[Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project

linvent at aol.com linvent at aol.com
Mon Nov 12 08:45:33 PST 2012


Dear Tom,
	The zinc and other metals ends up in the ash, passing TCLP testing in every instance and the DOE report for the EPA on gasification states that the chemistry of gasification produces ash with metals bound in a manner that prevents leaching and passes TCLP necessary for non-hazardous landfilling operation. All of our TCLP tests including RDF are below regulatory thresholds. There are a significant number of other benefits to gasification stated in the DOE/Radian report. 
	
	There has been concern about metals emissions from gasification but when one considers the vapor pressure of metals and final true gasifier output gas temperature, these concerns are baseless, with the possible exception of mercury. Our tests did not show mercury in the output gas.  The DOE/Radian report did not specifically identify where the metals went as the mass balance didn't  work out, and this has some residual concern about their path and eventual status, but taking each system apart and analyzing the deposits for metals will probably find the missing mass balance, but this is a time consuming process for minimal benefit. 
	The DOE/Radian report was authored by the same Radian engineer who conducted extensive testing on our system. 


Sincerely,

Leland T. "Tom" Taylor
Thermogenics Inc. 



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Miles <tmiles at trmiles.com>
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>; mark <mark at ludlow.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 12, 2012 9:32 am
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project



Tom,
 
Where did the zinc from the tires end up in your process? In the ash? 
 
In combustion it is oxidized to  fine particle and is usually removed from  the stack gas with an electrostatic precipitator.
 
Tom
 
From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of linvent at aol.com
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 8:28 AM
To: gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org; mark at ludlow.com
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project
 
For dioxins need to be produced, the chlorine needs oxygen to form the intermediate chlorine dioxide and without the availability of oxygen, and the presence of excess hydrogen, dioxins are actually destroyed by the stripping of oxygen to form water with the hydrogen and the hydrogen produces hydrogen chloride or hydrochloric acid. There are a series of reactions and conditions needed to produce dioxins including temperature, residence time, oxygen, and designs of thermal systems can affect the production where a pyrolytic gas is combusted, they will be produced.  

 

In our testing for the North Counties Association, a group of cities around San Diego, the ash and gas we produced from MSW/RDF operations in South Houston did not contain any dioxins. Additionally, with the interesting gas cleaning system we have developed, tires gasified contained no sulfur by FTIR analysis and other analysis. It was not a specific S removal system i.e., not designed specifically to remove S from the gas. 

Sincerely,

Leland T. "Tom" Taylor

Thermogenics Inc. 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Miles <tmiles at trmiles.com>
To: mark <mark at ludlow.com>; 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Sent: Sat, Nov 10, 2012 9:38 pm
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project


Mark,

 

The Japanese unit looks like it might be a small rotary pyrolyzer that is heated by burning the offgas. In that case we would expect to see a char product and a clean stack. 

 

Ebara is the main waste to energy company that uses gasification in Japan. Burn the gas directly into a close coupled boiler. 

 

Japan funded extensive waste gasification in the 1990s. They tried several different types of gasifiers. Ebara is one of the few companies that still used gasification for waste. There are several companies that make rotary pyrolyzers. Last year in Kyoto we did not see evidence that they are used much for biochar production.  Most biochar seems to be made by very small scale stirred bed rice husk gasifiers by Kansai Corporation.. The gas is burned above the stirred bed and used to heat water for space heating or process heat. The biochar (called “kuntan”) sells for about $0.40/lb. 

 

Tom

 


From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Mark Ludlow
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 7:01 PM
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project


 

Tom,

The incinerators I’ve seen, operate with excess oxygen. This seems antithetical to gasification. Perhaps a two-stage gasifier?

Mark

 


From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Tom Miles
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 7:09 PM
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project


 

You could call it a pyrolytic incinerator. The gases must be burned in conditions to completely destroy the dioxins. Even the poultry manure gasifier in West Virginia had to be tested for dioxins. Poultry litter manure has about 1% chlorine on a dry basis. Municipal waste also is loaded with salts from foods and fertilizers. We found much higher concentrations of salts in ash from MSW incineration than we expected. 

 

Tom  

 


From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Lloyd Helferty
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 4:49 PM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project


 


In answer to Mark Ludlow's question, Where does the rest of the “trash” go? 
That would probably be "up the stack" ~ i.e. == air emissions ??

In answer to John Miedema's question about "chlorides involved in the trash" and a possible dioxin problem? 
Again, you might, depending on the TEMPS involved in the process.


  You might expect that one good way to avoid Dioxins is to avoid burning chlorinated plastics, i.e. PVC (Polyvinyl chloride), Chlorinated polyethylene (CPE), Chlorinated polyvinyl chloride (CPVC) etc.

  Yes, most dioxins arise in the condensed solid phase by the reaction of inorganic chlorides with graphitic structures in char-containing ash particles, with copper acting as a catalyst for these reactions, therefore the highest dioxin concentration is typically created by the pyrolysis of PVC.

   Large incinerators have mostly worked this out, however.  The Japanese [and German] tech is rather good at dealing with these things.

I don't know what kind of "air emissions" controls have been put on this particular system, if any.

 The single most important factor in forming dioxin-like compounds is the temperature of the combustion gases. Oxygen concentration also plays a major role on dioxin formation, but not the chlorine content.  Several studies have shown that removing PVC from waste would not significantly reduce the quantity of dioxins emitted.**

The design of modern incinerators minimize dioxins by optimizing the stability of the thermal process.  The EU emission limit is 0.1 ng I-TEQ/m3.  Modern incinerators not only operate in conditions that minimize dioxin formation, but are also equipped with pollution control devices which catch the low amounts produced.

** The European Union Commission published in July 2000 a Green Paper on the Environmental Issues of PVC noted that, "there does not seem to be a direct quantitative relationship between chlorine content and dioxin formation".
Similarly, another study commissioned by the European Commission on "Life Cycle Assessment of PVC and of principal competing materials" states that "Recent studies show that the presence of PVC has no significant effect on the amount of dioxins released through incineration of plastic waste."

Regards,

  Lloyd Helferty, Engineering Technologist
  Principal, Biochar Consulting (Canada)
  www.biochar-consulting.ca
  48 Suncrest Blvd, Thornhill, ON, Canada
  905-707-8754
  CELL: 647-886-8754
     Skype: lloyd.helferty
  Steering Committee coordinator
  Canadian Biochar Initiative (CBI)
  President, Co-founder & CBI Liaison, Biochar-Ontario
  National Office, Canadian Carbon Farming Initiative (CCFI)
  Partner of Toronto Urban Ag Summit www.urbanagsummit.org 
  Manager, Biochar Offsets Group:
           http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=2446475
   Advisory Committee Member, IBI
  http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1404717
  http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42237506675
  http://groups.google.com/group/biochar-ontario
  http://www.meetup.com/biocharontario/
  http://www.biocharontario.ca
   www.biochar.ca
 
"It is the path, more than the arrival at the destination, that is important"
 - Gandhi

On 2012-11-10 12:36 PM, John Miedema wrote:


I am curious about the chlorides involved in the trash (plastics)? Would not there be a dioxin problem?  

 

 


 

John Miedema

BioLogical Carbon, LLC

 




From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Mark Ludlow
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 2:24 AM
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project


 

Where does the rest of the “trash” go? Just, “Somewhere”? RE: Conservation of Mass.

 

Mark

 


From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Terry & Susan Layman
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 4:08 PM
To: Gasification at bioenergylists.org
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sweden's trash project / Japanese trash project


 


The Swedish are probably using the same system the Japanese invented.


 


Leave it to the Japanese to perfect a system, that virtually elimanates


trash. Each day Iwamoto's "Super Stone Clean Waste Treatment'' processors


can take a 20 ton pile of common garbage, and reduce it to less than 8 gallons


of what they call biochar. 


 


Just watch their video. then you can see first hand the machine and the process.


I, wouldn't classify it as BioChar, but it looks to me like ashes.


 


Reduces waste volume from 1/100th to 1/3000th of original input: 


1,000kg waste →300g ashes ( 2,200 lbs waste to 10.58 oz's ashes ) 


 


This is probably the most advanced system for Gasification.


 

_______________________________________________
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/

 


_______________________________________________
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/


 
_______________________________________________
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/

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20121112/87c38719/attachment.html>


More information about the Gasification mailing list