:022-5722545 Extno:8378/8385/7386 N.Selvakumar PE | C/O Prof.(Mrs.) P.P.Parikh.| Dept of Mech Engg. | Want to Know more about My Work, Plz Visit IITB, Mumbai. 400 076. | India | www.me.iitb.ac.in/garp ========================================================================== Renewable energy is green, clean and is the future energy source. So join us in developing sophisticated technology package . Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From arnt at c2i.net Mon Sep 9 13:29:58 2002 From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020827210121.00a74e38@shawmail> Message-ID: <20020909232820.4eb5fb3e.arnt@c2i.net> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002 10:17:57 +0200, "Thomas Koch" wrote in message <005201c257d9$c9a44160$6801a8c0@image.dk>: > Dear Ingrid > > I just browsed through your web page. > > To me it is not clear how many gasifiers you have build and how well > they work. To me it looked very much like "sales talk". > As an example: > Your FBG system has exately the same relative specification for a 40 > kw and a 335 kw unit. It is a down draft system that can handle down ..url to these? How did you find them? > to 2mm particles and it produces 4 % CH4 and it have a gas washer with > recirkuiation of water. Is it possible that you could provide us with > some more technical data? > > Best regards > > Thomas Koch > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "Kevin Chisholm" ; "Laszlo Paszner" > Cc: ; > ; ; > ; ; > Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 12:10 PM Subject: Re: GAS-L: A > plague of criticism, any solutions? > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > I am Ingrid Fernandes, Sr. Manager, Ankur Scientific, India. We > > are basically a Biomass Gasification company and have been in the > > business for a number of years now, making enough money not only to > > support ourselves but also to support further technology development > > work through our own resources. Do visit our web site > > www.ankurscientific.com . ..Ingrid, I hope you did not pay money for this crap: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www.ankurscientific.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline My opinion is you may have been ripped off. > > Regards, > > > > Ingrid > > -- ..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 Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From arnt at c2i.net Mon Sep 9 13:54:51 2002 From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:07 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Glow Plugs In-Reply-To: <04f401c257dd$91fa8ae0$a379a4ca@wilnetonline.net> Message-ID: <20020909235301.7e8faecd.arnt@c2i.net> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002 07:12:00 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote in message <20020909121200.GB1235@cybershamanix.com>: > As far as I know, glow plugs are only used to pre-heat the > combustion chambers of diesel engines, they do not provide ignition. > There are, of course, model airplane engines that use glow plugs for > ignition, but that is a totally different concept, and, I might add, > they don't last long. ..these are actually coiled or spiralled platinium wire _catalyzers_, the methanol vapor-and-air cylinder charge fires from the _combined_ effect of compression and the catalyzer. > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 01:51:50PM +0530, ascent@wilnetonline.net > wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > We are looking for specific information and experience on use of > > glow plugs instead of spark plugs for 1500 rpm engines. Any ..these are the "semi-diesel" kinda engines? Slow turning monsters, more like 300-500 rpm. I'd get some used Japanese auto engines instead, for throw-away service. > > feedback will be very welcome. We are particularly interested in > > knowing recent experience with use of glow plugs in natural gas > > engines. ..the most recent use I'm aware of, is WWII fishermen bleeding the combustion chamber for idle on those "semi-diesels" on wood gas, is this "idle-valving" in "Gengas", or do I remember it from my own version? -- ..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 Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From arnt at c2i.net Mon Sep 9 13:58:08 2002 From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020902024227.009a6e90@wgs1.btl.net> Message-ID: <20020909235600.0058f497.arnt@c2i.net> On Sun, 1 Sep 2002 22:22:11 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote in message <20020902032211.GA12768@cybershamanix.com>: > Here's one that says they'll be in production with a 200kw unit > "end of > 2002" http://www.geocities.com/viscotherm/tesla.htm ..step up one level to http://www.geocities.com/viscotherm/ ;-D > Tesla claimed over 90%, check out the ViscoTherm site, they seem to > be claiming much higher. ..riiiiiight, 111.5%, I _could_ have bought a 90% figure. ;-) -- ..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 Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From arnt at c2i.net Mon Sep 9 14:00:10 2002 From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Engine Experience In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020909235634.356aaa8d.arnt@c2i.net> On Sun, 1 Sep 2002 21:06:29 EDT, LINVENT@aol.com wrote in message : > We have run engines for many hours and as long as the gas is clean > and > cool, and has most of the water removed, they show no execessive wear. > Tires are a great fuel as the gas heating value is high and without > sulfur, has no adverse impact upon the engine. ..ok, where does the rubber sulphur wind up? -- ..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 Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From arnt at c2i.net Mon Sep 9 14:02:06 2002 From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Essay: Wood/Coal/Oil/Gas/RB In-Reply-To: <000f01c25026$9f2d7150$9888fd0c@TOMBREED> Message-ID: <20020909235706.3238a1af.arnt@c2i.net> On Mon, 2 Sep 2002 19:08:24 -0500, "Harry W. Parker" wrote in message <000401c252de$05ef9580$b6e50144@dl.cox.net>: > Hello Tom and all, > > Thanks for your document regarding effective management of biomass as > an energy source. > > I have published a paper that regards the whole of energy utilization > last spring, "The Essentials of Essential Energy Consumption." > > I would be pleased to send individuals this paper as a word document. ..try make it an as early version as possible, I for one, I am _not_ going to buy Microsoft Office XP to wiew it. ;-) ..try save is as an html file, if that fails in 'http://validator.w3.org/', run it thru "HTML Tidy", find one for your system at "http://tidy.sourceforge.net/". These 2 wee steps, yields a web document which looks exactly the same in _all_ (gui) web browsers. ..two other options: save it in rtf or pdf file format, these 2 too are portable between systems, and all 3 save a lot of bandwidth compared to the binary "word" format, which, also happens to be the _primary_ virus carrier. > I would also be pleased for hardcopy or online journals to consider > republishing it. ..why not put it online on your own website? > Sorry I have been too busy to participate in the various "Crest" > energy groups. I note some interesting things are happening. > > Harry > > Harry W. Parker, Ph.D., P.E. > Professor of Chemical Engineering > & Consulting Engineer > Texas Tech University > Lubbock, TX 79409-3121 > 806.742.1759 fax 742.3552 -- ..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 Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From graeme at powerlink.co.nz Mon Sep 9 19:33:10 2002 From: graeme at powerlink.co.nz (Graeme Williams) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Spontaneous Ignition Temperature Of Producer Gas Message-ID: <000d01c2587a$a3a2b900$11ff58db@newpc> Hello Selvakumar It is unlikely that spontaneous ignition will take place by adding cold air to hot gas. If it did, all that would happen is that it would flash back to the point where the air is being mixed with the gas. The spontaneous ignition temperature of producer gas is about 570 degrees C, but the hydrogen content does change this as you would expect. The key factor is the temperature, not the air/gas ratio which surprised me when I first saw this demonstrated last year. In the presence of excess air the ignition didn't initiate until we had 630 degrees C on the gauge. The gas/air ratio only becomes critical when the gas is cold as you experience with engines. Another factor to consider in your research is that your hot gas is likely to contain soot or char particles. These are always hotter than the gas stream and could cause ignition when they come into contact with air. Hope this is of assistance to your understanding. Regards Doug Williams Fluidyne Gasification. Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From arnt at c2i.net Tue Sep 10 04:41:17 2002 From: arnt at c2i.net (Arnt Karlsen) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020827210121.00a74e38@shawmail> Message-ID: <20020910143858.545507b2.arnt@c2i.net> On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:28:32 +0200, "Thomas Koch" wrote in message <004c01c258ac$6e99fd40$6801a8c0@image.dk>: > I double clicked on the link > www.ankurscientific.com . ..I also tried that and a lot of other trixes. ;-) Which web browsers can get you past their index page, until they fix it? I could only use Mozilla, the other browsers (Galeon, Konqueror) I tried would not show their site menu, only their http://www.ankurscientific.com/index.html http://www.ankurscientific.com/script31_demo.html (I am _far_ from impressed by the job done by Thomas Brattli.) http://www.ankurscientific.com/Introduction.html http://www.ankurscientific.com/images/pp.swf ..diagnosis: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www.ankurscientific.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline ..fix: http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/ ..all I've seen until now, is http://www.ankurscientific.com/techwbg1.htm, which is available from http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html -- ..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 Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Tue Sep 10 05:51:52 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020827210121.00a74e38@shawmail> Message-ID: <20020910125148.GA2931@cybershamanix.com> Huh, the http://www.ankurscientific.com/ site works for me with mozilla running on linux, and all the links work. Including the M$-Word documents that they are using instead of forms. Can't imagine why people put Word documents in web pages, it certainly is slow and cumbersome, and a lot of people can't read them. I did note earlier tho that Crispin's page at http://www.newdawn-engineering.com was seriously broken. It appeared to be set up for windoz only (I tried it on two browsers, mozilla and opera under linux and also three browsers on a Mac, to no avail), but I see now that it is at least somewhat fixed. The graphics on the entrance page now work and I don't get error pages when I click on the links, but the graphics are still broken on many of the other pages. I've always given my staff strict orders that *every* page has to be checked with several browsers, including lynx, before they are published. It's amazing how many companies there are now who don't follow that practice. Sometimes I do them the curtesy of telling them about it, other times I just don't bother as I figure they're probably too clueless to want to do business with them anyway. What really gets me are the e-commerce sites that are not only exploder only but also add all sorts of other garbage like flash or badly done java that is so glacially slow (and I'm on a fast DSL line) that I just go elsewhere. Oh well, I guess Darwin will sort them out in the end. On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 02:38:58PM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:28:32 +0200, > "Thomas Koch" wrote in message > <004c01c258ac$6e99fd40$6801a8c0@image.dk>: > > > I double clicked on the link > > www.ankurscientific.com . > > ..I also tried that and a lot of other trixes. ;-) > Which web browsers can get you past their index page, until they fix it? > I could only use Mozilla, the other browsers (Galeon, Konqueror) I tried > would not show their site menu, only their > http://www.ankurscientific.com/index.html > http://www.ankurscientific.com/script31_demo.html > (I am _far_ from impressed by the job done by Thomas Brattli.) > http://www.ankurscientific.com/Introduction.html > http://www.ankurscientific.com/images/pp.swf > > ..diagnosis: > http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www.ankurscientific.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline > > ..fix: http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/ > > ..all I've seen until now, is > http://www.ankurscientific.com/techwbg1.htm, > which is available from > http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html > -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From W.deJong at wbmt.tudelft.nl Wed Sep 11 05:23:34 2002 From: W.deJong at wbmt.tudelft.nl (W.deJong@wbmt.tudelft.nl) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Spontaneous Ignition Temperature Of Producer Gas In-Reply-To: <000d01c2587a$a3a2b900$11ff58db@newpc> Message-ID: <3D7F5FAD.31395.168F79D@localhost> On 10 Sep 2002, at 15:31, Graeme Williams wrote: Dear Selvakumar and gasification list members, I can agree to the range of temperatures Graeme Williams mentions for ignition of low calorific value (LCV) gas. We generated LCV gas with a bubbling pressurised fluidised bed gasifier including hot gas ceramic filter cleaning. Here it was also not really easy to ignite the gas mixture. We needed temperatures around 630 °C at the combustor inlet for good and stable ignition as well. We did experiments with excess preheated and cold air in the thermal power range from 500 kW to ca. 1MW. The LCV gas was ignited with electrical sparks at pressures of ca. 3-5 bar (abs.). with kind regards, Wiebren de Jong. > Hello Selvakumar > > It is unlikely that spontaneous ignition will take place by adding > cold air to hot gas. If it did, all that would happen is that it > would flash back to the point where the air is being mixed with the > gas. > > The spontaneous ignition temperature of producer gas is about 570 > degrees C, but the hydrogen content does change this as you would > expect. The key factor is the temperature, not the air/gas ratio > which surprised me when I first saw this demonstrated last year. > > In the presence of excess air the ignition didn't initiate until we > had > 630 degrees C on the gauge. The gas/air ratio only becomes critical > when the gas is cold as you experience with engines. > > Another factor to consider in your research is that your hot gas is > likely to contain soot or char particles. These are always hotter > than the gas stream and could cause ignition when they come into > contact with air. > > Hope this is of assistance to your understanding. > > Regards > Doug Williams > Fluidyne Gasification. > > > Gasification List Moderator: > Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = > Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: > List-Help: > List-Unsubscribe: > List-Subscribe: > - Gasification List Archives > http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 > http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion > http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html > Gasification Reference > http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > > > > > 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 Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From babudeva at yahoo.com Wed Sep 11 19:43:32 2002 From: babudeva at yahoo.com (babu devasenapati) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: caloriefic value of Producer gas Message-ID: <20020912034104.81728.qmail@web14107.mail.yahoo.com> dear members, I am doing my masters project on gasifiers and would like to know how to measure the caloriefic value of producer gas . with regards Babu __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! News - Today's headlines http://news.yahoo.com Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From ascent at wilnetonline.net Wed Sep 11 21:36:49 2002 From: ascent at wilnetonline.net (ascent@wilnetonline.net) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020827210121.00a74e38@shawmail> Message-ID: <014201c25a1e$c9b20100$ad79a4ca@wilnetonline.net> September 10, 2002 Dear Mr Koch, Thank you for your mail and we currently have over 100 gasifiers in regular operation with industries, for rural electrification etc.  Our current production levels are of the order of 3 to 4 gasifiers every month.  We have a number of case studies included as part of our web site but if you are unable to access the same or if you would like us to transmit these separately, please let us know. Talking about rice husk gasifiers, we have installed about a dozen of these gasifiers during the last year.  Reference list is attached with this mail. Relative specifications being the same should not come as a surprise as these gasifiers are in some ways a family of gasifiers with the same basic technology. As far as technical data go, if you let us know exactly what you would like to have, we will be glad to do the needful. With best wishes,   Ms Ingrid Fernandes - Sr. Manager Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,"Ankur", Near Old Sama Jakat NakaBaroda 390 008, IndiaPhones : 0265 793098/794021 * Fax : 794042 Web Site : www.ankurscientific.com       ----- Original Message ----- From: Thomas Koch <Tk@tke.dk> To: <ascent@wilnetonline.net>; Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>; Laszlo Paszner <lpaszner@shaw.ca> Cc: <Carefreeland@aol.com>; <agniesco@hd2.dot.net.in>; <stoves@crest.org>; <gasification@crest.org>; <bioenergy@crest.org>; <LINVENT@aol.com> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 1:47 PM Subject: Re: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? Dear IngridI just browsed through your web page.To me it is not clear how many gasifiers you have build and how well they work.To me it looked very much like "sales talk". As an example: Your FBG system has exately the same relative specification for a 40 kw and a 335 kw unit.It is a down draft system that can handle down to 2mm particles and it produces 4 % CH4 and it have a gas washer with recirkuiation of water. Is it possible that you could provide us with some more technical data?Best regardsThomas Koch----- Original Message ----- From: <ascent@wilnetonline.net>To: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>; "Laszlo Paszner" Cc: ; <agniesco@hd2.dot.net.in>; <stoves@crest.org>; <gasification@crest.org>; <bioenergy@crest.org>; <LINVENT@aol.com>Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 12:10 PMSubject: Re: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions?> Dear Sir,> > I am Ingrid  Fernandes, Sr. Manager, Ankur Scientific, India.  We are> basically a Biomass Gasification company and have been in the business for a> number of years now, making enough money not only to support ourselves but> also to support further technology development work through our own> resources.  Do visit our web site www.ankurscientific.com .> > Regards,> > Ingrid> > ----- Original Message -----> From: Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>> To: Laszlo Paszner <lpaszner@shaw.ca>> Cc: <Carefreeland@aol.com>; <agniesco@hd2.dot.net.in>; <stoves@crest.org>;> <gasification@crest.org>; <bioenergy@crest.org>; <LINVENT@aol.com>> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:55 PM> Subject: Re: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions?> > > > Dear Dr. Paszner> >> > Thank you for your very interesting overview on> > bioenergy.> >> > Laszlo Paszner wrote:> > >> > > Dear All,> > >> > ....del...>> > > Biomass is largely "undersold" as an alternate renewable energy source> by> > > the world authorities and the media.  It is lucky if it gets honorable> > > mention among the renewable energy sources of wind, solar and tidal.> The> > > authorities are brainwashed by the petrochemical companies. This is so> > > because the technologies for these energy forms are owned by the> > > petrochemical companies, Shell, BP, Texaco, SUNCOR etc.  Promotion of> wind,> > > solar and tidal energy forms is safe, they do not cut into the gasoline> > > markets.  Wide-scale promotion of wind and solar  installations for> > > developing countries channels much needed developmental funds again to> the> > > petrochemical companies (you remember they own these technologies -> bought> > > into them quietly 5-6 years ago) leaving the developing countries> further> > > in debt and dependent without solving their problem (lack of energy in> > > rural areas).  These are "passive" energy forms because they will not> > > generate wide-spread sustainable jobs after their installation.  As a> > > result, this power form, regardless of its renewable nature, will remain> > > inaccessible to the poor because they are left without a> > > dispasible  income.  Biomass growing and ethanol production are highly> > > labor intensive (active) job creators.  Thus growing biomass (growing> the> > > seedlings, planting, tending and harvesting the forests) requires> > > continuous attention and will maintain a substantial number of permanent> > > rural jobs.  For every 50 million L/yr ethanol plant, we generate> between> > > 75 to 150 permanent, well paying rural jobs.  Yet, biomass is not> promoted> > > as the true future renewable energy source.> > >> > I would suggest that there is not a conspiracy by> > multi-National Oil Companies to hold back the> > development of biomass. I would suggest that they can> > make more money from oil than they can make from> > biomass, and that is the reason why they process oil.> > It is very dificult to imagine the multi-National Oil> > Companies saying "We can make more money on biomass,> > but we are not going to do that, because we are oil> > processors."> >> > The cruel reality seems to be that it is somewhere> > between difficult and impossible to make money from> > biomass energy.> >> >> > > For the biomass program, fast growing and high yielding crops become> > > important.  Comparatively speaking, trees produce 4-8 T/ha . yr biomass> in> > > the temperate regions, better yields (18-30 T/ha . yr) can be obtained> with> > > both deciduous and coniferous wood species in tropical and sub-tropical> > > countries.  Similar or better yields can be obtained with> sugarcane/sweet> > > sorghum and mineral giant reed; up to 45 T/ha .yr.  Exceptionally, up to> > > 60-75 T/ha .yr can be had with Eucalyptus species.  So by selective> biomass> > > cultivation the target biomass supply will become available while> > > simultaneously also solving the world's poverty problems.> >> > With a ratio of about 15:1 in terms of tropical> > eucalyptus to temperate forestry yields, if biomass> > energy even had a chance of being economic, one would> > see at least some biomass energy companies making money> > from eucalyptus energy processing. Are there any "stand> > alone biomass energy successes" anywhere in the world?> > There may be some businesses successes because of> > peculiar circumstances, such as waste product disposal,> > or special incentives. The cruel reality seems to be> > that, simply put, there is no money to be made in> > biomass energy.> >> > Am I mising something here? Is there anyone making> > "stand alone money" in biomass anywhere in the world?> > Is it perhaps a case that biomass energy economics are> > ruled by a Law that says "The bigger you are, the more> > you lose?"> >> > Kindest regards,> >> > Kevin Chisholm> > >> >> > -> > 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 Moderator:Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,  tombreed@attbi.com Biomass =Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.comList-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>-Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/200 kWe CHP Discussionhttp://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.htmlGasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html> LOI_01-02.doc Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: doc00083.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 82432 bytes Desc: ">" Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/gasification/attachments/20020911/9d9d015d/doc00083.obj From Tk at tke.dk Wed Sep 11 23:20:45 2002 From: Tk at tke.dk (Thomas Koch) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020827210121.00a74e38@shawmail> Message-ID: <005301c25a2d$9ff5a7e0$6801a8c0@image.dk> Dear Ingrid   Thank you very much for your ansver.   What I am looking for is some values from a real operating gasifier. My experince tell my that it is very difficult to upscale gasifiers and obtain the same relative data. If i look in your specification data they look very "theoretical" to me.   5 years ago I send one of my staff to India to look at the gasifiers in Bangalore. We where told that there was a 400 kWel gasifier there, but ........... Gasifiers of this family was also installed in Switzerland but ...... it has been no succes so far.   Furthermore I have been communicating with one of your countrymen Mr kollol Dey over the last weeks. He is looking for gasifiers, and I wonder why he has not come across one of your gasifiers in his searc for gasifiers manufacturers.   To be very concrete: Can you show me an operating system? How much does your system cost? How much guarantee are you villing to give?    And have any body on crest any experinces with the company Ankur?   I am ready to jump into the next plane to come and see you gasifier if it looks convincing.   Best regards   Thomas Koch
----- Original Message -----
From: ascent@wilnetonline.net To: Thomas Koch Cc: CREST Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:45 AM Subject: Re: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? September 10, 2002 Dear Mr Koch, Thank you for your mail and we currently have over 100 gasifiers in regular operation with industries, for rural electrification etc.  Our current production levels are of the order of 3 to 4 gasifiers every month.  We have a number of case studies included as part of our web site but if you are unable to access the same or if you would like us to transmit these separately, please let us know. Talking about rice husk gasifiers, we have installed about a dozen of these gasifiers during the last year.  Reference list is attached with this mail. Relative specifications being the same should not come as a surprise as these gasifiers are in some ways a family of gasifiers with the same basic technology. As far as technical data go, if you let us know exactly what you would like to have, we will be glad to do the needful. With best wishes,   Ms Ingrid Fernandes - Sr. Manager Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,"Ankur", Near Old Sama Jakat NakaBaroda 390 008, IndiaPhones : 0265 793098/794021 * Fax : 794042 Web Site : www.ankurscientific.com       ----- Original Message ----- From: Thomas Koch <Tk@tke.dk> To: <ascent@wilnetonline.net>; Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>; Laszlo Paszner <lpaszner@shaw.ca> Cc: <Carefreeland@aol.com>; <agniesco@hd2.dot.net.in>; <stoves@crest.org>; <gasification@crest.org>; <bioenergy@crest.org>; <LINVENT@aol.com> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 1:47 PM Subject: Re: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions? Dear IngridI just browsed through your web page.To me it is not clear how many gasifiers you have build and how well they work.To me it looked very much like "sales talk". As an example: Your FBG system has exately the same relative specification for a 40 kw and a 335 kw unit.It is a down draft system that can handle down to 2mm particles and it produces 4 % CH4 and it have a gas washer with recirkuiation of water. Is it possible that you could provide us with some more technical data?Best regardsThomas Koch----- Original Message ----- From: <ascent@wilnetonline.net>To: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>; "Laszlo Paszner" Cc: ; <agniesco@hd2.dot.net.in>; <stoves@crest.org>; <gasification@crest.org>; <bioenergy@crest.org>; <LINVENT@aol.com>Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 12:10 PMSubject: Re: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions?> Dear Sir,> > I am Ingrid  Fernandes, Sr. Manager, Ankur Scientific, India.  We are> basically a Biomass Gasification company and have been in the business for a> number of years now, making enough money not only to support ourselves but> also to support further technology development work through our own> resources.  Do visit our web site www.ankurscientific.com .> > Regards,> > Ingrid> > ----- Original Message -----> From: Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>> To: Laszlo Paszner <lpaszner@shaw.ca>> Cc: <Carefreeland@aol.com>; <agniesco@hd2.dot.net.in>; <stoves@crest.org>;> <gasification@crest.org>; <bioenergy@crest.org>; <LINVENT@aol.com>> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:55 PM> Subject: Re: GAS-L: A plague of criticism, any solutions?> > > > Dear Dr. Paszner> >> > Thank you for your very interesting overview on> > bioenergy.> >> > Laszlo Paszner wrote:> > >> > > Dear All,> > >> > ....del...>> > > Biomass is largely "undersold" as an alternate renewable energy source> by> > > the world authorities and the media.  It is lucky if it gets honorable> > > mention among the renewable energy sources of wind, solar and tidal.> The> > > authorities are brainwashed by the petrochemical companies. This is so> > > because the technologies for these energy forms are owned by the> > > petrochemical companies, Shell, BP, Texaco, SUNCOR etc.  Promotion of> wind,> > > solar and tidal energy forms is safe, they do not cut into the gasoline> > > markets.  Wide-scale promotion of wind and solar  installations for> > > developing countries channels much needed developmental funds again to> the> > > petrochemical companies (you remember they own these technologies -> bought> > > into them quietly 5-6 years ago) leaving the developing countries> further> > > in debt and dependent without solving their problem (lack of energy in> > > rural areas).  These are "passive" energy forms because they will not> > > generate wide-spread sustainable jobs after their installation.  As a> > > result, this power form, regardless of its renewable nature, will remain> > > inaccessible to the poor because they are left without a> > > dispasible  income.  Biomass growing and ethanol production are highly> > > labor intensive (active) job creators.  Thus growing biomass (growing> the> > > seedlings, planting, tending and harvesting the forests) requires> > > continuous attention and will maintain a substantial number of permanent> > > rural jobs.  For every 50 million L/yr ethanol plant, we generate> between> > > 75 to 150 permanent, well paying rural jobs.  Yet, biomass is not> promoted> > > as the true future renewable energy source.> > >> > I would suggest that there is not a conspiracy by> > multi-National Oil Companies to hold back the> > development of biomass. I would suggest that they can> > make more money from oil than they can make from> > biomass, and that is the reason why they process oil.> > It is very dificult to imagine the multi-National Oil> > Companies saying "We can make more money on biomass,> > but we are not going to do that, because we are oil> > processors."> >> > The cruel reality seems to be that it is somewhere> > between difficult and impossible to make money from> > biomass energy.> >> >> > > For the biomass program, fast growing and high yielding crops become> > > important.  Comparatively speaking, trees produce 4-8 T/ha . yr biomass> in> > > the temperate regions, better yields (18-30 T/ha . yr) can be obtained> with> > > both deciduous and coniferous wood species in tropical and sub-tropical> > > countries.  Similar or better yields can be obtained with> sugarcane/sweet> > > sorghum and mineral giant reed; up to 45 T/ha .yr.  Exceptionally, up to> > > 60-75 T/ha .yr can be had with Eucalyptus species.  So by selective> biomass> > > cultivation the target biomass supply will become available while> > > simultaneously also solving the world's poverty problems.> >> > With a ratio of about 15:1 in terms of tropical> > eucalyptus to temperate forestry yields, if biomass> > energy even had a chance of being economic, one would> > see at least some biomass energy companies making money> > from eucalyptus energy processing. Are there any "stand> > alone biomass energy successes" anywhere in the world?> > There may be some businesses successes because of> > peculiar circumstances, such as waste product disposal,> > or special incentives. The cruel reality seems to be> > that, simply put, there is no money to be made in> > biomass energy.> >> > Am I mising something here? Is there anyone making> > "stand alone money" in biomass anywhere in the world?> > Is it perhaps a case that biomass energy economics are> > ruled by a Law that says "The bigger you are, the more> > you lose?"> >> > Kindest regards,> >> > Kevin Chisholm> > >> >> > -> > 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 Moderator:Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,  tombreed@attbi.com Biomass =Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.comList-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>-Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/200 kWe CHP Discussionhttp://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.htmlGasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html> From rreda at radhegroup.com Fri Sep 13 07:12:29 2002 From: rreda at radhegroup.com (Dr. S. V. Makadia) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: biomass gasification Message-ID: <004e01c25b38$063618e0$0600a8c0@Comp6> Dear All,   we are engaged in the manufacturing of renewable and non-conventional energy equipments. i.e. briquetting plants and biomass gasifiers.   company name: RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES   Activities: manufacturing briquetting plants JUMBO 90 model with production capacity of 500 to 1500 kgs per hour, with an added benefit ;JUMBO 90 does not require hammer mill or sizing machine since residuals of upto 25mm can be fed directly. Moreover, it has been developed for minimum consumption of power and maintenance.   Manufacturing large size updraft  gasifiers with rotating grate  for thermal application with biomass and coal..   Achievements: Over 34 installed BRIQUETTING PLANTS operating with an immaculate track record.   Over 45 installed UPDRAFT BIOMASS GASIFIERS for Thermal Applications from 500KWth to 5000KWth. These are for various applications including ceramic tunnel, kiln, spray dryer, boiler etc.   Expressed Interest: [1] to develop 250KWe to 2MWe Gasifier based Power Project. [2] to develop thermal tar cracking system to make updraft gasifier more effective by converting high molecular hydro carbons into small molecular hydrocarbons and to reduce tar problems and produce a rich quality of gas. [3] as per our thinking to manufacture big power projects compared to downdraft gasification, updraft gasification is easy to operate and suitable for any kind of fuels example, biomass or any grade of coal. [4] we are also interested to obtain proven know-how for reduction of sulphur from gasification of petroleum coke and other mines coal. [5] cost of manufacturing gasifiers in European and other  countries is on the high side. We are interested in collaborating with firms who wish to  join hands with us where our company can offer complete production facility, with highly developed infrastructure and manufacturing know how of gasifiers.   Consultants, mfrs, agencies, organizations, technocrats, universities, who wish to obtain further elaboration on our activities and interest may contact us at the below:   RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEV. ASSOCIATES D-110 RAJDOOT IND. ESTATE 4 UMAKANT PANDIT UDYOGNAGAR' RAJKOT 360004 GUJARAT INDIA TEL-91-281-372567, 377823, 369098 FAX-91-281-372557 email: rreda@radhegroup.com www.radhegroup.com   From tmiles at trmiles.com Fri Sep 13 09:06:44 2002 From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: biomass gasification In-Reply-To: <004e01c25b38$063618e0$0600a8c0@Comp6> Message-ID: <00f201c25b47$a1fccc60$6601a8c0@tommain> Dr. Makadia,   Thank you for the information about your company.   Do you have any photos or project decriptions for your systems operating in the 1000 kWth size on wood waste?   Thanks   Tom Miles   
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. S. V. Makadia To: gasification@crest.org Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 8:12 AM Subject: GAS-L: biomass gasification Dear All,   we are engaged in the manufacturing of renewable and non-conventional energy equipments. i.e. briquetting plants and biomass gasifiers.   company name: RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES   Activities: manufacturing briquetting plants JUMBO 90 model with production capacity of 500 to 1500 kgs per hour, with an added benefit ;JUMBO 90 does not require hammer mill or sizing machine since residuals of upto 25mm can be fed directly. Moreover, it has been developed for minimum consumption of power and maintenance.   Manufacturing large size updraft  gasifiers with rotating grate  for thermal application with biomass and coal..   Achievements: Over 34 installed BRIQUETTING PLANTS operating with an immaculate track record.   Over 45 installed UPDRAFT BIOMASS GASIFIERS for Thermal Applications from 500KWth to 5000KWth. These are for various applications including ceramic tunnel, kiln, spray dryer, boiler etc.   Expressed Interest: [1] to develop 250KWe to 2MWe Gasifier based Power Project. [2] to develop thermal tar cracking system to make updraft gasifier more effective by converting high molecular hydro carbons into small molecular hydrocarbons and to reduce tar problems and produce a rich quality of gas. [3] as per our thinking to manufacture big power projects compared to downdraft gasification, updraft gasification is easy to operate and suitable for any kind of fuels example, biomass or any grade of coal. [4] we are also interested to obtain proven know-how for reduction of sulphur from gasification of petroleum coke and other mines coal. [5] cost of manufacturing gasifiers in European and other  countries is on the high side. We are interested in collaborating with firms who wish to  join hands with us where our company can offer complete production facility, with highly developed infrastructure and manufacturing know how of gasifiers.   Consultants, mfrs, agencies, organizations, technocrats, universities, who wish to obtain further elaboration on our activities and interest may contact us at the below:   RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEV. ASSOCIATES D-110 RAJDOOT IND. ESTATE 4 UMAKANT PANDIT UDYOGNAGAR' RAJKOT 360004 GUJARAT INDIA TEL-91-281-372567, 377823, 369098 FAX-91-281-372557 email: rreda@radhegroup.com www.radhegroup.com   From d.rl at virgin.net Sat Sep 14 11:41:57 2002 From: d.rl at virgin.net (David Reynolds-Lacey) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Gel fuel and much more from cattails Message-ID: <001d01c25c26$aaa2bde0$0701a8c0@drl01> Daniel, "Coppicing" cattails? - now that is interesting. I am assuming that you would require to continue harvesting the cattails as a renewable energy source rather than use them on a once every-so-often basis. Harvesting cattails by pulling them out by the roots may be counter- productive if you wished to continue vigorous growth for future harvesting. The continued removal of soil with the roots may also eventually increase the depth of the water to point where the cattails would not survive, although this would take some time and may be replaced by normal silting in any event. Cattails also have special cells (aerenchyma) that allow the transfer of oxygen to the rhizome during the dormant period, damaging these by deep shearing or discing, especially combined with deepening water could also eventually destroy the crop - in fact it is a better method of control than using glyphosate! I am sure that you have mentioned that you have severe frozen "early" winters in your part of the US so one method of harvesting you could consider is to wait until it is frozen and go on and cut them with a reciprocating cutter or a disc, this will also protect the rhizomes from damage. Of course, this method will only work until global warming takes full effect! Regards, David Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From hseaver at cybershamanix.com Sat Sep 14 12:46:32 2002 From: hseaver at cybershamanix.com (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Gel fuel and much more from cattails In-Reply-To: <001d01c25c26$aaa2bde0$0701a8c0@drl01> Message-ID: <20020914204426.GC8291@cybershamanix.com> On Sat, Sep 14, 2002 at 08:41:06PM +0100, David Reynolds-Lacey wrote: > Daniel, > > "Coppicing" cattails? - now that is interesting. > > I am assuming that you would require to continue harvesting the cattails as > a renewable energy source rather than use them on a once every-so-often > basis. The harvesting methods developed are to harvest only in strips, since they spread by both root and seed. > > Harvesting cattails by pulling them out by the roots may be counter- > productive if you wished to continue vigorous growth for future harvesting. It would depend on what you were doing. In many areas the DNR is trying to eradicate them anyway, and that is why they would allow you to harvest on public lands. > The continued removal of soil with the roots may also eventually increase > the depth of the water to point where the cattails would not survive, > although this would take some time and may be replaced by normal silting in > any event. Not so, one of the reasons that cattails are a problem is because water levels have been raised by dams to the point of being too deep for the other native species, while cattails will form floating matts that aren't even attached to the soil at all. Which makes for ease of harvesting with the proper machinery. One method of havesting involves using a water or air jet type of "dredge", and which then aids in cleanining all the mud from the roots as well, something necessary if you want to use them for feed or ethanol production. (snip) -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com Gasification List Moderator: Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation, tombreed@attbi.com Biomass = Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: - Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/ Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/ 200 kWe CHP Discussion http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html > From d.rl at virgin.net Sat Sep 14 15:36:47 2002 From: d.rl at virgin.net (David Reynolds-Lacey) Date: Tue Aug 31 21:10:08 2004 Subject: GAS-L: Gel Fuel and much more from cattails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003e01c25c47$750e4ca0$0701a8c0@drl01> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 0 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/gasification/attachments/20020914/9e31c152/attachment.bin