4.7 Article

Gasification of Charcoal in Air, Oxygen, and Steam Mixtures over a γ-Al2O3 Fluidized

Journal

ENERGY & FUELS
Volume 32, Issue 1, Pages 406-415

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b02257

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. BRISK (Biofuel Research Infrastructure for Sharing of Knowledge) consortium - European Union (7th Framework Program) [284498]
  2. Gobierno de Aragon
  3. European Social Fund [T-36]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Charcoal was gasified using air and oxygen as well as with mixtures of oxygen and steam, aiming to produce a gas stream with high hydrogen content. The effects of the equivalence ratio (ER) and steam-to-carbon ratio (S/C) on carbon conversion, producer gas yield, gas heating value, and composition as well as on the apparent energy efficiency (AEE) of the process were studied. The gasification experiments were performed in a laboratory-scale fluidized bed rig working at 1173 K and atmospheric pressure and using gamma-Al2O3 as bed material. Results showed that, on a N-2-free basis, the composition of the producer gas obtained by gasification with air and pure oxygen were comparable when using the same ER Furthermore, carbon fraction converted into gas improved when ER was increased from 0.25 up to 0.35, as well as when the S/C was increased to 0.625. The highest producer gas yield was obtained using ER = 0.35 and S/C = 0.625, while the highest hydrogen concentration in the produced gas was achieved using ER = 0.25 and S/C = 0.625. The highest hydrogen yield (0.412 N m(3)/kg charcoal) and the highest AEE (33.43%) were achieved by using S/C = 0.625 and ER = 0.3 (oxygen). The autothermal gasification of the charcoal was possible in the experimental rig used in this work by selecting ER = 0.3 and S/C = 0.5, allowing the production of a gas with a heating value of 8.3 MJ/Nm(3) while reducing the carbon conversion into gas to 49.4 wt %.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available