4.8 Article

From fossil fuels towards renewables: Inhibitory and catalytic effects on carbon thermochemical conversion during co-gasification of biomass with fossil fuels

Journal

APPLIED ENERGY
Volume 140, Issue -, Pages 196-209

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.12.006

Keywords

Co-gasification; Catalysis; Alkali metals; Biomass; Fossil fuel; Sustainable energy

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent environmental regulatory sharp curbs on fossil fuel power plants have obliged industries to incorporate alternative sources of fuels for energy production. Cost and recovery of synthetic catalysts are major challenges in carbonaceous materials catalytic gasification. Biomass rich in alkali metals can be added as fuel and also to provide inexpensive natural catalysts to boost fossil fuel gasification. Biomass/fossil fuel co-gasification could provide bridging energy production based on renewable and fossil fuels. In this work, CO2 co-gasification of switchgrass and sawdust with coal and fluid coke was conducted in a thermogravimetric analyzer. Gasification kinetics were inhibited or enhanced, depending on the potassium concentration in the mixture. For low K/Al and K/Si molar ratios, the coal ash sequestered the biomass potassium needed for KAlSiO4 formation, and thus, no catalytic effect was observed until the biomass-to-coal mass ratio reached 3:1, where the switchgrass ash supplied enough potassium to more than satisfy the minerals in the coal ash. For high K/Al and K/Si molar ratios, unreacted residual potassium acted as catalyst, enhancing coal gasification. Fluid coke contained much lower Al and Si than for the coal. Hence, the gasification kinetics of fluid coke were significantly augmented by blending the coke with switchgrass due to the abundance of potassium in the biomass. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available