[Gasification] mycoremediation of tarry water
Bruce Jackson
bpjackso at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 1 18:20:00 CST 2013
Dear Tom and Kevin,
It is clear from reading the old texts, that when gas producers were fueled with coal and the gas burned in something like a Westinghouse 5000hp gas engine, the brake specific fuel consumption was less the the same horse power steam engine. Both systems would have had specilized professional engineers and artisans keeping things working economically. So in the end, the lower capitalization and fuel consumption costs would have leaned toward the gas producers. This was all around 1900. Reading Sir Ricardo's books, allows a direct comparison between the big gas engines and the fledgling diesel engines, and it was pretty clear that even with compressed air atomization (a separate power robbing aircompressor), the diesel would eventually have better brake specific fuel consumption and even lower capitalization costs the gas producers. There was also this competition between coal and crude oil.
The history is interesting in showing that gas producers were competitive when the comparison is made between systems using the same fuel. I don't see that happening today. There simply aren't any internal combustion engines designed to burn producer gas whether it comes from coal, biomass, or blast furnaces. Its apples compared to oranges. The same can be said for steam too. As close I see to an equal comparison is wood chip burning heating plants and something like Greg's system.
The real answer to Stuart's question is that producer gas is the only sustainable alternative fuel that can come close to replacing motor fuel and be used by the present fleet of vehicles. As in world war two, when petroleum motor fuel was removed from the picture, then the vehicle fleets had to switch over, and they had no choice but to figure out the tar problem. Its worth it because there wasn't a choice.
Perhaps in the near future there will be better choices.
yours,
Bruce
________________________________
From: Kevin <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Gasification] mycoremediation of tarry water
Dear Tom
Certainly, what you say could be true for 2 MW and larger
facilities that have the technical and economic economies of scale.
Smaller gasifier and engine systems can deliver 1 HP for a
heat rate of about 16,000 BTU/hp-hr. If powering a generator, this is a heat
rate of about 24,000 BTU/kw-hr. I would doubt that small scale steam or ORC
plants could meet this heat rate.
Small gasification plants can be operated safely with a
conscientious Operator, having very basic training. Steam power plants of any
significant size and pressure, usually Stationary Engineers as Operators. With
smaller steam Plants, the Operating labour Cost can be very
significant.
Best wishes,
Kevin.
----- Original Message -----
>From: Tom Miles
>To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' ; 'stuart mather'
>Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 1:04 PM
>Subject: Re: [Gasification] mycoremediation of tarry water
>
>
>Except . . apparently when you do a detailed engineering feasibility study and get quotes from suppliers. In a recent 2 MWe project we found that gasifiers were 50% higher in capital cost than steam (turbines or engines) or steam + ORC. In the opinion of a couple of gasifier suppliers, for our economic circumstances, gasifiers could be more competitive in the 5 to 10 MWe scale. At 10 MWe steam becomes more economic. We were interested to see that at the 2 MWe scale steam or steam + ORC could be competitive. There are about 200 ORC systems in operation on biomass but to use ORC you need a use for large amounts of low quality heat.
>
>We found that while a 5-10 MWe biomass plant may have a heat rate (fuel to power) of 14,500 Btu/kWh, the efficiency for the 2 MWe plant ranged from 18,500-22,800 Btu/kWh for small scale steam turbines; 28,000-55,000 Btu/kWh for ORC boiler-turbines and 24,000 Btu/kWh for gasifiers. In this 2 MWe case gasification did not demonstrate an advantage in capital and operating costs or fuel to power efficiency compared with steam or steam + ORC.
>
>Tom
>
>From:Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Kevin
>Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:01 AM
>To: stuart mather; Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
>Subject: Re: [Gasification] mycoremediation of tarry water
>
>Dear Stuart
>
>Basically, a "Gasifier + IC engine" is cheaper than a "Boiler + Turbine (or steam engine)".
>
>Turbines must have superheated steam, to enable maximum expansion of the steam, without having droplet condensation that can be a serious cause of turbine blade erosion. erosion in a steam engine is not a problem, even with saturated steam. However, the steam engine efficiency with low pressure saturated steam is dreadful. Higher pressures and superheat would considerably improve the efficiency of steam engines.
>
>Then there is the safety hazard associated with steam. Safety is not a problem with competent operators, but competent operators are expensive to hire. Additionally, there are many Government regulations connected to steam boilers and their operation, because of many fatalities in the past, as a result of poor boiler design or inadequately qualified Operators.
>
>With woodgas, there are indeed safety hazards, but they are much smaller than with steam. The main safety hazard with wood gas is the poisonous CO, but with appropriate system design and ventilation, this hazard is small. Additionally, if there is a serious failure with woodgas, it will not be as dramatic and physically devastating as would be a steam boiler explosion.
>
>So.... it is worth the bother, especially for smaller installations, to go with woodgas rather than steam boilers, and to take extra steps to clean it adequately.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Kevin
>----- Original Message -----
>>From:stuart mather
>>To:stuart mather ; Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
>>Sent:Thursday, January 31, 2013 11:07 PM
>>Subject:Re: [Gasification] mycoremediation of tarry water
>>
>>Ok, steam turbines under 250 hp aren't efficient and a turbine needs super heated steam. But a reciprocating steam engine is efficient and doesn't need superheated steam, so aren't these better than trying to deal with tar in an internal combustion engine?
>>Stuart.
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>From:stuart mather <kneebraceboy at yahoo.com.au>
>>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>Sent: Friday, 1 February 2013 12:21 PM
>>Subject: Re: [Gasification] mycoremediation of tarry water
>>
>>I'm just curious why syngas is ever deliberately burnt in an internal combustion engine in a deliberate setup when surely it would completely sidestep the tar/acids corrosion/disposal issue if the heat was just used to power a steam turbine driven generator? Sorry if it's a daft question.
>>Stuart.
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>From:Robert Fairchild <solarbobky at yahoo.com>
>>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>Sent: Friday, 1 February 2013 11:40 AM
>>Subject: Re: [Gasification] mycoremediation of tarry water
>>
>>This might be a job for mushrooms. Really. Filter the water through straw or woodchips then innoculate with the appropriate fungus. It's known as mycoremediation. Paul Stamets is the expert.
>>See:
>>http://www.realitysandwich.com/mycoremediation_and_oil_spills
>>http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/research/reports/fullreports/464.1.pdf
>> Bob
>>
>>---
On Thu, 1/31/13, linvent at aol.com <linvent at aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>From: linvent at aol.com <linvent at aol.com>
>>Subject: Re:
[Gasification] Gasification Digest, Vol 29, Issue 7: scrubber
water
>>To: gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>Date:
Thursday, January 31, 2013, 8:15 PM
>>And some of the gasifiers in India simply dump it in ponds. One very well funded group set up large tanks ala biodigesters, that didn't work. This is the same group that spent $200 mm on an Australian MSW to power gasifier that was scrapped. It is not acceptable to dump the produced water in any normal waste water treatment system. Even in "clean" gasifier gas the moisture content going to the engine will bring organic acids and other compounds that will reduce the lifetime and the power output of the engine. There are effective water treatment systems available, and after years of trying a variety of options, we have landed on ones that work well and are relatively inexpensive to construct and operate. If you look at the cost of a coal gasifier water treatment plant, it is a significant investment.
>>Sincerely,
>>Leland T. "Tom" Taylor
>>Thermogenics Inc.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: David Coote <dccoote at mira.net>
>>To:
gasification <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>Sent:
Thu, Jan 31, 2013 5:38 pm
>>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Gasification
Digest, Vol 29, Issue 7: scrubber water
>>How were they handling the scrubber water, Tom? A colleague visited a
>>reasonable size gasifier in Europe where the water was stored in a tank.
>>Once this tank was full their immediate option was to install another
>>tank. Not ideal!
>>
>>Waste disposal is becoming increasingly expensive in Australia. This
>>would increase the cost of the power.
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>David
>>
>>On 1/02/2013 7:00 AM, gasification-request at lists.bioenergylists.org wrote:
>>> ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013
>>> 09:32:11 -0800 From: "Tom Miles" <tmiles at trmiles.com> To: "'Discussion
>>> of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"
>>> <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org> Subject: Re: [Gasification]
>>> Power Pallet Message-ID: <00f201cdffd8$e7c8ae80$b75a0b80$@trmiles.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>> >yes, but remember that all that run these fuels to date are doing so by
>>>>
>>> tolerating a dirty gas non tar solving reactor, and fighting the tar problem
>>> in the filtering. on the low tech end this is nearly always a water
>>> scrubbing system, which really just>moves the toxic problem somewhere else,
>>> and actual real world running is highly unattractive. yes, it will work for
>>> the demo, but the ongoing issues with the bongwater cofferdam challenges
>>> health, regulatory and general pleasurable>concerns.
>>>
>>> Not so fast. You can't write off "tar making" gasifiers completely. While
>>> your observation may be true for hundreds of low cost gasifiers now in use,
>>> in the last five years I have seen three small scale gas cleaning systems
>>> using wet scrubbers that would pass California air quality and safety
>>> regulations. One is produced commercially and was demonstrated at the 300
>>> kWe scale. Another was demonstrated at 300 KWe and used on a 1 MWe system.
>>> One was demonstrated on a 100 kWe downdraft gasifier generating 100 kWe from
>>> grass seed screenings. I know of another two in development for the 40 kWe
>>> scale. (I also know of at least one that has failed miserably.)
>>>
>>> Tar making gasifiers may be a solution for some very difficult but abundant
>>> fuel like rice husks and agricultural residues if the tars can be managed
>>> and destroyed acceptably.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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/
>>
>>-----Inline
Attachment Follows-----
>>_______________________________________________
>>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/
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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 listto Send a Message to the list, use the email addressGasification at bioenergylists.orgto UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web pagehttp://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.orgfor 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/20130201/cb6bc651/attachment.html>
More information about the Gasification
mailing list