[Gasification] Which of the gasifiers Tom listed are meeting Knoef's commercial criteria

Thu Jun 28 00:34:18 CDT 2012

Tom

The ansver to your question is very simple. 

The customers should buy gasifiers!! 

Then they will be developed. 

Ulrik - the "father" of the Viking gasifier - once said "6 months after you can make real money on a biomass gasifier there will be a working gasifier on the market" 

If there are cheaper and/or better solutions small scale biomass gasification will struggle.

Thomas 

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] På vegne af Tom Miles
Sendt: 28. juni 2012 03:14
Til: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Emne: Re: [Gasification] Which of the gasifiers Tom listed are meeting Knoef's commercial criteria

David,

It looks like you have the makings of a survey. :-/

Harrie's criteria are good and would be difficult for most suppliers to meet. We want gasifiers to be as readily installed and operated as boilers. 

We should determine what needs to be done to get more suppliers over all of these hurdles. 

Tom 

-----Original Message-----
From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of David Coote
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 4:38 PM
To: gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org
Subject: [Gasification] Which of the gasifiers Tom listed are meeting Knoef's commercial criteria

Hi Tom,

Picking up from Thomas Koch's comments below, do you have any insight into perhaps the 4 or 5 gasifier vendors with systems being used for electricity generation that are doing the best job of meeting Knoef's criteria for successful commercial gasifiers?

Thanks

David

Knoef et al (2007, p5) proposed the following criteria for determining whether or not a gasification technology is commercial:
1. Continuous integrated plant operation under commercial conditions for a minimum of 2,000 hours 2. Plant availability of 80% or higher 3. Profitable plant operation without government support; an example is the sustainable financial support from CHP operations with feed-in rate for electricity and heat 4. Plant operation without major modifications during the first year of commissioning 5. Process owners willing to specify investment and operational costs and offer or arrange performance, service, and maintenance guarantees 6. Process owners ready to offer 'turn-key' plants

Knoef et al also emphasise "that the development, optimization, and commercialization of first-of-a-kind BMG process are challenging and require substantial financial resources" (2007, p4) and that sale of "5 or more gasification systems of the same gasification island configuration" is a commercial criterion (2007, p1).

Knoef HAM, Buhler R, and Babu S 2007. Workshop No. 1 (2007-09): 
Situation Analysis and Success and Visions for Biomass Gasification IEA. 
Retrieved October 1, 2009 from
http://media.godashboard.com//gti/IEA_BRU_11-07.pdf

> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 07:31:12 -0700
> From: "Tom Miles"<tmiles at trmiles.com>
> To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"
> 	<gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] 2 MWe Gasifier at University of British
> 	Columbia,	Vancouver, Canada
> Message-ID:<00d301cd5471$811be8e0$8353baa0$@trmiles.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I should add PRM Energy and ENERIA to the list.
>
> PRM Energy has supplied many gasifier for industrial uses. At least 
> two
have
> been used for power generation, one in Italy and one in France. The 
> system in Limoges, France, is owned and operated by ENERIA, the 
> Caterpillar
dealer
> for France, Poland, Romania, Algeria and Belgium.  ENERIA has been the 
> Caterpillar dealer for France since 1929.
>
> The plant was built in 2006 as a 1.0MWe  test/demo unit for testing of 
> various fuels that can be gasified in the PRME gasifier and produce a 
> suitable syngas for IC Engines. ENERIA installed three (3) different 
> types of gas cleaning technology to determine which was best for the IC Engine
> application.   The plant is fully equipped with gas conditioning, gas
> cooling. emissions monitoring etc.
>
> Contacts:
>
> PRM Energy
> http://www.prmenergy.com/
> Ron Bailey Sr. rbaileys at prmenergy.com
>
> Eneria
> http://www.eneria.fr/english/renewable-energy/biomass-plants.html
>
> Eneria will also test the Xylowatt gasifier from Belgium:
>
http://www.xylowatt.com/en/Dernieres-Actualites/eneria-et-xylowatt-concluent
> -un-partenariat-pour-developper-la-cogeneration-biomasse.html
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
> [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of 
> Tom Miles
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:11 PM
> To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'; 
> mark at ludlow.com
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] 2 MWe Gasifier at University of British 
> Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
>
> Thomas
>
> Who are the likely small scale gasifier suppliers that will conquer 
> these challenges?
>
> A
> Ankur Scientific, India http://www.ankurscientific.com/
> 	
> B.
> Babcock Volund, Denmark http://www.volund.dk/
> 	3 gasifiers up to 2 MWe
>
> Biogen, Dominican Republic http://www.biogendr.com/app/en/frontpage.aspx
> 	300-500 kWe modules, Italy
> C
> CarboConsult, South Africa http://www.carboconsult.com/
> 	250 kWe, Melanie, Gauteng, South Africa
>
> Carbona/Andritz, Finland
> http://www.andritz.com/pp-gasification-andritz-carbona
> 	3 MWe plant in Skive, Denmark
>
> CleanStGas, Austria http://www.cleanstgas.com/
> 	125-250 kWe/235-480 kWth
>
> Community Power Corporation www.gocpc.com
> 	50-75 kWe modules.
>
> E
> EKZ, Switzerland www.ekz.ch
> 	Turnkey wood gasifier installations
>
> G
> Gasek, Finland www.gasek.fi
> 	50 kWe/100 kWth
>
> I
> IISc, India  and Licensees
>
http://cgpl.iisc.ernet.in/site/Technologies/BiomassGasification/tabid/68/Def
> ault.aspx
> 	
>
> M
>
> MEVA Innovation AB, Sweden (fine wood fuels) http://www.mevainnovation.se/
> 	1-10 MWe; 1.2 MWe in construction Horlax, Pitea
>
> Mothermik, Germany http://www.mothermik.com/engl/prod-1holzver-e.html
> 	10 plants.250 kWe
>
> N
> Nexterra Ltd., Vancouver, Canada http://www.nexterra.ca/
> 	2 MWe in construction. University of British Columbia
>
> R
> Repotec, Austria http://www.repotec.at/index.php/homepage.html
> 	Dual fluidized bed for CHP
>
> S
> Satake, Japan (IISc, India technology) 
> http://www.satake-group.com/news/2008/080214.html
> 	Up to 900 kWe modules
> 	
> Stirling DK, Denmark http://www.stirling.dk/
> 	15-140 kWe, Updraft gasifier with stirling engine.
>
> T
> TK Eenergi, Denmark http://www.tke.dk
> 	3 stage gasifier
> U
> Urbas Energietechnik, Austria http://www.rsbiomass.com/urbas_gas.html
> 	150 kWe/310 kWth fixed bed downdraft
>
> W
> Weiss, Denmark, two stage gasification www.weiss-as.dk
> 	1-2 MWe
>
> X
> Xylowatt, Belgium http://www.xylowatt.com/
> 	350 kWe modules
>
> XyloPower AG, Switzerland www.xylopower.com
>
>
> Which companies have 3 operating, commercial, gasifiers?
>
> Who else?
>
> Tom Miles
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
> [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of 
> Thomas Koch
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 2:15 PM
> To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification; mark at ludlow.com
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] 2 MWe Gasifier at University of British 
> Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
>
> Tom
>
> I am sure this price level is achieveable - BUT BUT BUT - there is a 
> major challege that must be overcommed.
>
> You need some where you can have 5-10 similar gasifiers operating for 
> 10
of
> thousans of hours each with in reachable distance from their "parent (s)"
> and this alone needs 50 - 100 mio $ on top of the market price for the 
> electricity - and it is possible to maintain a stable and bright and 
> not religious brain capacity for a decade or two.
>
> On top of that you need to start with a good idea and that is where 
> most principles fail.
> And what does that mean?
> Not too complex - with a potential to handle the challenges that will 
> come in an ECONOMICALLY COMPETITIVE way!!!
>
> Examples - V?lund - Nexterra - CFBs-Repotec and this type of gasifiers
will
> alvays have the challenge og tar/perticle gas handling issues - 
> personally
I
> believe it is too complex to handle in a competitive way.
> FCC - may be large scale - but catalyst and gasifier is a challenge
> 2-3 stage - Viking - double feuer - TKE - and the likes have high 
> temperature challenges and reduction challenges and bed stability 
> issues - variation in gaspermeability etc Stirling show a large drop 
> in efficiency
if
> upscaled above 50-75 kW thus the biomass handling systems becomes very
small
> and sensitive.
> Entrained flow are very big and needs extensive pretreatment of the fuel.
>
> Many things will work for some time if nursed properly by the 
> enthusiastic developers.
>
> Thomas
>    

_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address Gasification at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg
ylists.org

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/

_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address Gasification at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/