<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="IncrediMail 1.0">
<STYLE>v\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml)
}
</STYLE>
<!--IncrdiXMLRemarkStart>
<IncrdiX-Info>
<X-FID>FLAVOR00-NONE-0000-0000-000000000000</X-FID>
<X-FVER></X-FVER>
<X-CNT>;</X-CNT>
</IncrdiX-Info>
<IncrdiXMLRemarkEnd-->
</HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 5px 10px 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" background="" scroll=yes bgColor=#ffffff>
<TABLE id=INCREDIMAINTABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD style="POSITION: relative; DIRECTION: ltr; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" id=INCREDITEXTREGION width="100%">
<DIV style="PADDING-LEFT: 2px" id=INCREDI_TEXT_AREA>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" dir=ltr id=IncrediOriginalFontSize>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV id=receivestrings> </DIV>
<DIV style="PADDING-LEFT: 2px" id=INCREDI_TEXT_AREA>
<DIV>
<DIV>Hi, I'm sorry for sending you this huge and garbled e-mail but this is what I receive from you every day. (notice all the repetition!)</DIV>
<DIV>Is there something wrong with my e-mail program? I use Incredimail 2.0.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt" dir=ltr id=IncrediOriginalMessage><I>-------Original Message-------</I></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV id=receivestrings>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt" dir=ltr><I><B>From:</B></I> <A href="mailto:gasification-request@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-request@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt" dir=ltr><I><B>Date:</B></I> 01/26/2011 3:00:43 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt" dir=ltr><I><B>To:</B></I> <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt" dir=ltr><I><B>Subject:</B></I> Gasification Digest, Vol 5, Issue 27</DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Send Gasification mailing list submissions to</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="mailto:gasification-request@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-request@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You can reach the person managing the list at</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="mailto:gasification-owner@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-owner@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific</DIV>
<DIV>than "Re: Contents of Gasification digest..."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Today's Topics:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 1. Woodgas.net is looking to add member pages (<A href="mailto:jonathan@woodgas.net">jonathan@woodgas.net</A>)</DIV>
<DIV> 2. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Kevin)</DIV>
<DIV> 3. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Daniel Chisholm)</DIV>
<DIV> 4. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Mark Ludlow)</DIV>
<DIV> 5. Re: A small literature review re: syngas (Tom Miles)</DIV>
<DIV> 6. Re: Woodgas.net is looking to add member pages</DIV>
<DIV> (<A href="mailto:JWCARTER33@aol.com">JWCARTER33@aol.com</A>)</DIV>
<DIV> 7. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (jim mason)</DIV>
<DIV> 8. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Arnt Karlsen)</DIV>
<DIV> 9. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (andrew schofield)</DIV>
<DIV> 10. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Mark Ludlow)</DIV>
<DIV> 11. Re: A small literature review re: syngas (Anand Karve)</DIV>
<DIV> 12. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Thomas Koch)</DIV>
<DIV> 13. Re: [Digestion] composition of pyrolysis gas (nari phaltan)</DIV>
<DIV> 14. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Jim Leach)</DIV>
<DIV> 15. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Otto Formo)</DIV>
<DIV> 16. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Kevin)</DIV>
<DIV> 17. Re: A small literature review re: syngas (Kevin)</DIV>
<DIV> 18. Re: A small literature review re: syngas (Gerald Kutney)</DIV>
<DIV> 19. Re: A small literature review re: syngas (Gerald Kutney)</DIV>
<DIV> 20. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Thomas Koch)</DIV>
<DIV> 21. Re: Range Fuels Closing Plant (Mark Ludlow)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 1</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:34:10 -0600</DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:jonathan@woodgas.net">jonathan@woodgas.net</A></DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: [Gasification] Woodgas.net is looking to add member pages</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <20110125143410.88201fzijokbt0pw@<A href="http://www.woodgas.net">www.woodgas.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";</DIV>
<DIV> format="flowed"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Hello,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I just spent a fair amount of time updating my website <A href="http://www.woodgas.net">www.woodgas.net</A></DIV>
<DIV>. I am looking to add new member pages. Please contact me,</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:jonathan@woodgas.net">jonathan@woodgas.net</A> I am sure we can get something put up for you.</DIV>
<DIV>Also if anyone wants to exchange links send me an email.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jonathan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Jonathan@woodgas.net">Jonathan@woodgas.net</A></DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.woodgas.net">www.woodgas.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 2</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:46:54 -0400</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Kevin" <<A href="mailto:kchisholm@ca.inter.net">kchisholm@ca.inter.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <650F678D767247D0B40C41AF12B7840A@usera594fda0bf></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";</DIV>
<DIV> reply-type=original</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Arnt</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I got another bad one from you. :-(</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rather than just replying, I copied all except the first part of the message</DIV>
<DIV>I received from the Gas List....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Any idea what is causing the hash?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message -----</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Arnt Karlsen" <<A href="mailto:arnt@c2i.net">arnt@c2i.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 3:19 PM</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> z{Zr+ z?4mzvy?r*'IC ? YK H[ LH L? LH LL ? ?H[Y\YHQQ Q</DIV>
<DIV>> QL XXZ[ [LL?\ ?[ O?\Y[?[ [][</DIV>
<DIV>> H [ H[Y?YH?H?PUUSSK\\ \H\ ^\\H]\Y[?X?ZX? X[??HY[Y]]H X \ Y H ]\ \H[X]B[KH [X\H ^Y\[ \ [H]HXYH \H Z\Y] ? ]\ ] H\ ^H]H?X]Y8'SPRSSP8'HB\ [ ^H\\H\H][[?HYXY[ \[H B\?\Y?Y Y</DIV>
<DIV>> ^H X Z\[\\ ]Z]B [\ K ZH? ?[H][Z] Y\ \?XH? B [X[???[ XZY XH[[ \]]H Z\ [K[ XH \Y[[ \[\ \[HH[?Y\[[\Y[ [\ H [H? H[Z] YHY[Y[H X[ [ YY H?[ YZ\?HZ]] H? H [Y]B ] ?YY[? H \? H \] ]?\ H [X\B]\H? X8'\'H []H Z\ [ Y ]Y</DIV>
<DIV>> \B\HXY[ ? ?YY[[ ]X?]\ H^\B[\]YHH \Y[ \[[X?]K] [X] \?Y\] ? H [\Z[H\??[[?^K] [H?Y\Y ? HY][[\[\X\Y8'[Y8'H \[K]ZY B[Y]\8'?'K[ X\KH \\Y \H] ]]X\?HY[X\? H[Z] YK?\ H HYY ?Y\[H [KXZ[ X[HYYXH [Z\ H [\ X[</DIV>
<DIV>> Y^H X\ ?Y\ H[ \H [H ][X\?BYKI?HY[ ^YY[YYH[Y\H^H?\Y[H \X? H?^H [\[[\Y][? </DIV>
<DIV>> Y\[Z[\S[P?XZ\H] \ ]X]\X[? H ] X[ZX[[ \ H [ ]</DIV>
<DIV>> Z[[?[?[KKHYY [Y[ [H ][Y\ H\\ []H[X\? \X\ [\[\[\ K[\[[ ^\YH[ ] ? YN\\K ?\K[\[\K?\YX][?XZ[[\[HY\YH H\</DIV>
<DIV>> \H H[XZ[Y \?\YX][?[[\[\ ???SP?PH?[H [\\] [ \H H X YB \ ?[[\[\ ??XZ[X[\[\YX][?\ ?[[\[\ ????[?H\YY\][[?X][? YH\ X ]N \YY\?[[\[\ ??</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> -----</DIV>
<DIV>> No virus found in this message.</DIV>
<DIV>> Checked by AVG - <A href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3402 - Release Date: 01/25/11</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 3</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:10:09 +0000</DIV>
<DIV>From: Daniel Chisholm <<A href="mailto:dmc@danielchisholm.com">dmc@danielchisholm.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:AANLkTin+YfhJN0wKTc4=YOfyCAawqJkKP0Dabdt4xyhG@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTin+YfhJN0wKTc4=YOfyCAawqJkKP0Dabdt4xyhG@mail.gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>FYI either Arnt's emailer is (a bit) broken, or the list's software is a bit</DIV>
<DIV>broken.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Anybody other than Erin or Arnt can probably ignore the following:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Arnt's email header includes these two lines:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV>Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The main body of his email consists solely of base64 encoded text; here are</DIV>
<DIV>the very first and very last lines of the message body:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>T24gVHVlLCAyNSBKYW4gMjAxMSAxMzo0MDo1MSAtMDUwMCwgR0Ygd3JvdGUgaW4gbWVzc2FnZSAK</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>(...a bunch of lines here...)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Zy8K</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Arnt if you are able to look at the exact internal text sent by your email</DIV>
<DIV>client you should ensure that your message is being sent both in plain ASCII</DIV>
<DIV>text in additions to any other optional fancy-schmancy encoding.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Erin if Arnt reports to you that his emailer (X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8</DIV>
<DIV>(GTK+ 2.23.90; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)is indeed sending out plain ASCII text</DIV>
<DIV>you might want to start digging into why the list software might be messing</DIV>
<DIV>up his emails.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Daniel</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 21:46, Kevin <<A href="mailto:kchisholm@ca.inter.net">kchisholm@ca.inter.net</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> Dear Arnt</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> I got another bad one from you. :-(</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Rather than just replying, I copied all except the first part of the</DIV>
<DIV>> message I received from the Gas List....</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Any idea what is causing the hash?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Kevin</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arnt Karlsen" <<A href="mailto:arnt@c2i.net">arnt@c2i.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>> To: <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 3:19 PM</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>>> z{Zr+ z?4mzvy?r*'IC ? YK H [ LH L? LH LL ? ? H [ Y\YH Q Q Q</DIV>
<DIV>>> QL XXZ[ [LL?\ ?[ O ?\Y[ ?[ [ ] [</DIV>
<DIV>>> H [ H [ Y?YH ? H ?PU U S S K \ \ \H \ ^ \ \H ]\ Y [ ?</DIV>
<DIV>>> X?ZX X [? ? H Y[ Y ] ]H X \ Y H ]\ \ H [X] B [K H [X\H ^Y\ [</DIV>
<DIV>>> \ [H ]H XY H \H Z\ Y] ] \ ] H \ ^H ]H ?X] Y 8' SPRS S</DIV>
<DIV>>> P8'H B \ [ ^H \\H \ H ] [ [?H YXY[</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>- Daniel</DIV>
<DIV>Fredericton, NB Canada</DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/801c1936/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/801c1936/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 4</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:15:25 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Mark Ludlow" <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <011401cbbcdd$5ee102b0$1ca30810$@com></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Reads fine with my Outlook client.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of Daniel Chisholm</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 2:10 PM</DIV>
<DIV>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>FYI either Arnt's emailer is (a bit) broken, or the list's software is a bit broken.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Anybody other than Erin or Arnt can probably ignore the following:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Arnt's email header includes these two lines:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV>Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The main body of his email consists solely of base64 encoded text; here are the very first and very last lines of the message body:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>T24gVHVlLCAyNSBKYW4gMjAxMSAxMzo0MDo1MSAtMDUwMCwgR0Ygd3JvdGUgaW4gbWVzc2FnZSAK</DIV>
<DIV>(...a bunch of lines here...)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Zy8K</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Arnt if you are able to look at the exact internal text sent by your email client you should ensure that your message is being sent both in plain ASCII text in additions to any other optional fancy-schmancy encoding.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Erin if Arnt reports to you that his emailer (X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.23.90; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)is indeed sending out plain ASCII text you might want to start digging into why the list software might be messing up his emails.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Daniel</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 21:46, Kevin <<A href="mailto:kchisholm@ca.inter.net">kchisholm@ca.inter.net</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Arnt</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I got another bad one from you. :-(</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rather than just replying, I copied all except the first part of the message I received from the Gas List....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Any idea what is causing the hash?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- From: "Arnt Karlsen" <<A href="mailto:arnt@c2i.net">arnt@c2i.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 3:19 PM</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>z{Zr+ z?4mzvy?r*'IC ? YK H [ LH L? LH LL ? ? H [ Y\YH Q Q Q QL XXZ[ [LL?\ ?[ O ?\Y[ ?[ [ ] [ H [ H [ Y?YH ? H ?PU U S S K \ \ \H \ ^ \ \H ]\ Y [ ? X?ZX X [? ? H Y[ Y ] ]H X \ Y H ]\ \ H [X] B [K H [X\H ^Y\ [ \ [H ]H XY H \H Z\ Y] ] \ ] H \ ^H ]H ?X] Y 8' SPRS S P8'H B \ [ ^H \\H \ H ] [ [?H YXY[</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>- Daniel</DIV>
<DIV>Fredericton, NB Canada</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/2a3441a0/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/2a3441a0/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 5</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:27:31 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Tom Miles" <<A href="mailto:tmiles@trmiles.com">tmiles@trmiles.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <00d701cbbcdf$0f32afa0$2d980ee0$@com></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin, Daniel,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You seem to be making your own hash. Gerry and Arnt's emails came through just fine.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tom Miles</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of Kevin</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:42 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Gerald</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Your message came across as hash.. could you send it in a different way, so</DIV>
<DIV>we can read it?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message -----</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Gerald Kutney" <<A href="mailto:gkutney@shaw.ca">gkutney@shaw.ca</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"</DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>; <<A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 1:59 PM</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> z{Zr+ z?4mzvy?r*'IC H]HY H\\[?? HY[][?? [\</DIV>
<DIV>> [\\\H ]?X][\\ [ Y \H\HY[X[ Y] ] [\ [H\ HY[Y</DIV>
<DIV>> H]H Y] YHX\ H Y\[\ ]X \ \Z[KH \H[\\\?\ X\ ]HZ[Y [\] H \[ H</DIV>
<DIV>> X HY?JH \?XH H ]X]\X[? H \]\] ]ZX HX[YH H [\ \H?X[YX \Y\?[ H X?Y][?? HX?X\SY\[XYXH?[ZX[XK?H\\XY H\ \?X[YX \Y\ [[? [\\\</DIV>
<DIV>> YH L MK</DIV>
<DIV>> NMK \H]\Y[[?Y XH []X[ZX[ H H ]\\[ ]\\ Y XX[??[YY[</DIV>
<DIV>> [ \ X[[Z\ K</DIV>
<DIV>> NMH\? [\\\Y] \H\Y ]Z[ZXX[YX \Y\[[ Y\\YX][? ]Z\[? </DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>L [\\\\ [\ HY[Y\ HZ^ \H?[</DIV>
<DIV>> H \X H[[?? HY[X\? \\</DIV>
<DIV>> ][ [H \ HX\ H Y\[\ X \ [\Y[][??H[Y]H ] \\[[\?[\YH HX\Y \</DIV>
<DIV>> \ \H\Y[]H?\[?? ]\ [\ []HH[Z]YY[][??HYY[][?\[]^K</DIV>
<DIV>> X[Y[\X?^ [[Y[\Z[XHX[Y[Y[?\KBKKKKS?Y[[Y\YKKKKKBN\YX][?X[\\ ?[[\[\ ??XZ[ ?\YX][?X[\\ ?[[\[\ ??H?Z[?[HX\?[</DIV>
<DIV>Y\^KX[X\</DIV>
<DIV>> K L B?\YX][?[[\[\ ???XX</DIV>
<DIV>N\YX][?HH X[]\] \H ]Y] N [\??Y</DIV>
<DIV>> X K L]</DIV>
<DIV>> NLKX\]YX[X\[ \X??? ?NHY Y YH? H \\H]H?[</DIV>
<DIV>> [^ XY B[\\[ \ \ ^H []H H]\\\[?U?[ ?</DIV>
<DIV>> H \YHH HX?H\?\ X\[\[ HX\][[\[</DIV>
<DIV>> [\\?[ Y\Y ]HY[ \?YY ??BY\ [\H?[</DIV>
<DIV>> [\\?[ \Y Y\ \[[Y H \Y? [\\? X ?[\\[ Y[H H \Y\?[\[ \H[ YH\\?X\[ XY[ Y [\^[\\\KH[? [H \BH \H[\?[ YH]??H[\[ \H? H\? XY Y YH?H?[X\ \X[?\[?] ?[][?\ [\\ \\[] [\\[ ?\H?\K] H ][[H? H[\X? \YH\?\ \[?IH \ \Y YH][ YHXZ?[Y\[ \ \\?[\\H \[] [YH H\H \ \\?][ \?\XZ?] HX[[ \ H[\X \K H [B[[X\^H H ]H?YZ\HY\Z[ H[?H Y][?[[\? H \O] Y[\ H[X\\HX[[[ </DIV>
<DIV>H\\X[??\H [\ [\H\[X[</DIV>
<DIV>> ] [[X\ ?H \[ [ ]\X\ \X ] [</DIV>
<DIV>> H[\\\[ [\? \[?H YH[ H [\K Y [H[\]H \?[\O?[ H \Y \\X[?^HY\ \ ] H[\X \YB? H \H \X^XHH</DIV>
<DIV>> L L</DIV>
<DIV>> H [Y[?^[\\\H [[ \]]\X X[ H]XY\ [ \?] Y[\][Y\[HXY[ZX ? [[\[?[H\KY[\[H \Y\X H\Y[[\\\?[\[X\[?[[\[\ \[\?Y[\Y\ \YX][?[ X H ]\\ Y Y\ H</DIV>
<DIV>> ][[H\?XY\H [\</DIV>
<DIV>> HZ^ \B? [K X[H \Y X[YX \HY][</DIV>
<DIV>> [[[?XK\\ \]ZY ? Y [? \H[Y[[ </DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> KH Z]X[] H?H \X[\ \YKKK HY[\ ]X[] K\]\Z[YH H\?\][?[ H][??[Z[][?H \X[]\[[B\[ ] [X?Z[[\?[ [ \[ \</DIV>
<DIV>> JKH[\??][ [\H[[H?Y[\\] \HZ\X[B\YX][??[X\[\ Q Y</DIV>
<DIV>> ^Y PY \H\YY\[ ??[[\][?[\X[ X]Y[XY\[^ \^?H</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> K] </DIV>
<DIV>\[YK[?XY? ?ST? ? ?L ?L \ \ ^\ \Y H</DIV>
<DIV>> 8/ H HX] H[X\</DIV>
<DIV>> L H H 8/L 0[ \XH \X[ H [??H[X\[[[[</DIV>
<DIV>> 8/ H?X\K [\?</DIV>
<DIV>> 8/ H?X\K[\[</DIV>
<DIV>> 8/ H?X\KH[\H \]Z\Y \]BH\ \ ^\\8/</DIV>
<DIV>> MIH? H [[\H ][H\]YH B H[X\?[\ \[\\H\Y?Y \H H [\[\]YH B \H ^\ ?YH[ H[\HYY ? H \ ^\HZ\</DIV>
<DIV>> </DIV>
<DIV>> KH\[\[?H[[[[\[?[][ [[\ H X[[[\K\X[[ H\]Y\\[\? [B[\ ?[[[]\]X[] KY??</DIV>
<DIV>> L M LN J</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> K[\ ?H H \X[YXY[H[ YX H\][?? [\ ]\[[Y\X[[ ]HY[][Y?[X\?\[? \[\?H[</DIV>
<DIV>> K YZ[0?H</DIV>
<DIV>> ][\X[\ X?[ Z[Y[[\\] \H[H[X\ ]YYY? Y\YY\[Y\X[\[?\ YYY[\</DIV>
<DIV>> LJ</DIV>
<DIV>> K[Y[ ?H ]YYY? Y[[ ][ ] ?Z\[[X\] ] ? [\[\\?H \H8& \ \\&H\ \X[ H \YZ]\?</DIV>
<DIV>> [[ ]X[ \\K??[[\H \[\ ]\ \H H?Y\\[Z] Y \[\[[ \Y XH Y [ [\[[[ X]?[X X] H</DIV>
<DIV>> Y]\][ NNNJKHZX[ \ ?[\?[\?Y[[X[Y[Y[</DIV>
<DIV> Y[B[ XK</DIV>
<DIV>> X\ [?[Y\ [Y\?</DIV>
<DIV>JKY \] H [\</DIV>
<DIV>> KK ]X[]Y\?[\ X\H\^ [Y[ B[YXX[?Y[ [[ZX[ [\\ [H] X[X[ H Y X\? H ^H[?? X[H\]Z\Y[</DIV>
<DIV>> ]\ HZY[[\ ?YY[XHH [H[\ ]Y\ [[ \]Z\[Y[ ?\H\[?H]] YH ] Y\ [\\][??[[BX\[? [? \[HX\[?H?Y\Y[\[XXH ]?[[?[[Y[ </DIV>
<DIV>> ] \[\?\[]H[ H[ [\HX^[][H^X[] H?[ \ X[? ][] H\ X][? [\X][ [ YHYY HX?H</DIV>
<DIV>> LHRL?] [\\] \\?X]\ [ L LL</DIV>
<DIV>> ] H?Y][KY\ Y \?? \\?YY [</DIV>
<DIV>> [ X[?\X^[Z^Y ]] \]Z\[H\\?\[? \</DIV>
<DIV>> [X\\YX][?\ H?\[??[?[X?\?X[\?YY H \X[Y][?[H\[\ X</DIV>
<DIV>> [\\\?8' [\8'H?\[ [X\[ H? [H ]\\[[[ ??KY\ Y \?</DIV>
<DIV>> ?K[] [</DIV>
<DIV>> KH XX[?\B\YY]][]]Y [\\] \\L LM</DIV>
<DIV>> [][\X?[]]Y \\\ \ \</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> XJKHY[ \Y[HZ\ \H Y[ X[H?HZ^ \H? \H\\?Z\X\Y\YY\? \X[ H XHH X\?Z[[H []][ HY?[ ][??] [ ]HX][ [ YH] Y[[RL</DIV>
<DIV>> LLMB K?</DIV>
<DIV>> K Y[[ X[KX\Y\YY\ XHH X\?Z[[?H []][ HY?[ ][?? Y [[ ]HX][ [ YB] Y[</DIV>
<DIV>> L[ RL</DIV>
<DIV>> ML K? KXH</DIV>
<DIV> \][??[X\Q\]Y[\? H[ Y\H MMK HKM</DIV>
<DIV>> ?KH</DIV>
<DIV>KMK?H M B HY\</DIV>
<DIV>> X\[[X\[[X\\YX][? XY\?Y[ [ZX[ [ Y [ X[?T\?[\BU</DIV>
<DIV>> K] </DIV>
<DIV>XKK?XY\[ \\YX][? X?X\\?[[ H \[ [Y[\H X\\</DIV>
<DIV>> H [\\\? [\H ]?\ [X\[ H? \Z[ ][? Y [[\?[?YH</DIV>
<DIV>> KH]Z \?X[\H [\N[\[[ \\ [\\[\?</DIV>
<DIV>> K] </DIV>
<DIV>?\]?K[]KY K?] X[K[KNMKK? K\]Y[OLO[ ?</DIV>
<DIV>> H \YHH HX?H\?\ X\[\[ HX\][[\[</DIV>
<DIV>> [\\?[ Y\Y ]HY[ \?YY ??BY\ [\H?[</DIV>
<DIV>> [\\?[ \Y Y\ \[[Y H \Y? [\\? X ?[\\[ Y[H H \Y\?[\[ \H[ YH\\?^H Y\Y \YH\Y[ [ H\ HZ\X?RXZ\? X\\?\\ ] H\? \H \[X\ YB? Y\ H \K[\?Z[XYH ]?? X[KH ?[H ] HX?H\]\?X]HH[\[]</DIV>
<DIV>> X[ \KY\X\]YX[[\X??H\YX][?\\[?Y ?\YX][?[[\\ ??</DIV>
<DIV>> H X\H \]H [\[XZ[?X ? YX H[KX\H \] </DIV>
<DIV>[?[[\[\ ???[?H]? H\[?K[ [K\YX][?YZ[\ ]?KHKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKB[HX\?X]N </DIV>
<DIV>?]X[]\ ?B\[ ?X ?</DIV>
<DIV>> H\YY\^ \[Y[\]</DIV>
<DIV>> HRN </DIV>
<DIV>?Z\YY\B H\\HH\[^H[ Y[ ZXH XN ?\\YX\[^KB</DIV>
<DIV>> HS\X? ] \ </DIV>
<DIV> ] \K[ \X? H\ X\[[H\</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>\ ?X\\</DIV>
<DIV>> K\[?KX \X\\ B?\YX][?XZ[[\[HY\YH H\</DIV>
<DIV>> \H H[XZ[Y \?\YX][?[[\[\ ???SP?PH?[H [\\] [ \H H X YB </DIV>
<DIV>\ ?[[\[\ ??XZ[X[\[\YX][?\ ?[[\[\ ????[?H\YY\][[?X][? YH\ X ]N </DIV>
<DIV>\YY\?[[\[\ ????\YX][?XZ[[\[HY\YH H\</DIV>
<DIV>> \H H[XZ[Y \?\YX][?[[\[\ ???SP?PH?[H [\\] [ \H H X YB </DIV>
<DIV>\ ?[[\[\ ??XZ[X[\[\YX][?\ ?[[\[\ ????[?H\YY\][[?X][? YH\ X ]N </DIV>
<DIV>\YY\?[[\[\ ??</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> -----</DIV>
<DIV>> No virus found in this message.</DIV>
<DIV>> Checked by AVG - <A href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3402 - Release Date: 01/25/11</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 6</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:29:17 EST</DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:JWCARTER33@aol.com">JWCARTER33@aol.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Woodgas.net is looking to add member pages</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <<A href="mailto:96b2c.701e246d.3a70a8bd@aol.com">96b2c.701e246d.3a70a8bd@aol.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>BIOFUELS.COM</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jeff Carter</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>| BFC Gas & Electric Companies, LC | 110 Southeast Grant Street | Suite</DIV>
<DIV>205 |</DIV>
<DIV>Ankeny, IA 50021 | ( 515-964-6787 | *: <A href="mailto:_J.Carter@Biofuels.com_">_J.Carter@Biofuels.com_</A></DIV>
<DIV>(<A href="mailto:J.Carter@Biofuels.com">mailto:J.Carter@Biofuels.com</A>)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 1/25/2011 2:35:19 P.M. Central Standard Time,</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:jonathan@woodgas.net">jonathan@woodgas.net</A> writes:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Hello,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I just spent a fair amount of time updating my website <A href="http://www.woodgas.net">www.woodgas.net</A></DIV>
<DIV>. I am looking to add new member pages. Please contact me,</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:jonathan@woodgas.net">jonathan@woodgas.net</A> I am sure we can get something put up for you.</DIV>
<DIV>Also if anyone wants to exchange links send me an email.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jonathan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Jonathan@woodgas.net">Jonathan@woodgas.net</A></DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.woodgas.net">www.woodgas.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg</A></DIV>
<DIV>ylists.org</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jeff Carter</DIV>
<DIV>| BFC Gas & Electric Companies, LC | 110 Southeast Grant Street | Suite</DIV>
<DIV>205 |</DIV>
<DIV>Ankeny, IA 50021 | ( 515-964-6787 | *: <A href="mailto:_J.Carter@Biofuels.com_">_J.Carter@Biofuels.com_</A></DIV>
<DIV>(<A href="mailto:J.Carter@Biofuels.comJeff%20Carter">mailto:J.Carter@Biofuels.comJeff%20Carter</A>|%20BFC%20Gas%20&%20Electric%20Companies,%20LC</DIV>
<DIV>%20|%20110%20Southeast%20Grant%20Street%20|%20Suite%20205%20|Ankeny,%20IA%20</DIV>
<DIV>50021%20|%20(%20515-964-6787%20|*<A href="mailto::%20J.Carter@Biofuels.comJeff%20Carter">:%20J.Carter@Biofuels.comJeff%20Carter</A>|%20B</DIV>
<DIV>FC%20Gas%20&%20Electric%20Companies,%20LC%20|%20110%20Southeast%20Grant%20St</DIV>
<DIV>reet%20|%20Suite%20205%20|Ankeny,%20IA%2050021%20|%20(%20515-964-6787%20|*:%</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:20J.Carter@Biofuels.comJ.Carter@Biofuels.com">20J.Carter@Biofuels.comJ.Carter@Biofuels.com</A>)</DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/fff21d8a/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/fff21d8a/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 7</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 15:38:26 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: jim mason <<A href="mailto:jim@allpowerlabs.org">jim@allpowerlabs.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:AANLkTimEypOiC=tkdrtccR=JkGvC__3jNaNbMSLSbyd5@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTimEypOiC=tkdrtccR=JkGvC__3jNaNbMSLSbyd5@mail.gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Daniel Chisholm <<A href="mailto:dmc@danielchisholm.com">dmc@danielchisholm.com</A>>wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> FYI either Arnt's emailer is (a bit) broken, or the list's software is a</DIV>
<DIV>> bit broken.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>must be unexpected tar in the system . . .</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> Anybody other than Erin or Arnt can probably ignore the following:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Arnt's email header includes these two lines:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> The main body of his email consists solely of base64 encoded text; here are</DIV>
<DIV>> the very first and very last lines of the message body:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> T24gVHVlLCAyNSBKYW4gMjAxMSAxMzo0MDo1MSAtMDUwMCwgR0Ygd3JvdGUgaW4gbWVzc2FnZSAK</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> (...a bunch of lines here...)</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Zy8K</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Arnt if you are able to look at the exact internal text sent by your email</DIV>
<DIV>> client you should ensure that your message is being sent both in plain ASCII</DIV>
<DIV>> text in additions to any other optional fancy-schmancy encoding.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Erin if Arnt reports to you that his emailer (X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8</DIV>
<DIV>> (GTK+ 2.23.90; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)is indeed sending out plain ASCII text</DIV>
<DIV>> you might want to start digging into why the list software might be messing</DIV>
<DIV>> up his emails.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> - Daniel</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 21:46, Kevin <<A href="mailto:kchisholm@ca.inter.net">kchisholm@ca.inter.net</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>>> Dear Arnt</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>> I got another bad one from you. :-(</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>> Rather than just replying, I copied all except the first part of the</DIV>
<DIV>>> message I received from the Gas List....</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>> Any idea what is causing the hash?</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>> Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>> Kevin</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arnt Karlsen" <<A href="mailto:arnt@c2i.net">arnt@c2i.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>>> To: <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 3:19 PM</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>>> z{Zr+ z?4mzvy?r*'IC ? YK H [ LH L? LH LL ? ? H [ Y\YH Q Q Q</DIV>
<DIV>>>> QL XXZ[ [LL?\ ?[ O ?\Y[ ?[ [ ] [</DIV>
<DIV>>>> H [ H [ Y?YH ? H ?PU U S S K \ \ \H \ ^ \ \H ]\ Y [ ?</DIV>
<DIV>>>> X?ZX X [? ? H Y[ Y ] ]H X \ Y H ]\ \ H [X] B [K H [X\H ^Y\ [</DIV>
<DIV>>>> \ [H ]H XY H \H Z\ Y] ] \ ] H \ ^H ]H ?X] Y 8' SPRS S</DIV>
<DIV>>>> P8'H B \ [ ^H \\H \ H ] [ [?H YXY[</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>> --</DIV>
<DIV>> - Daniel</DIV>
<DIV>> Fredericton, NB Canada</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>> Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV>Jim Mason</DIV>
<DIV>Website: <A href="http://www.whatiamupto.com">http://www.whatiamupto.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Current Projects:</DIV>
<DIV> - Gasifier Experimenters Kit (the GEK): <A href="http://www.gekgasifier.com">http://www.gekgasifier.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Escape from Berkeley alt fuels vehicle race: <A href="http://www.escapefromberkeley.com">www.escapefromberkeley.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - ALL Power Labs on Twitter: <A href="http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs">http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Shipyard Announce list:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com">http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/77c07408/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/77c07408/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 8</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 03:34:01 +0100</DIV>
<DIV>From: Arnt Karlsen <<A href="mailto:arnt@c2i.net">arnt@c2i.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <<A href="mailto:20110126033401.4b05d791@celsius.local">20110126033401.4b05d791@celsius.local</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 15:38:26 -0800, jim wrote in message</DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:AANLkTimEypOiC=tkdrtccR=JkGvC__3jNaNbMSLSbyd5@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTimEypOiC=tkdrtccR=JkGvC__3jNaNbMSLSbyd5@mail.gmail.com</A>>:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Daniel Chisholm</DIV>
<DIV>> <<A href="mailto:dmc@danielchisholm.com">dmc@danielchisholm.com</A>>wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> > FYI either Arnt's emailer is (a bit) broken, or the list's software</DIV>
<DIV>> > is a bit broken.</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> must be unexpected tar in the system . . .</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>..yup, of the base64 kind. ;o)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen</DIV>
<DIV>...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...</DIV>
<DIV> Scenarios always come in sets of three:</DIV>
<DIV> best case, worst case, and just in case.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 9</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:25:04 -0500</DIV>
<DIV>From: andrew schofield <<A href="mailto:scothebuilder@hotmail.com">scothebuilder@hotmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <<A href="mailto:BAY150-w21531CDA06D424881B03A2A8FF0@phx.gbl">BAY150-w21531CDA06D424881B03A2A8FF0@phx.gbl</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Thomas Koch,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> How much of a problem for the scaled up Range Fuels plant, was heat transfer from the hot fluid outside the auger-tubes to the celluose inside each parallel screw-tube?</DIV>
<DIV>we gather a hint of the problem from your description, and Range Fuels needing to consult you about your experience with</DIV>
<DIV>hot-fluid jacketed screw-pyrolizers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Dr Reed said he saw the liquid fuel process working at small scale. May I guess this success was with a jacketed single-screw?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Inside the radiation, and convection sections of water-tube boilers steel surface temperatures can vary widely, as water vigorously circulates inside.</DIV>
<DIV>Water, being more fluid than wood chips screwing along in a tube, keeps steel temperature within certain limits throughout the entire boiler setting.</DIV>
<DIV>May we use this analogy to describe one problem experienced with Range Fuels attempt at system scale up?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A culinary anology for heat-jacketed auger-tubes is stir-frying vegitables in a Chinese wok. The chef adroitly presents new surfaces of the food to the hot steel to transfer heat by conduction. The chef can only make a batch of food under a certain size. Size beyond which he may choose to use a pressure cooker which can feed an army.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Would not direct-contact heat exchange between the hot fluid, and the wood be more practical at 4 ton/hr?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Andrew Schofield</DIV>
<DIV>Renewable Fuel Systems</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thomas Koch wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> Tom</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Range fuel gasification technology was an externally heated</DIV>
<DIV> pressuries pipe with a transport screew inside when I saw it.</DIV>
<DIV> It was very similar to the pyrolysis unit on the wiking gasifier but</DIV>
<DIV> they had ideas to upscale it to 4 tons pr hour by stacking pipes with</DIV>
<DIV> screew conveyers. Thinking of the challenges of making the 1 tons pr</DIV>
<DIV> hour screew pyrolyser in Haslev i have doubts this principle will</DIV>
<DIV> ever be competitive for energy production - even for atmospherich</DIV>
<DIV> applications. Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: Thomas Reed <<A href="mailto:tombreed2010@gmail.com">tombreed2010@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> I attended a few of the formative meetings of Range Fuels back about 2007 when I lived in Denver.</DIV>
<DIV>I have known Bud Klepper since about 1988 when we worked together on a methanol project.</DIV>
<DIV>Too bad that many $millions couldn't solve at a large scale what Bud had solved at a small scale.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tom Reed, Pyrologist</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jim of All Power Labs wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> thomas, why did you think a stacked array of skinny auger retorts won't work? this seems a known solution that tends to work as far as i know. of course the proof is in the material handling with specific fuels.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> did you find it difficult to keep the auger straight and working? difficult to keep the heat out of the motor and bearings at the ends?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> any secret cautionary tales we should know of?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> jim</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/42a1e119/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/42a1e119/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 10</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 20:58:43 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Mark Ludlow" <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <034801cbbd15$b5b65760$21230620$@com></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Hi Andrew,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>To address the exact issue you describe, designers of equipment that</DIV>
<DIV>incorporates the equivalent of conveyor flighting for mass transport and</DIV>
<DIV>processing add periodic "interrupter bars" that disrupt (mix, actually) the</DIV>
<DIV>mass being conveyed by the auger and prevent any co-rotation. Obviously, the</DIV>
<DIV>flighting itself must also be interrupted in the region of the bars.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It's common to have a large shaft core, which is generally heated as well,</DIV>
<DIV>to reduce the radial heat transfer distance and provide torsional stiffness</DIV>
<DIV>to the auger.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>No one seems to know for certain how many modes of failure RF's contraption</DIV>
<DIV>had. From TK's description, the pyrolysis section sees overly complex and</DIV>
<DIV>under-designed. But it could that the conversion chemistry part of the</DIV>
<DIV>process was equally ill-conceived.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mark</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>[<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of andrew</DIV>
<DIV>schofield</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 8:25 PM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Thomas Koch,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> How much of a problem for the scaled up Range Fuels plant, was heat</DIV>
<DIV>transfer from the hot fluid outside the auger-tubes to the celluose inside</DIV>
<DIV>each parallel screw-tube?</DIV>
<DIV>we gather a hint of the problem from your description, and Range Fuels</DIV>
<DIV>needing to consult you about your experience with</DIV>
<DIV>hot-fluid jacketed screw-pyrolizers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Dr Reed said he saw the liquid fuel process working at small scale. May I</DIV>
<DIV>guess this success was with a jacketed single-screw?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Inside the radiation, and convection sections of water-tube boilers steel</DIV>
<DIV>surface temperatures can vary widely, as water vigorously circulates inside.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Water, being more fluid than wood chips screwing along in a tube, keeps</DIV>
<DIV>steel temperature within certain limits throughout the entire boiler</DIV>
<DIV>setting.</DIV>
<DIV>May we use this analogy to describe one problem experienced with Range Fuels</DIV>
<DIV>attempt at system scale up?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A culinary anology for heat-jacketed auger-tubes is stir-frying vegitables</DIV>
<DIV>in a Chinese wok. The chef adroitly presents new surfaces of the food to the</DIV>
<DIV>hot steel to transfer heat by conduction. The chef can only make a batch of</DIV>
<DIV>food under a certain size. Size beyond which he may choose to use a pressure</DIV>
<DIV>cooker which can feed an army.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Would not direct-contact heat exchange between the hot fluid, and the wood</DIV>
<DIV>be more practical at 4 ton/hr?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Andrew Schofield</DIV>
<DIV>Renewable Fuel Systems</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thomas Koch wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> Tom</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Range fuel gasification technology was an externally heated</DIV>
<DIV> pressuries pipe with a transport screew inside when I saw it.</DIV>
<DIV> It was very similar to the pyrolysis unit on the wiking gasifier but</DIV>
<DIV> they had ideas to upscale it to 4 tons pr hour by stacking pipes with</DIV>
<DIV> screew conveyers. Thinking of the challenges of making the 1 tons pr</DIV>
<DIV> hour screew pyrolyser in Haslev i have doubts this principle will</DIV>
<DIV> ever be competitive for energy production - even for atmospherich</DIV>
<DIV> applications. Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: Thomas Reed <<A href="mailto:tombreed2010@gmail.com">tombreed2010@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> I attended a few of the formative meetings of Range Fuels back about 2007</DIV>
<DIV>when I lived in Denver.</DIV>
<DIV>I have known Bud Klepper since about 1988 when we worked together on a</DIV>
<DIV>methanol project.</DIV>
<DIV>Too bad that many $millions couldn't solve at a large scale what Bud had</DIV>
<DIV>solved at a small scale.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tom Reed, Pyrologist</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jim of All Power Labs wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> thomas, why did you think a stacked array of skinny auger retorts won't</DIV>
<DIV>work? this seems a known solution that tends to work as far as i know. of</DIV>
<DIV>course the proof is in the material handling with specific fuels.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> did you find it difficult to keep the auger straight and working? difficult</DIV>
<DIV>to keep the heat out of the motor and bearings at the ends?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> any secret cautionary tales we should know of?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> jim</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/40e44672/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/40e44672/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 11</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 21:53:19 +0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: Anand Karve <<A href="mailto:adkarve@gmail.com">adkarve@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:AANLkTin2Cnf9nmwHdMqx8xe2eG1U+mbQeTEVmEWZkg__@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTin2Cnf9nmwHdMqx8xe2eG1U+mbQeTEVmEWZkg__@mail.gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Dr. Kutney,</DIV>
<DIV>I am an absolute novice in this field. The work that I have so far conducted</DIV>
<DIV>dealt with biogas, which is produced in an anaerobic biological process.</DIV>
<DIV>Since ligno-cellulosic material cannot be digeseted by the anaerobic</DIV>
<DIV>process, and because I knew that pyrolysis produced gas, I pyrolysed</DIV>
<DIV>ligno-cellulosic material under anaerobic conditions, collected the gas over</DIV>
<DIV>water, and found that it burned. The tarry fraction in the gas was condensed</DIV>
<DIV>out of it when it passed through water. I wanted to know the composition of</DIV>
<DIV>the gas that I had produced, and asked some knowledgeable persons in my</DIV>
<DIV>city. Their answer did not satisfy me, because the so called knowledgeable</DIV>
<DIV>persons told me that the gas contained 55% nitrogen. Because I had doubts</DIV>
<DIV>about the presence of nitrogen, I posed the question to this group. I thank</DIV>
<DIV>members of this group because some of them gave me a satisfactory answer. I</DIV>
<DIV>am not worried about the definition.</DIV>
<DIV>Yours</DIV>
<DIV>A.D.Karve</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:59 AM, Gerald Kutney <<A href="mailto:gkutney@shaw.ca">gkutney@shaw.ca</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> I have followed the discussion on the definition of syngas (synthesis gas)</DIV>
<DIV>> with great interest. Although there are adamant views that syngas should be</DIV>
<DIV>> narrowly defined, I have yet to see early references that back up this</DIV>
<DIV>> claim. The term "synthesis gas" appears to have gained popularity during</DIV>
<DIV>> the '40's (possibly before) to describe the raw material for the FT process;</DIV>
<DIV>> however, it quickly became the popular term for manufactured gas. In the</DIV>
<DIV>> second edition of the iconic Kirk-Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chemical</DIV>
<DIV>> Technology, one is directed to the chapter on manufactured gas when looking</DIV>
<DIV>> for synthesis gas (see vol. 10, p. 355, 1966), where it is mentioned to</DIV>
<DIV>> produce synthetic chemicals from the water gas and water gas shift</DIV>
<DIV>> reactions. In Riegel's, Industrial Chemistry, 1962, a list of synthesis gas</DIV>
<DIV>> methods are listed that mimic manufactured gas and includes gasification</DIV>
<DIV>> with air. And on p. 892, synthesis gas is simply defined as the mixture of</DIV>
<DIV>> CO and H2.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> I respect the opinion of the members of this list, but could you supply</DIV>
<DIV>> early references to back up your definitions. I believe that this is an</DIV>
<DIV>> important issue to be cleared up, as there is definite confusion on whether</DIV>
<DIV>> syngas should have a limited definition or a broad definition.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Gerald Kutney, Ph.D.</DIV>
<DIV>> Managing Director</DIV>
<DIV>> Sixth Element Sustainable Management</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://www.6esm.com">www.6esm.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> -----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV>> From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [mailto:</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of jim mason</DIV>
<DIV>> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:40 PM</DIV>
<DIV>> To: <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Bear Kaufmann <<A href="mailto:bear@allpowerlabs.org">bear@allpowerlabs.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> > I looked through some of the papers I have on hand, and extracted the</DIV>
<DIV>> > interesting parts as they relate to the latest discussion, FWIW:</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV>> > But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV>> > higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas</DIV>
<DIV>> intended</DIV>
<DIV>> > to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV>> > general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> bear, in reading through your 6 examples here, i find 4 of them use</DIV>
<DIV>> the term "syngas" in some flavor of a general term for the gas</DIV>
<DIV>> produced through some form of biomass thermal conversion. its</DIV>
<DIV>> relationship to synthesis processes and no/low nitrogen gas is also</DIV>
<DIV>> there of course. but the prevalence of the "generic" usage is</DIV>
<DIV>> surprising. i'm surprised to see even some major names in</DIV>
<DIV>> pyrolysis/biochar are using it to name the gas from pyrolysis.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> given this over majority leaning towards the generic use, why do you</DIV>
<DIV>> summarize the state of affairs by affirming the more "traditional"</DIV>
<DIV>> senses of the term? it seems the numbers are leaning in the other</DIV>
<DIV>> direction. of course your sample is anecdotal, so putting numbers to</DIV>
<DIV>> the resulting statistics is suspect. but still, the emphasis in your</DIV>
<DIV>> conclusion i do not see in the sample. btw, how did you generate this</DIV>
<DIV>> sample?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> when we started this disucssion, my guess was that the generic usage</DIV>
<DIV>> of the term was maybe a 10-20% phenomenon. examples are piling up</DIV>
<DIV>> that it is actually much higher than this. it seems even higher in</DIV>
<DIV>> the academic world than in our local online circle.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> j</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > "Fuel gas can be used directly as fuel in gas burners or internal</DIV>
<DIV>> combustion</DIV>
<DIV>> > engines and gas turbines. Fuel gas, after purification and possibly water</DIV>
<DIV>> > gas shift to adjust the H2/CO ratio, can be described as a syngas (a</DIV>
<DIV>> mixture</DIV>
<DIV>> > of H2 and CO), which can be used to manufacture methanol, ammonia,</DIV>
<DIV>> Fischer</DIV>
<DIV>> > Tropsch liquids, or hydrogen for use in fuel cells (4). The suitability</DIV>
<DIV>> for</DIV>
<DIV>> > a particular usage, i.e. the fuel gas quality, is determined by the gas</DIV>
<DIV>> > composition and the level of contamination by particulates, alkali</DIV>
<DIV>> > compounds, nitrogen-containing components, sulphur and tars (5)."</DIV>
<DIV>> > from Kalisz, S. et al. Energy Balance of High Temperature Air/Steam</DIV>
<DIV>> > Gasification of Biomass in Up-Draft, Fixed-Bed Type Gasifier. Int. Conf.</DIV>
<DIV>> on</DIV>
<DIV>> > Incineration and Thermal Treatment Technologies, Phoenix, Arizona</DIV>
<DIV>> (2004).at</DIV>
<DIV>> > <<A href="http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf">http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf</A>></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > "Fast pyrolyzers rapidly (?1 s) heat dry biomass (10% H2O) to ?500?C and</DIV>
<DIV>> > thereby thermally transform biomass into bio-oil (?60% of mass), syngas</DIV>
<DIV>> > (?20% of mass), and charcoal (?20% of mass). The energy required to</DIV>
<DIV>> operate</DIV>
<DIV>> > a fast pyrolyzer is ?15% of the total energy that can be derived from the</DIV>
<DIV>> > dry biomass. Modern systems are designed to use the syngas generated by</DIV>
<DIV>> the</DIV>
<DIV>> > pyro- lyzer to provide all the energy needs of the pyrolyzer."</DIV>
<DIV>> > from Laird, D.A. The Charcoal Vision: A Win Win Win Scenario for</DIV>
<DIV>> > Simultaneously Producing Bioenergy, Permanently Sequestering Carbon,</DIV>
<DIV>> while</DIV>
<DIV>> > Improving Soil and Water Quality. Agron J 100, 178-181(2008).</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > "To improve the thermal efficiency and predict the composition of syngas,</DIV>
<DIV>> > several numeric models have been developed for biomass conversion</DIV>
<DIV>> systems."</DIV>
<DIV>> > from Rogel, A. & Aguill?n, J. The 2D Eulerian Approach of Entrained Flow</DIV>
<DIV>> and</DIV>
<DIV>> > Temperature in a Biomass Stratified Downdraft Gasifier. American Journal</DIV>
<DIV>> of</DIV>
<DIV>> > Applied Sciences 3, 2068-2075(2006).</DIV>
<DIV>> > Comments: Shows a stratified downdraft model with inputs of air and</DIV>
<DIV>> biomass,</DIV>
<DIV>> > outputs of syngas and ashes</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > "The term ?pyrolysis? is typically used either for ...[analytical</DIV>
<DIV>> > purposes]... or for bioenergy systems that capture the off-gases emitted</DIV>
<DIV>> > during charring and used to produce hydrogen, syngas, bio-oils, heat or</DIV>
<DIV>> > electricity (Bridgwater et al, 1999)."</DIV>
<DIV>> > from Lehmann, J. & Joseph, S. Biochar for environmental management:</DIV>
<DIV>> science</DIV>
<DIV>> > and technology. (Earthscan/James & James: 2009).</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > "High purity syngas (i.e. low quantities of inerts such as N2) is</DIV>
<DIV>> extremely</DIV>
<DIV>> > beneficial for fuels and chemicals synthesis since it substantially</DIV>
<DIV>> reduces</DIV>
<DIV>> > the size and cost of downstream equipment. However, the guidelines</DIV>
<DIV>> provided</DIV>
<DIV>> > in Table 5 should not be interpreted as stringent requirements. "</DIV>
<DIV>> > "There is more latitude with regard to syngas composition for engine</DIV>
<DIV>> > combustion than for turbine combustion."</DIV>
<DIV>> > "To be considered interchangeable with conventional fossil fuels (natural</DIV>
<DIV>> > gas or distillate oils) and to ensure maximum flexibility for industrial</DIV>
<DIV>> or</DIV>
<DIV>> > utility applications, syngas heating value needs to be above 11 MJ/m3"</DIV>
<DIV>> > "At temperatures greater than 1200-1300oC, little or no methane, higher</DIV>
<DIV>> > hydrocarbons or tar is formed, and H2 and CO production is maximized</DIV>
<DIV>> without</DIV>
<DIV>> > requiring a further conversion step."</DIV>
<DIV>> > "Biomass gasification is the conversion of an organic...carbonaceous</DIV>
<DIV>> > feedstock by partial oxidation into a gaseous product, synthesis gas or</DIV>
<DIV>> > ?syngas,? consisting primarily of [H2 and CO] with lesser amounts of</DIV>
<DIV>> [CO2,</DIV>
<DIV>> > CH4], higher hydrocarbons (C2+), and nitrogen (N2). The reactions are</DIV>
<DIV>> > carried out at elevated temperatures, 500-1400oC, and atmospheric or</DIV>
<DIV>> > elevated pressures up to 33 bar (480 psia). The oxidant used can be air,</DIV>
<DIV>> > pure oxygen, steam or a mixture of these gases. Air-based gasifiers</DIV>
<DIV>> > typically produce a product gas containing a relatively high</DIV>
<DIV>> concentration</DIV>
<DIV>> > of nitrogen with a low heating value between 4 and 6 MJ/m3 (107-161</DIV>
<DIV>> > Btu/ft3). Oxygen and steam-based gasifiers produce a product gas</DIV>
<DIV>> containing</DIV>
<DIV>> > a relatively high concentration of hydrogen and CO with a heating value</DIV>
<DIV>> > between 10 and 20 MJ/m3 (268-537 Btu/ft3)."</DIV>
<DIV>> > "Table 8. Compositions of Biomass-Derived Syngas" - includes N2 from</DIV>
<DIV>> 0-56%,</DIV>
<DIV>> > H2 from 5-43.3%, CO from 9-67%, CO2 from 4-40%</DIV>
<DIV>> > ...</DIV>
<DIV>> > from Ciferno, J.P. & Marano, J.J. Benchmarking biomass gasification</DIV>
<DIV>> > technologies for fuels, chemicals and hydrogen production. US Dep of</DIV>
<DIV>> Energy</DIV>
<DIV>> > NETL (2002).at</DIV>
<DIV>> > <</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf">http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf</A></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > "The resulting fuel is a producer gas (a synthesis gas or syngas) that</DIV>
<DIV>> > consists primarily of varying ratios of hydrogen and carbon monoxide</DIV>
<DIV>> (CO)."</DIV>
<DIV>> > from Mukhtar, S. Manure to Energy: Understanding Processes, Principles</DIV>
<DIV>> and</DIV>
<DIV>> > Jargon. (2006).at</DIV>
<DIV>> > <</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1">http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1</A></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV>> > But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV>> > higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas</DIV>
<DIV>> intended</DIV>
<DIV>> > to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV>> > general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > My preferred usage has been to call the gas the air-blown GEK makes</DIV>
<DIV>> > "producer gas". Wood gas notes that the carbon source was biomass, though</DIV>
<DIV>> I</DIV>
<DIV>> > don't prefer the term. "Syngas" being made with O2 or steam.</DIV>
<DIV>> > The problem with the above is it doesn't leave a general catch-all term.</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > Cheers,</DIV>
<DIV>> > Bear Kaufmann</DIV>
<DIV>> > All Power Labs</DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>> > _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>> > The Gasification list has moved to</DIV>
<DIV>> > <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenerglists.org">gasification@bioenerglists.org</A> - please update your email contacts to</DIV>
<DIV>> > reflect the change.</DIV>
<DIV>> > Please visit <A href="http://info.bioenergylists.org">http://info.bioenergylists.org</A> for more news on the list</DIV>
<DIV>> move.</DIV>
<DIV>> > Thank you,</DIV>
<DIV>> > Gasification Administrator</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> --</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV>> Jim Mason</DIV>
<DIV>> Website: <A href="http://www.whatiamupto.com">http://www.whatiamupto.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Current Projects:</DIV>
<DIV>> - Gasifier Experimenters Kit (the GEK): <A href="http://www.gekgasifier.com">http://www.gekgasifier.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>> - Escape from Berkeley alt fuels vehicle race:</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://www.escapefromberkeley.com">www.escapefromberkeley.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>> - ALL Power Labs on Twitter: <A href="http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs">http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs</A></DIV>
<DIV>> - Shipyard Announce list:</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com">http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>> Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>> Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>***</DIV>
<DIV>Dr. A.D. Karve</DIV>
<DIV>President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>*Please change my email address in your records to: <A href="mailto:adkarve@gmail.com">adkarve@gmail.com</A> *</DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/cb5fcce6/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/cb5fcce6/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 12</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:55:14 +0100</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Thomas Koch" <<A href="mailto:TK@tke.dk">TK@tke.dk</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>,</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:9346E1844DED164EB6371F0BF87FBCF74DCDBE@EXCHSERVER.tke.local">9346E1844DED164EB6371F0BF87FBCF74DCDBE@EXCHSERVER.tke.local</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Andrew</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>To me this a kiss of the death.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I started my carier developing screew pyrolysis units at the technical universty of Copenhagen for two purposes - one the Viking gasifier - 2 a starw pyrolysis unit.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>1. It is limited in temperature bedause of material limitations in the steel -</DIV>
<DIV>2. It is limited in capacity due to heat tarnsfer limitations om both sides</DIV>
<DIV>3. It is hot mowing part inside that has a limited lifetime due to reduced strenght</DIV>
<DIV>4. Everywhere you cool eg for bearings tar condenses and cause problems.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>1. Maks temperature on the steel plate is 600 oC if you expect life times of years even for soem of the most expensive types of refracotory metals. The consequense of that is that mea temperatue inside the biomass will be well below 600 oC having the consequense that almost no gasification takes place.</DIV>
<DIV>2. Energy transfer is in the order of 3-4 KW/m2 havinf the consequense that you can pyrolyse 5-10 kg pr hour pr m3 at a mean temperature of 500 oC - thus a Range fuel pyrolyser should have been 4-800 m2 to PYROLYSE (not gasifiy) 4000 kg pr hours. Assuming this made of a 600 mm pipe with a screew inside it is a 2-400 meter long pipe !!! - imagine the termal stresses in such a construction - and even worse thermal transients!!</DIV>
<DIV>3. Imagine 18 pipes in series stacked on top of each other you feed into the top and it falls in to the pipe below - each equipped with a screew and 36 - 36 pressurised axel sealings!! and 18 drive mechanisms!! The maintenance cost will far exeed the income from each line in a commercial market</DIV>
<DIV>4. Tars are not easy to handle</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Here in Denmark we have designed 2 real staged gasifiers one is the Viking and the other is the TKE 3 stage gasifier.</DIV>
<DIV>The Viking has a screew pyrolyser very similar to the one that Range use. The TKE gasifier uses an internally heated plug pyrolyser. The reason the I went a way from the Screew pyrolyser was that i could</DIV>
<DIV>1. Not see how upscale it</DIV>
<DIV>2. Not see hw to make a safety approval</DIV>
<DIV>3. See too high maintenance costs</DIV>
<DIV>But for both gasifiers electricity made from biomass cost s around 50-75 cent US pr kWh in a 3-800 KW gasifier.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The answer to your last question is -- YES</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best regards</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.tke.dk">www.tke.dk</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Fra: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> p? vegne af andrew schofield</DIV>
<DIV>Sendt: on 26-01-2011 05:25</DIV>
<DIV>Til: <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Emne: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Thomas Koch,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> How much of a problem for the scaled up Range Fuels plant, was heat transfer from the hot fluid outside the auger-tubes to the celluose inside each parallel screw-tube?</DIV>
<DIV>we gather a hint of the problem from your description, and Range Fuels needing to consult you about your experience with</DIV>
<DIV>hot-fluid jacketed screw-pyrolizers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Dr Reed said he saw the liquid fuel process working at small scale. May I guess this success was with a jacketed single-screw?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Inside the radiation, and convection sections of water-tube boilers steel surface temperatures can vary widely, as water vigorously circulates inside.</DIV>
<DIV>Water, being more fluid than wood chips screwing along in a tube, keeps steel temperature within certain limits throughout the entire boiler setting.</DIV>
<DIV>May we use this analogy to describe one problem experienced with Range Fuels attempt at system scale up?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A culinary anology for heat-jacketed auger-tubes is stir-frying vegitables in a Chinese wok. The chef adroitly presents new surfaces of the food to the hot steel to transfer heat by conduction. The chef can only make a batch of food under a certain size. Size beyond which he may choose to use a pressure cooker which can feed an army.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Would not direct-contact heat exchange between the hot fluid, and the wood be more practical at 4 ton/hr?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Andrew Schofield</DIV>
<DIV>Renewable Fuel Systems</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thomas Koch wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> Tom</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Range fuel gasification technology was an externally heated</DIV>
<DIV> pressuries pipe with a transport screew inside when I saw it.</DIV>
<DIV> It was very similar to the pyrolysis unit on the wiking gasifier but</DIV>
<DIV> they had ideas to upscale it to 4 tons pr hour by stacking pipes with</DIV>
<DIV> screew conveyers. Thinking of the challenges of making the 1 tons pr</DIV>
<DIV> hour screew pyrolyser in Haslev i have doubts this principle will</DIV>
<DIV> ever be competitive for energy production - even for atmospherich</DIV>
<DIV> applications. Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: Thomas Reed <<A href="mailto:tombreed2010@gmail.com">tombreed2010@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> I attended a few of the formative meetings of Range Fuels back about 2007 when I lived in Denver.</DIV>
<DIV>I have known Bud Klepper since about 1988 when we worked together on a methanol project.</DIV>
<DIV>Too bad that many $millions couldn't solve at a large scale what Bud had solved at a small scale.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tom Reed, Pyrologist</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jim of All Power Labs wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> thomas, why did you think a stacked array of skinny auger retorts won't work? this seems a known solution that tends to work as far as i know. of course the proof is in the material handling with specific fuels.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> did you find it difficult to keep the auger straight and working? difficult to keep the heat out of the motor and bearings at the ends?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> any secret cautionary tales we should know of?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> jim</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/e9ec50b1/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/e9ec50b1/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 13</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 09:56:31 +0530</DIV>
<DIV>From: nari phaltan <<A href="mailto:nariphaltan@gmail.com">nariphaltan@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:digestion@lists.bioenergylists.org">digestion@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Cc: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] [Digestion] composition of pyrolysis gas</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:AANLkTimyaKu3ob_+-w1T8Jomqs+2MdFCdXXoD=jnH1A8@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTimyaKu3ob_+-w1T8Jomqs+2MdFCdXXoD=jnH1A8@mail.gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>nariphaltan.virtualave.net/gasbook.pdf</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Jeff Davis <<A href="mailto:jeff0124@velocity.net">jeff0124@velocity.net</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> Dear Dr. Karve,</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Many variables:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> <</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://bioweb.sungrant.org/Technical/Biopower/Technologies/Pyrolysis/Default.htm">http://bioweb.sungrant.org/Technical/Biopower/Technologies/Pyrolysis/Default.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV>> ></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "Handbook of Biomass Downdraft Gasifier Engine Systems" by Dr. Tom</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> CO, CO2, H2, H2O, CH4 and tar vapor</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Jeff</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 09:24 -0800, Anand Karve wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> > I would like to know the composition of pyrolysis gas</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> --</DIV>
<DIV>> ________________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://www.puffergas.com">www.puffergas.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Sent from any port in the storm via Acer netbook & Ubuntu Remix.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>> Digestion mailing list</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="mailto:Digestion@bioenergylists.org">Digestion@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> for more information about digestion, see</DIV>
<DIV>> Beginner's Guide to Biogas</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/">http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/</A></DIV>
<DIV>> and the Biogas Wiki <A href="http://biogas.wikispaces.com/">http://biogas.wikispaces.com/</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute (NARI)</DIV>
<DIV>Tambmal, Phaltan-Lonand Road</DIV>
<DIV>P.O.Box 44</DIV>
<DIV>Phaltan-415523, Maharashtra, India</DIV>
<DIV>Ph:91-2166-222396/220945</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:e-mail:nariphaltan@gmail.com">e-mail:nariphaltan@gmail.com</A> <<A href="mailto:e-mail%3Anariphaltan@gmail.com">e-mail%3Anariphaltan@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV> <A href="mailto:anilrajvanshi@gmail.com">anilrajvanshi@gmail.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.nariphaltan.org">http://www.nariphaltan.org</A></DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://nariphaltan.virtualave.net">http://nariphaltan.virtualave.net</A></DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/a1fc6726/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110125/a1fc6726/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 14</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:18:42 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Jim Leach" <<A href="mailto:jleach@danatech.net">jleach@danatech.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>, <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <B15193892EB844F78ED209F926C94AFC@danatech01></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>That is a pretty nasty and bold claim, do you have any facts to back that</DIV>
<DIV>up?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.</DIV>
<DIV>President</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.</DIV>
<DIV>32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D</DIV>
<DIV>San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675</DIV>
<DIV>Ph 949-496-6516</DIV>
<DIV>Fx 949-496-8133</DIV>
<DIV>Mobile 949-933-6518</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _____</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>[<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of GF</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:41 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>; <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Government Grants and Ethanol.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think we all agree on: THE GREAT ETHANOL SWINDLE.</DIV>
<DIV>This is where our tax dollars are diverted into non economic production</DIV>
<DIV>of a fuel additive which supposedly saves us from climate change.</DIV>
<DIV>The primary players in this scam have made sure their methods together with</DIV>
<DIV>the cash cow they have created "REMAINS INTACT"</DIV>
<DIV>The last thing they desire is a new and more efficient system to be</DIV>
<DIV>discovered or adopted.</DIV>
<DIV>So how do they protect their interests?</DIV>
<DIV>Quite simply, take control of any new committees responsible for the</DIV>
<DIV>selection of grants which might produce an alternative to their scam.</DIV>
<DIV>How could such a wasteful and useless system be chosen for Federal</DIV>
<DIV>Investment unless the people on the committee had an agenda which also</DIV>
<DIV>included the grant seekers.</DIV>
<DIV>The naivety of those who believe that poor judgment on the part of the</DIV>
<DIV>perpetrators is the primary cause of such "losses" should have their voting</DIV>
<DIV>rights revoked.</DIV>
<DIV>There are no accidents or poor judgment in politics. That is the excuse</DIV>
<DIV>generated by a stupid and trusting electorate.</DIV>
<DIV>It will not matter how merit worthy your claim is for grant money, it will</DIV>
<DIV>not be considered worthy if it challenges an established "funded" system.</DIV>
<DIV>It might be chosen if it has "floors", in which case, be prepared to share</DIV>
<DIV>it with at least one member of the committee.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>GF</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV>From: Mark Ludlow <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'</DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 11:20 am</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tom writes: Wonder why anyone stays in this field?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Reply: It pays well.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>[<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org?">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org?</A>> ] On Behalf Of</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:LINVENT@aol.com">LINVENT@aol.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 6:27 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:tmiles@trmiles.com">tmiles@trmiles.com</A>; <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Technologists,</DIV>
<DIV> The failure or whatever it is spun by Mr. Klepper in the article</DIV>
<DIV>announcing the closure of the plant, is by itself devastating to the</DIV>
<DIV>industry. Without a successfully operating plant, the industry has no</DIV>
<DIV>positive markers for the investment community. Do you think that the</DIV>
<DIV>financing group would do another bio-refinery after putting up the money for</DIV>
<DIV>this plant?</DIV>
<DIV> What is more difficult is that nowhere in the technical review</DIV>
<DIV>community used to fund this plant was the critical eye which said "It won't</DIV>
<DIV>work". Of course, the developers may have shopped the technical review until</DIV>
<DIV>they got what they wanted to hear. The DOE is quite apparently not able to</DIV>
<DIV>make the distinction as they approved the funding. This also means that a</DIV>
<DIV>successful technology would not be known by them. It takes a winner to know</DIV>
<DIV>a winner.</DIV>
<DIV> I had early meetings with parts of the Klepper movement. A small</DIV>
<DIV>private group which had put $1+mm into the project and were basically</DIV>
<DIV>abandoneed when the technology was sold to another group for development.</DIV>
<DIV>Their concerns were the reactor design which apparently relied upon a</DIV>
<DIV>mechanical system which they didn't think would scale well. Not knowing what</DIV>
<DIV>the issues with the plant not operating, this may have been a contributing</DIV>
<DIV>factor. They also said that they were sticking with it and just picking my</DIV>
<DIV>brains which I suspected and didn't contribute anything of significance.</DIV>
<DIV> There were also issues with the catalyst. Reports that it produced</DIV>
<DIV>only ethanol using the proprietary catalyst were suspect as most of the</DIV>
<DIV>catalysts for ethanol production produce methanol also. The press statement</DIV>
<DIV>that they ran a methanol batch first and then an ethanol batch, are</DIV>
<DIV>interesting in this regard.</DIV>
<DIV> DOE is doing a lot of soul searching at the behest of the White House</DIV>
<DIV>because of the dearth of bio-energy project successes. Political pressure</DIV>
<DIV>will not make it happen, money will not make it happen, but a serious well</DIV>
<DIV>developed , innovative, simple process and technology will.</DIV>
<DIV> Below are some of the massive failures:</DIV>
<DIV>Occidental's flash pyrolysis unit in Sad Diego: $100mm</DIV>
<DIV>Britestar/EDL pyrolysis unit in Australia: $200mm</DIV>
<DIV>Range Fuels: $300mm</DIV>
<DIV>Molten Metals: $90mm(mostly DOE earmarked funds)</DIV>
<DIV>Hawaii IGT/EPRI/Westinghouse/HPL/ gasification unit: $30-50mm?</DIV>
<DIV>Battelle's dual fluidized bed gasification system: $60mm?</DIV>
<DIV>Thermoselect's two stage combustion system: $125mm/plant 4-5 plants except</DIV>
<DIV>for the one in Japan which I think is still operating.</DIV>
<DIV>PRM's Philadelphia sewage sludge gasification system: $2-3mm (blew up and</DIV>
<DIV>was shut down very shortly after installation, I was called to see if wanted</DIV>
<DIV>the plant for scrap).</DIV>
<DIV>Italian sawdust gasification plant near Venice, 1 Mwe couldn't get an engine</DIV>
<DIV>to run more than 40 hours between valve jobs due to tar fouling of intake</DIV>
<DIV>valves.</DIV>
<DIV>Farmland's acquisition of the Daggett, California Texaco coal gasification</DIV>
<DIV>144 Mwe power plant and reconstituting it in Coffeville, Kansas to run on</DIV>
<DIV>pet coke for ammonia production. Texaco was thrown out of the project,</DIV>
<DIV>Farmland finished the plant got it running on petcoke, had to file</DIV>
<DIV>bankruptcy and sell the 1100 ton/day ammonia production unit using it to a</DIV>
<DIV>separate entity.</DIV>
<DIV> The list goes on and on.</DIV>
<DIV> Wonder why anyone stays in this field?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sincerely,</DIV>
<DIV>Leland T. "Tom" Taylor</DIV>
<DIV>President</DIV>
<DIV>Thermogenics Inc.</DIV>
<DIV>505.463.8422</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.thermogenics.com">www.thermogenics.com</A> <<A href="http://www.thermogenics.com/">http://www.thermogenics.com/</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg</A></DIV>
<DIV>ylists.org</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/5a8616ef/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/5a8616ef/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 15</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 18:59:10 +0100 (MET)</DIV>
<DIV>From: Otto Formo <<A href="mailto:formo-o@online.no">formo-o@online.no</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: Thomas Koch <<A href="mailto:TK@tke.dk">TK@tke.dk</A>>, Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and</DIV>
<DIV> gasification <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>,</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:8635164.8662.1296064750062.JavaMail.adm-moff@moffice1.nsc.no">8635164.8662.1296064750062.JavaMail.adm-moff@moffice1.nsc.no</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thomas,</DIV>
<DIV>Does it means that your TKE 3 stage gasifier is still operating in Denmark?</DIV>
<DIV>Have you any connection to or cooperation to the lab of Bioenergy Innovation Centre run by SINTEF in Norway?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Paal`s TLUD ND Gasifier PekoPe was tested by the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen in mid 1990`s. Do you happend to know about how it operates?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It seems someone has focused on the "wrong" terms of combustion and fuel operations.............who knows?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I gues you can find some more detalis about pyrolysis and gasifier units from the Technical Museum of Munich in Bavaria, Germany?</DIV>
<DIV>Some people on the list were doing some investigations over there, just some time back.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Good luck.</DIV>
<DIV>Otto</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> From: Thomas Koch [<A href="mailto:TK@tke.dk">TK@tke.dk</A>]</DIV>
<DIV>> Sent: 2011-01-26 15:55:14 MET</DIV>
<DIV>> To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification [<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>], <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Dear Andrew</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> To me this a kiss of the death.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> I started my carier developing screew pyrolysis units at the technical universty of Copenhagen for two purposes - one the Viking gasifier - 2 a starw pyrolysis unit.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> 1. It is limited in temperature bedause of material limitations in the steel -</DIV>
<DIV>> 2. It is limited in capacity due to heat tarnsfer limitations om both sides</DIV>
<DIV>> 3. It is hot mowing part inside that has a limited lifetime due to reduced strenght</DIV>
<DIV>> 4. Everywhere you cool eg for bearings tar condenses and cause problems.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> 1. Maks temperature on the steel plate is 600 oC if you expect life times of years even for soem of the most expensive types of refracotory metals. The consequense of that is that mea temperatue inside the biomass will be well below 600 oC having the consequense that almost no gasification takes place.</DIV>
<DIV>> 2. Energy transfer is in the order of 3-4 KW/m2 havinf the consequense that you can pyrolyse 5-10 kg pr hour pr m3 at a mean temperature of 500 oC - thus a Range fuel pyrolyser should have been 4-800 m2 to PYROLYSE (not gasifiy) 4000 kg pr hours. Assuming this made of a 600 mm pipe with a screew inside it is a 2-400 meter long pipe !!! - imagine the termal stresses in such a construction - and even worse thermal transients!!</DIV>
<DIV>> 3. Imagine 18 pipes in series stacked on top of each other you feed into the top and it falls in to the pipe below - each equipped with a screew and 36 - 36 pressurised axel sealings!! and 18 drive mechanisms!! The maintenance cost will far exeed the income from each line in a commercial market</DIV>
<DIV>> 4. Tars are not easy to handle</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Here in Denmark we have designed 2 real staged gasifiers one is the Viking and the other is the TKE 3 stage gasifier.</DIV>
<DIV>> The Viking has a screew pyrolyser very similar to the one that Range use. The TKE gasifier uses an internally heated plug pyrolyser. The reason the I went a way from the Screew pyrolyser was that i could</DIV>
<DIV>> 1. Not see how upscale it</DIV>
<DIV>> 2. Not see hw to make a safety approval</DIV>
<DIV>> 3. See too high maintenance costs</DIV>
<DIV>> But for both gasifiers electricity made from biomass cost s around 50-75 cent US pr kWh in a 3-800 KW gasifier.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> The answer to your last question is -- YES</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Best regards</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://www.tke.dk">www.tke.dk</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> ________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Fra: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> p? vegne af andrew schofield</DIV>
<DIV>> Sendt: on 26-01-2011 05:25</DIV>
<DIV>> Til: <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Emne: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Dear Thomas Koch,</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> How much of a problem for the scaled up Range Fuels plant, was heat transfer from the hot fluid outside the auger-tubes to the celluose inside each parallel screw-tube?</DIV>
<DIV>> we gather a hint of the problem from your description, and Range Fuels needing to consult you about your experience with</DIV>
<DIV>> hot-fluid jacketed screw-pyrolizers.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Dr Reed said he saw the liquid fuel process working at small scale. May I guess this success was with a jacketed single-screw?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Inside the radiation, and convection sections of water-tube boilers steel surface temperatures can vary widely, as water vigorously circulates inside.</DIV>
<DIV>> Water, being more fluid than wood chips screwing along in a tube, keeps steel temperature within certain limits throughout the entire boiler setting.</DIV>
<DIV>> May we use this analogy to describe one problem experienced with Range Fuels attempt at system scale up?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> A culinary anology for heat-jacketed auger-tubes is stir-frying vegitables in a Chinese wok. The chef adroitly presents new surfaces of the food to the hot steel to transfer heat by conduction. The chef can only make a batch of food under a certain size. Size beyond which he may choose to use a pressure cooker which can feed an army.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Would not direct-contact heat exchange between the hot fluid, and the wood be more practical at 4 ton/hr?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Andrew Schofield</DIV>
<DIV>> Renewable Fuel Systems</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Thomas Koch wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> Tom</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Range fuel gasification technology was an externally heated</DIV>
<DIV>> pressuries pipe with a transport screew inside when I saw it.</DIV>
<DIV>> It was very similar to the pyrolysis unit on the wiking gasifier but</DIV>
<DIV>> they had ideas to upscale it to 4 tons pr hour by stacking pipes with</DIV>
<DIV>> screew conveyers. Thinking of the challenges of making the 1 tons pr</DIV>
<DIV>> hour screew pyrolyser in Haslev i have doubts this principle will</DIV>
<DIV>> ever be competitive for energy production - even for atmospherich</DIV>
<DIV>> applications. Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> From: Thomas Reed <<A href="mailto:tombreed2010@gmail.com">tombreed2010@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> I attended a few of the formative meetings of Range Fuels back about 2007 when I lived in Denver.</DIV>
<DIV>> I have known Bud Klepper since about 1988 when we worked together on a methanol project.</DIV>
<DIV>> Too bad that many $millions couldn't solve at a large scale what Bud had solved at a small scale.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Tom Reed, Pyrologist</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Jim of All Power Labs wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> thomas, why did you think a stacked array of skinny auger retorts won't work? this seems a known solution that tends to work as far as i know. of course the proof is in the material handling with specific fuels.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> did you find it difficult to keep the auger straight and working? difficult to keep the heat out of the motor and bearings at the ends?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> any secret cautionary tales we should know of?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> jim</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 16</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:31:14 -0400</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Kevin" <<A href="mailto:kchisholm@ca.inter.net">kchisholm@ca.inter.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>, <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <57D7E3D7ACB44D38B5946DE09F0AD39E@usera594fda0bf></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Jim</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Greg says, among other things, :</DIV>
<DIV>This is where our tax dollars are diverted into non economic production</DIV>
<DIV>of a fuel additive which supposedly saves us from climate change.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There was an interesting Science program on CBC on 15 Jan, on Climate Change. A reference URL to the Program is:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/episode/2011/01/15/january-15-2011/">http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/episode/2011/01/15/january-15-2011/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>They have one clip on "Climate 3000". Scroll down and click on "Listen to this Item".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It would appear from this article that we cannot be "saved from Climate Change."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin</DIV>
<DIV> ----- Original Message -----</DIV>
<DIV> From: Jim Leach</DIV>
<DIV> To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' ; <A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 1:18 PM</DIV>
<DIV> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> That is a pretty nasty and bold claim, do you have any facts to back that up?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.</DIV>
<DIV> President</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.</DIV>
<DIV> 32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D</DIV>
<DIV> San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675</DIV>
<DIV> Ph 949-496-6516</DIV>
<DIV> Fx 949-496-8133</DIV>
<DIV> Mobile 949-933-6518</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of GF</DIV>
<DIV> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:41 AM</DIV>
<DIV> To: <A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>; <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Government Grants and Ethanol.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> I think we all agree on: THE GREAT ETHANOL SWINDLE.</DIV>
<DIV> This is where our tax dollars are diverted into non economic production</DIV>
<DIV> of a fuel additive which supposedly saves us from climate change.</DIV>
<DIV> The primary players in this scam have made sure their methods together with the cash cow they have created "REMAINS INTACT"</DIV>
<DIV> The last thing they desire is a new and more efficient system to be discovered or adopted.</DIV>
<DIV> So how do they protect their interests?</DIV>
<DIV> Quite simply, take control of any new committees responsible for the selection of grants which might produce an alternative to their scam.</DIV>
<DIV> How could such a wasteful and useless system be chosen for Federal Investment unless the people on the committee had an agenda which also included the grant seekers.</DIV>
<DIV> The naivety of those who believe that poor judgment on the part of the perpetrators is the primary cause of such "losses" should have their voting rights revoked.</DIV>
<DIV> There are no accidents or poor judgment in politics. That is the excuse generated by a stupid and trusting electorate.</DIV>
<DIV> It will not matter how merit worthy your claim is for grant money, it will not be considered worthy if it challenges an established "funded" system.</DIV>
<DIV> It might be chosen if it has "floors", in which case, be prepared to share it with at least one member of the committee.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> GF</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> -----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV> From: Mark Ludlow <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV> To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV> Sent: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 11:20 am</DIV>
<DIV> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Tom writes: Wonder why anyone stays in this field?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Reply: It pays well.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of <A href="mailto:LINVENT@aol.com">LINVENT@aol.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 6:27 AM</DIV>
<DIV> To: <A href="mailto:tmiles@trmiles.com">tmiles@trmiles.com</A>; <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Dear Technologists,</DIV>
<DIV> The failure or whatever it is spun by Mr. Klepper in the article announcing the closure of the plant, is by itself devastating to the industry. Without a successfully operating plant, the industry has no positive markers for the investment community. Do you think that the financing group would do another bio-refinery after putting up the money for this plant?</DIV>
<DIV> What is more difficult is that nowhere in the technical review community used to fund this plant was the critical eye which said "It won't work". Of course, the developers may have shopped the technical review until they got what they wanted to hear. The DOE is quite apparently not able to make the distinction as they approved the funding. This also means that a successful technology would not be known by them. It takes a winner to know a winner.</DIV>
<DIV> I had early meetings with parts of the Klepper movement. A small private group which had put $1+mm into the project and were basically abandoneed when the technology was sold to another group for development. Their concerns were the reactor design which apparently relied upon a mechanical system which they didn't think would scale well. Not knowing what the issues with the plant not operating, this may have been a contributing factor. They also said that they were sticking with it and just picking m</DIV>
<DIV>y brains which I suspected and didn't contribute anything of significance.</DIV>
<DIV> There were also issues with the catalyst. Reports that it produced only ethanol using the proprietary catalyst were suspect as most of the catalysts for ethanol production produce methanol also. The press statement that they ran a methanol batch first and then an ethanol batch, are interesting in this regard.</DIV>
<DIV> DOE is doing a lot of soul searching at the behest of the White House because of the dearth of bio-energy project successes. Political pressure will not make it happen, money will not make it happen, but a serious well developed , innovative, simple process and technology will.</DIV>
<DIV> Below are some of the massive failures:</DIV>
<DIV> Occidental's flash pyrolysis unit in Sad Diego: $100mm</DIV>
<DIV> Britestar/EDL pyrolysis unit in Australia: $200mm</DIV>
<DIV> Range Fuels: $300mm</DIV>
<DIV> Molten Metals: $90mm(mostly DOE earmarked funds)</DIV>
<DIV> Hawaii IGT/EPRI/Westinghouse/HPL/ gasification unit: $30-50mm?</DIV>
<DIV> Battelle's dual fluidized bed gasification system: $60mm?</DIV>
<DIV> Thermoselect's two stage combustion system: $125mm/plant 4-5 plants except for the one in Japan which I think is still operating.</DIV>
<DIV> PRM's Philadelphia sewage sludge gasification system: $2-3mm (blew up and was shut down very shortly after installation, I was called to see if wanted the plant for scrap).</DIV>
<DIV> Italian sawdust gasification plant near Venice, 1 Mwe couldn't get an engine to run more than 40 hours between valve jobs due to tar fouling of intake valves.</DIV>
<DIV> Farmland's acquisition of the Daggett, California Texaco coal gasification 144 Mwe power plant and reconstituting it in Coffeville, Kansas to run on pet coke for ammonia production. Texaco was thrown out of the project, Farmland finished the plant got it running on petcoke, had to file bankruptcy and sell the 1100 ton/day ammonia production unit using it to a separate entity.</DIV>
<DIV> The list goes on and on.</DIV>
<DIV> Wonder why anyone stays in this field?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Sincerely,</DIV>
<DIV> Leland T. "Tom" Taylor</DIV>
<DIV> President</DIV>
<DIV> Thermogenics Inc.</DIV>
<DIV> 505.463.8422</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://www.thermogenics.com">www.thermogenics.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5821 (20110126) __________</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://www.eset.com">http://www.eset.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> No virus found in this message.</DIV>
<DIV> Checked by AVG - <A href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3404 - Release Date: 01/26/11</DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/a9d86c73/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/a9d86c73/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 17</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:59:36 -0400</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Kevin" <<A href="mailto:kchisholm@ca.inter.net">kchisholm@ca.inter.net</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: <<A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <859D71B311A944938FC3906E6E5B07DF@usera594fda0bf></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Gerald</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What would you think of the following proposed definitions?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>WOOD GAS:</DIV>
<DIV>Wood gas is a combustible gas produced by gasifying non-fossilized biomass with sufficient oxygen to leave little or no char. The biomass feed to a "Wood Gas Gasifier" could be woody biomass, agricultural wastes, or any other non-fossil biomass based material. The gas produced has a heating value in the range of about 125 to 150 BTU per Standard cubic foot. It may, or may not, contain significant quantities of tars. With adequately low tar content, it would be termed "Engine Grade Wood Gas", or if the tar c</DIV>
<DIV>ontent was too much for longer term use in an engine, it would be termed "Fuel Grade Wood Gas."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PYROLYSIS GAS:</DIV>
<DIV>Pyrolysis gas is the gas product produced when non-fossil biomass is either heated in a sealed retort, or, when it is "internally heated" through partial combustion of the pyrolysis gases. It has a high tar content, and a heating value in excess of 200 BTU per Standard Cubic foot.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>SYNTHESIS GAS, and "SYNGAS"</DIV>
<DIV>Synthesis gas is any gas produced for the purpose of synthesizing a higher value product. Wood gas and Pyrolysis gas can be termed "Synthesis Gas" or "SYNGAS" if they are used to synthesize a higher value product. Any such gas that is burned as fuel to release its energy content as heat is not "Synthesis Gas" or "SYNGAS".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How do those proposed definitions sound to you?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin Chisholm</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> ---------- Forwarded message ----------</DIV>
<DIV> From: Gerald Kutney <<A href="mailto:gkutney@shaw.ca">gkutney@shaw.ca</A>></DIV>
<DIV> Date: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 17:59</DIV>
<DIV> Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>, <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> I have followed the discussion on the definition of syngas (synthesis gas) with great interest. Although there are adamant views that syngas should be narrowly defined, I have yet to see early references that back up this claim. The term "synthesis gas" appears to have gained popularity during the '40's (possibly before) to describe the raw material for the FT process; however, it quickly became the popular term for manufactured gas. In the second edition of the iconic Kirk-Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chem</DIV>
<DIV>ical Technology, one is directed to the chapter on manufactured gas when looking for synthesis gas (see vol. 10, p. 355, 1966), where it is mentioned to produce synthetic chemicals from the water gas and water gas shift reactions. In Riegel's, Industrial Chemistry, 1962, a list of synthesis gas methods are listed that mimic manufactured gas and includes gasification with air. And on p. 892, synthesis gas is simply defined as the mixture of CO and H2.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> I respect the opinion of the members of this list, but could you supply early references to back up your definitions. I believe that this is an important issue to be cleared up, as there is definite confusion on whether syngas should have a limited definition or a broad definition.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Gerald Kutney, Ph.D.</DIV>
<DIV> Managing Director</DIV>
<DIV> Sixth Element Sustainable Management</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://www.6esm.com">www.6esm.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> -----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV> From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of jim mason</DIV>
<DIV> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:40 PM</DIV>
<DIV> To: <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Bear Kaufmann <<A href="mailto:bear@allpowerlabs.org">bear@allpowerlabs.org</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV> > I looked through some of the papers I have on hand, and extracted the</DIV>
<DIV> > interesting parts as they relate to the latest discussion, FWIW:</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV> > But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV> > higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas intended</DIV>
<DIV> > to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV> > general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> bear, in reading through your 6 examples here, i find 4 of them use</DIV>
<DIV> the term "syngas" in some flavor of a general term for the gas</DIV>
<DIV> produced through some form of biomass thermal conversion. its</DIV>
<DIV> relationship to synthesis processes and no/low nitrogen gas is also</DIV>
<DIV> there of course. but the prevalence of the "generic" usage is</DIV>
<DIV> surprising. i'm surprised to see even some major names in</DIV>
<DIV> pyrolysis/biochar are using it to name the gas from pyrolysis.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> given this over majority leaning towards the generic use, why do you</DIV>
<DIV> summarize the state of affairs by affirming the more "traditional"</DIV>
<DIV> senses of the term? it seems the numbers are leaning in the other</DIV>
<DIV> direction. of course your sample is anecdotal, so putting numbers to</DIV>
<DIV> the resulting statistics is suspect. but still, the emphasis in your</DIV>
<DIV> conclusion i do not see in the sample. btw, how did you generate this</DIV>
<DIV> sample?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> when we started this disucssion, my guess was that the generic usage</DIV>
<DIV> of the term was maybe a 10-20% phenomenon. examples are piling up</DIV>
<DIV> that it is actually much higher than this. it seems even higher in</DIV>
<DIV> the academic world than in our local online circle.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> j</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > "Fuel gas can be used directly as fuel in gas burners or internal combustion</DIV>
<DIV> > engines and gas turbines. Fuel gas, after purification and possibly water</DIV>
<DIV> > gas shift to adjust the H2/CO ratio, can be described as a syngas (a mixture</DIV>
<DIV> > of H2 and CO), which can be used to manufacture methanol, ammonia, Fischer</DIV>
<DIV> > Tropsch liquids, or hydrogen for use in fuel cells (4). The suitability for</DIV>
<DIV> > a particular usage, i.e. the fuel gas quality, is determined by the gas</DIV>
<DIV> > composition and the level of contamination by particulates, alkali</DIV>
<DIV> > compounds, nitrogen-containing components, sulphur and tars (5)."</DIV>
<DIV> > from Kalisz, S. et al. Energy Balance of High Temperature Air/Steam</DIV>
<DIV> > Gasification of Biomass in Up-Draft, Fixed-Bed Type Gasifier. Int. Conf. on</DIV>
<DIV> > Incineration and Thermal Treatment Technologies, Phoenix, Arizona (2004).at</DIV>
<DIV> > <<A href="http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf">http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf</A>></DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > "Fast pyrolyzers rapidly (?1 s) heat dry biomass (10% H2O) to ?500?C and</DIV>
<DIV> > thereby thermally transform biomass into bio-oil (?60% of mass), syngas</DIV>
<DIV> > (?20% of mass), and charcoal (?20% of mass). The energy required to operate</DIV>
<DIV> > a fast pyrolyzer is ?15% of the total energy that can be derived from the</DIV>
<DIV> > dry biomass. Modern systems are designed to use the syngas generated by the</DIV>
<DIV> > pyro- lyzer to provide all the energy needs of the pyrolyzer."</DIV>
<DIV> > from Laird, D.A. The Charcoal Vision: A Win Win Win Scenario for</DIV>
<DIV> > Simultaneously Producing Bioenergy, Permanently Sequestering Carbon, while</DIV>
<DIV> > Improving Soil and Water Quality. Agron J 100, 178-181(2008).</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > "To improve the thermal efficiency and predict the composition of syngas,</DIV>
<DIV> > several numeric models have been developed for biomass conversion systems."</DIV>
<DIV> > from Rogel, A. & Aguill?n, J. The 2D Eulerian Approach of Entrained Flow and</DIV>
<DIV> > Temperature in a Biomass Stratified Downdraft Gasifier. American Journal of</DIV>
<DIV> > Applied Sciences 3, 2068-2075(2006).</DIV>
<DIV> > Comments: Shows a stratified downdraft model with inputs of air and biomass,</DIV>
<DIV> > outputs of syngas and ashes</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > "The term ?pyrolysis? is typically used either for ...[analytical</DIV>
<DIV> > purposes]... or for bioenergy systems that capture the off-gases emitted</DIV>
<DIV> > during charring and used to produce hydrogen, syngas, bio-oils, heat or</DIV>
<DIV> > electricity (Bridgwater et al, 1999)."</DIV>
<DIV> > from Lehmann, J. & Joseph, S. Biochar for environmental management: science</DIV>
<DIV> > and technology. (Earthscan/James & James: 2009).</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > "High purity syngas (i.e. low quantities of inerts such as N2) is extremely</DIV>
<DIV> > beneficial for fuels and chemicals synthesis since it substantially reduces</DIV>
<DIV> > the size and cost of downstream equipment. However, the guidelines provided</DIV>
<DIV> > in Table 5 should not be interpreted as stringent requirements. "</DIV>
<DIV> > "There is more latitude with regard to syngas composition for engine</DIV>
<DIV> > combustion than for turbine combustion."</DIV>
<DIV> > "To be considered interchangeable with conventional fossil fuels (natural</DIV>
<DIV> > gas or distillate oils) and to ensure maximum flexibility for industrial or</DIV>
<DIV> > utility applications, syngas heating value needs to be above 11 MJ/m3"</DIV>
<DIV> > "At temperatures greater than 1200-1300oC, little or no methane, higher</DIV>
<DIV> > hydrocarbons or tar is formed, and H2 and CO production is maximized without</DIV>
<DIV> > requiring a further conversion step."</DIV>
<DIV> > "Biomass gasification is the conversion of an organic...carbonaceous</DIV>
<DIV> > feedstock by partial oxidation into a gaseous product, synthesis gas or</DIV>
<DIV> > ?syngas,? consisting primarily of [H2 and CO] with lesser amounts of [CO2,</DIV>
<DIV> > CH4], higher hydrocarbons (C2+), and nitrogen (N2). The reactions are</DIV>
<DIV> > carried out at elevated temperatures, 500-1400oC, and atmospheric or</DIV>
<DIV> > elevated pressures up to 33 bar (480 psia). The oxidant used can be air,</DIV>
<DIV> > pure oxygen, steam or a mixture of these gases. Air-based gasifiers</DIV>
<DIV> > typically produce a product gas containing a relatively high concentration</DIV>
<DIV> > of nitrogen with a low heating value between 4 and 6 MJ/m3 (107-161</DIV>
<DIV> > Btu/ft3). Oxygen and steam-based gasifiers produce a product gas containing</DIV>
<DIV> > a relatively high concentration of hydrogen and CO with a heating value</DIV>
<DIV> > between 10 and 20 MJ/m3 (268-537 Btu/ft3)."</DIV>
<DIV> > "Table 8. Compositions of Biomass-Derived Syngas" - includes N2 from 0-56%,</DIV>
<DIV> > H2 from 5-43.3%, CO from 9-67%, CO2 from 4-40%</DIV>
<DIV> > ...</DIV>
<DIV> > from Ciferno, J.P. & Marano, J.J. Benchmarking biomass gasification</DIV>
<DIV> > technologies for fuels, chemicals and hydrogen production. US Dep of Energy</DIV>
<DIV> > NETL (2002).at</DIV>
<DIV> > <<A href="http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf">http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf</A>></DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > "The resulting fuel is a producer gas (a synthesis gas or syngas) that</DIV>
<DIV> > consists primarily of varying ratios of hydrogen and carbon monoxide (CO)."</DIV>
<DIV> > from Mukhtar, S. Manure to Energy: Understanding Processes, Principles and</DIV>
<DIV> > Jargon. (2006).at</DIV>
<DIV> > <<A href="http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1">http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1</A>></DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV> > But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV> > higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas intended</DIV>
<DIV> > to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV> > general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > My preferred usage has been to call the gas the air-blown GEK makes</DIV>
<DIV> > "producer gas". Wood gas notes that the carbon source was biomass, though I</DIV>
<DIV> > don't prefer the term. "Syngas" being made with O2 or steam.</DIV>
<DIV> > The problem with the above is it doesn't leave a general catch-all term.</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > Cheers,</DIV>
<DIV> > Bear Kaufmann</DIV>
<DIV> > All Power Labs</DIV>
<DIV> ></DIV>
<DIV> > _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> > The Gasification list has moved to</DIV>
<DIV> > <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenerglists.org">gasification@bioenerglists.org</A> - please update your email contacts to</DIV>
<DIV> > reflect the change.</DIV>
<DIV> > Please visit <A href="http://info.bioenergylists.org">http://info.bioenergylists.org</A> for more news on the list move.</DIV>
<DIV> > Thank you,</DIV>
<DIV> > Gasification Administrator</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> --</DIV>
<DIV> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> Jim Mason</DIV>
<DIV> Website: <A href="http://www.whatiamupto.com">http://www.whatiamupto.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> Current Projects:</DIV>
<DIV> - Gasifier Experimenters Kit (the GEK): <A href="http://www.gekgasifier.com">http://www.gekgasifier.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Escape from Berkeley alt fuels vehicle race: <A href="http://www.escapefromberkeley.com">www.escapefromberkeley.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - ALL Power Labs on Twitter: <A href="http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs">http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Shipyard Announce list:</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com">http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV> <A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> --</DIV>
<DIV> - Daniel</DIV>
<DIV> Fredericton, NB Canada</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> No virus found in this message.</DIV>
<DIV> Checked by AVG - <A href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3402 - Release Date: 01/25/11</DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/1545aa97/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/1545aa97/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 18</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:28:58 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Gerald Kutney" <<A href="mailto:gkutney@shaw.ca">gkutney@shaw.ca</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>,</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <023d01cbbd8f$477da260$d678e720$@ca></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin, I have always respected your knowledge in this area. And your definitions are excellent. Engine-grade gas is especially attractive.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What I am actually seeking though is not to define any gas, because these terms have existed for decades and the literature should have defined them. The early references that I have seen do not strictly define syngas in a very limited manner. Others have felt so strongly on a limited definition that inflammatory statements have been made about organizations who claim to make ?syngas?. If we use the term to declare groups to be fraudulent, we should ensure that we are also using the terms correctly, as t</DIV>
<DIV>hey were originally intended.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In the dispute over syngas, many references have used the term as a generic replacement for any manufactured gas well before members of this list for working in the field; that is any gasification process that produces hydrogen and carbon monoxide. If members feel that this definition is incorrect, which it may be, then recognized early references to such should be provided.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Gerald</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of Kevin</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 11:00 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Gerald</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What would you think of the following proposed definitions?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>WOOD GAS:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Wood gas is a combustible gas produced by gasifying non-fossilized biomass with sufficient oxygen to leave little or no char. The biomass feed to a "Wood Gas Gasifier" could be woody biomass, agricultural wastes, or any other non-fossil biomass based material. The gas produced has a heating value in the range of about 125 to 150 BTU per Standard cubic foot. It may, or may not, contain significant quantities of tars. With adequately low tar content, it would be termed "Engine Grade Wood Gas", or if the tar c</DIV>
<DIV>ontent was too much for longer term use in an engine, it would be termed "Fuel Grade Wood Gas."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PYROLYSIS GAS:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Pyrolysis gas is the gas product produced when non-fossil biomass is either heated in a sealed retort, or, when it is "internally heated" through partial combustion of the pyrolysis gases. It has a high tar content, and a heating value in excess of 200 BTU per Standard Cubic foot.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>SYNTHESIS GAS, and "SYNGAS"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Synthesis gas is any gas produced for the purpose of synthesizing a higher value product. Wood gas and Pyrolysis gas can be termed "Synthesis Gas" or "SYNGAS" if they are used to synthesize a higher value product. Any such gas that is burned as fuel to release its energy content as heat is not "Synthesis Gas" or "SYNGAS".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How do those proposed definitions sound to you?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin Chisholm</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>---------- Forwarded message ----------</DIV>
<DIV>From: Gerald Kutney <<A href="mailto:gkutney@shaw.ca">gkutney@shaw.ca</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 17:59</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>, <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have followed the discussion on the definition of syngas (synthesis gas) with great interest. Although there are adamant views that syngas should be narrowly defined, I have yet to see early references that back up this claim. The term "synthesis gas" appears to have gained popularity during the '40's (possibly before) to describe the raw material for the FT process; however, it quickly became the popular term for manufactured gas. In the second edition of the iconic Kirk-Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chemic</DIV>
<DIV>al Technology, one is directed to the chapter on manufactured gas when looking for synthesis gas (see vol. 10, p. 355, 1966), where it is mentioned to produce synthetic chemicals from the water gas and water gas shift reactions. In Riegel's, Industrial Chemistry, 1962, a list of synthesis gas methods are listed that mimic manufactured gas and includes gasification with air. And on p. 892, synthesis gas is simply defined as the mixture of CO and H2.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I respect the opinion of the members of this list, but could you supply early references to back up your definitions. I believe that this is an important issue to be cleared up, as there is definite confusion on whether syngas should have a limited definition or a broad definition.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Gerald Kutney, Ph.D.</DIV>
<DIV>Managing Director</DIV>
<DIV>Sixth Element Sustainable Management</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.6esm.com">www.6esm.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of jim mason</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:40 PM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Bear Kaufmann <<A href="mailto:bear@allpowerlabs.org">bear@allpowerlabs.org</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> I looked through some of the papers I have on hand, and extracted the</DIV>
<DIV>> interesting parts as they relate to the latest discussion, FWIW:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV>> But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV>> higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas intended</DIV>
<DIV>> to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV>> general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>bear, in reading through your 6 examples here, i find 4 of them use</DIV>
<DIV>the term "syngas" in some flavor of a general term for the gas</DIV>
<DIV>produced through some form of biomass thermal conversion. its</DIV>
<DIV>relationship to synthesis processes and no/low nitrogen gas is also</DIV>
<DIV>there of course. but the prevalence of the "generic" usage is</DIV>
<DIV>surprising. i'm surprised to see even some major names in</DIV>
<DIV>pyrolysis/biochar are using it to name the gas from pyrolysis.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>given this over majority leaning towards the generic use, why do you</DIV>
<DIV>summarize the state of affairs by affirming the more "traditional"</DIV>
<DIV>senses of the term? it seems the numbers are leaning in the other</DIV>
<DIV>direction. of course your sample is anecdotal, so putting numbers to</DIV>
<DIV>the resulting statistics is suspect. but still, the emphasis in your</DIV>
<DIV>conclusion i do not see in the sample. btw, how did you generate this</DIV>
<DIV>sample?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>when we started this disucssion, my guess was that the generic usage</DIV>
<DIV>of the term was maybe a 10-20% phenomenon. examples are piling up</DIV>
<DIV>that it is actually much higher than this. it seems even higher in</DIV>
<DIV>the academic world than in our local online circle.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>j</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "Fuel gas can be used directly as fuel in gas burners or internal combustion</DIV>
<DIV>> engines and gas turbines. Fuel gas, after purification and possibly water</DIV>
<DIV>> gas shift to adjust the H2/CO ratio, can be described as a syngas (a mixture</DIV>
<DIV>> of H2 and CO), which can be used to manufacture methanol, ammonia, Fischer</DIV>
<DIV>> Tropsch liquids, or hydrogen for use in fuel cells (4). The suitability for</DIV>
<DIV>> a particular usage, i.e. the fuel gas quality, is determined by the gas</DIV>
<DIV>> composition and the level of contamination by particulates, alkali</DIV>
<DIV>> compounds, nitrogen-containing components, sulphur and tars (5)."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Kalisz, S. et al. Energy Balance of High Temperature Air/Steam</DIV>
<DIV>> Gasification of Biomass in Up-Draft, Fixed-Bed Type Gasifier. Int. Conf. on</DIV>
<DIV>> Incineration and Thermal Treatment Technologies, Phoenix, Arizona (2004).at</DIV>
<DIV>> <<A href="http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf">http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "Fast pyrolyzers rapidly (?1 s) heat dry biomass (10% H2O) to ?500?C and</DIV>
<DIV>> thereby thermally transform biomass into bio-oil (?60% of mass), syngas</DIV>
<DIV>> (?20% of mass), and charcoal (?20% of mass). The energy required to operate</DIV>
<DIV>> a fast pyrolyzer is ?15% of the total energy that can be derived from the</DIV>
<DIV>> dry biomass. Modern systems are designed to use the syngas generated by the</DIV>
<DIV>> pyro- lyzer to provide all the energy needs of the pyrolyzer."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Laird, D.A. The Charcoal Vision: A Win Win Win Scenario for</DIV>
<DIV>> Simultaneously Producing Bioenergy, Permanently Sequestering Carbon, while</DIV>
<DIV>> Improving Soil and Water Quality. Agron J 100, 178-181(2008).</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "To improve the thermal efficiency and predict the composition of syngas,</DIV>
<DIV>> several numeric models have been developed for biomass conversion systems."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Rogel, A. & Aguill?n, J. The 2D Eulerian Approach of Entrained Flow and</DIV>
<DIV>> Temperature in a Biomass Stratified Downdraft Gasifier. American Journal of</DIV>
<DIV>> Applied Sciences 3, 2068-2075(2006).</DIV>
<DIV>> Comments: Shows a stratified downdraft model with inputs of air and biomass,</DIV>
<DIV>> outputs of syngas and ashes</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "The term ?pyrolysis? is typically used either for ...[analytical</DIV>
<DIV>> purposes]... or for bioenergy systems that capture the off-gases emitted</DIV>
<DIV>> during charring and used to produce hydrogen, syngas, bio-oils, heat or</DIV>
<DIV>> electricity (Bridgwater et al, 1999)."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Lehmann, J. & Joseph, S. Biochar for environmental management: science</DIV>
<DIV>> and technology. (Earthscan/James & James: 2009).</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "High purity syngas (i.e. low quantities of inerts such as N2) is extremely</DIV>
<DIV>> beneficial for fuels and chemicals synthesis since it substantially reduces</DIV>
<DIV>> the size and cost of downstream equipment. However, the guidelines provided</DIV>
<DIV>> in Table 5 should not be interpreted as stringent requirements. "</DIV>
<DIV>> "There is more latitude with regard to syngas composition for engine</DIV>
<DIV>> combustion than for turbine combustion."</DIV>
<DIV>> "To be considered interchangeable with conventional fossil fuels (natural</DIV>
<DIV>> gas or distillate oils) and to ensure maximum flexibility for industrial or</DIV>
<DIV>> utility applications, syngas heating value needs to be above 11 MJ/m3"</DIV>
<DIV>> "At temperatures greater than 1200-1300oC, little or no methane, higher</DIV>
<DIV>> hydrocarbons or tar is formed, and H2 and CO production is maximized without</DIV>
<DIV>> requiring a further conversion step."</DIV>
<DIV>> "Biomass gasification is the conversion of an organic...carbonaceous</DIV>
<DIV>> feedstock by partial oxidation into a gaseous product, synthesis gas or</DIV>
<DIV>> ?syngas,? consisting primarily of [H2 and CO] with lesser amounts of [CO2,</DIV>
<DIV>> CH4], higher hydrocarbons (C2+), and nitrogen (N2). The reactions are</DIV>
<DIV>> carried out at elevated temperatures, 500-1400oC, and atmospheric or</DIV>
<DIV>> elevated pressures up to 33 bar (480 psia). The oxidant used can be air,</DIV>
<DIV>> pure oxygen, steam or a mixture of these gases. Air-based gasifiers</DIV>
<DIV>> typically produce a product gas containing a relatively high concentration</DIV>
<DIV>> of nitrogen with a low heating value between 4 and 6 MJ/m3 (107-161</DIV>
<DIV>> Btu/ft3). Oxygen and steam-based gasifiers produce a product gas containing</DIV>
<DIV>> a relatively high concentration of hydrogen and CO with a heating value</DIV>
<DIV>> between 10 and 20 MJ/m3 (268-537 Btu/ft3)."</DIV>
<DIV>> "Table 8. Compositions of Biomass-Derived Syngas" - includes N2 from 0-56%,</DIV>
<DIV>> H2 from 5-43.3%, CO from 9-67%, CO2 from 4-40%</DIV>
<DIV>> ...</DIV>
<DIV>> from Ciferno, J.P. & Marano, J.J. Benchmarking biomass gasification</DIV>
<DIV>> technologies for fuels, chemicals and hydrogen production. US Dep of Energy</DIV>
<DIV>> NETL (2002).at</DIV>
<DIV>> <<A href="http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf">http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "The resulting fuel is a producer gas (a synthesis gas or syngas) that</DIV>
<DIV>> consists primarily of varying ratios of hydrogen and carbon monoxide (CO)."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Mukhtar, S. Manure to Energy: Understanding Processes, Principles and</DIV>
<DIV>> Jargon. (2006).at</DIV>
<DIV>> <<A href="http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1">http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV>> But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV>> higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas intended</DIV>
<DIV>> to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV>> general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> My preferred usage has been to call the gas the air-blown GEK makes</DIV>
<DIV>> "producer gas". Wood gas notes that the carbon source was biomass, though I</DIV>
<DIV>> don't prefer the term. "Syngas" being made with O2 or steam.</DIV>
<DIV>> The problem with the above is it doesn't leave a general catch-all term.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Cheers,</DIV>
<DIV>> Bear Kaufmann</DIV>
<DIV>> All Power Labs</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>> The Gasification list has moved to</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenerglists.org">gasification@bioenerglists.org</A> - please update your email contacts to</DIV>
<DIV>> reflect the change.</DIV>
<DIV>> Please visit <A href="http://info.bioenergylists.org">http://info.bioenergylists.org</A> for more news on the list move.</DIV>
<DIV>> Thank you,</DIV>
<DIV>> Gasification Administrator</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV>Jim Mason</DIV>
<DIV>Website: <A href="http://www.whatiamupto.com">http://www.whatiamupto.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Current Projects:</DIV>
<DIV> - Gasifier Experimenters Kit (the GEK): <A href="http://www.gekgasifier.com">http://www.gekgasifier.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Escape from Berkeley alt fuels vehicle race: <A href="http://www.escapefromberkeley.com">www.escapefromberkeley.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - ALL Power Labs on Twitter: <A href="http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs">http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Shipyard Announce list:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com">http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>- Daniel</DIV>
<DIV>Fredericton, NB Canada</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _____</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _____</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>No virus found in this message.</DIV>
<DIV>Checked by AVG - <A href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3402 - Release Date: 01/25/11</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/403aede0/attachment-0002.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/403aede0/attachment-0002.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 19</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:28:58 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Gerald Kutney" <<A href="mailto:gkutney@shaw.ca">gkutney@shaw.ca</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'"</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>,</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <023d01cbbd8f$477da260$d678e720$@ca></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin, I have always respected your knowledge in this area. And your definitions are excellent. Engine-grade gas is especially attractive.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What I am actually seeking though is not to define any gas, because these terms have existed for decades and the literature should have defined them. The early references that I have seen do not strictly define syngas in a very limited manner. Others have felt so strongly on a limited definition that inflammatory statements have been made about organizations who claim to make ?syngas?. If we use the term to declare groups to be fraudulent, we should ensure that we are also using the terms correctly, as t</DIV>
<DIV>hey were originally intended.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In the dispute over syngas, many references have used the term as a generic replacement for any manufactured gas well before members of this list for working in the field; that is any gasification process that produces hydrogen and carbon monoxide. If members feel that this definition is incorrect, which it may be, then recognized early references to such should be provided.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Gerald</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of Kevin</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 11:00 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Gerald</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What would you think of the following proposed definitions?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>WOOD GAS:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Wood gas is a combustible gas produced by gasifying non-fossilized biomass with sufficient oxygen to leave little or no char. The biomass feed to a "Wood Gas Gasifier" could be woody biomass, agricultural wastes, or any other non-fossil biomass based material. The gas produced has a heating value in the range of about 125 to 150 BTU per Standard cubic foot. It may, or may not, contain significant quantities of tars. With adequately low tar content, it would be termed "Engine Grade Wood Gas", or if the tar c</DIV>
<DIV>ontent was too much for longer term use in an engine, it would be termed "Fuel Grade Wood Gas."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PYROLYSIS GAS:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Pyrolysis gas is the gas product produced when non-fossil biomass is either heated in a sealed retort, or, when it is "internally heated" through partial combustion of the pyrolysis gases. It has a high tar content, and a heating value in excess of 200 BTU per Standard Cubic foot.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>SYNTHESIS GAS, and "SYNGAS"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Synthesis gas is any gas produced for the purpose of synthesizing a higher value product. Wood gas and Pyrolysis gas can be termed "Synthesis Gas" or "SYNGAS" if they are used to synthesize a higher value product. Any such gas that is burned as fuel to release its energy content as heat is not "Synthesis Gas" or "SYNGAS".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How do those proposed definitions sound to you?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best wishes,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin Chisholm</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>---------- Forwarded message ----------</DIV>
<DIV>From: Gerald Kutney <<A href="mailto:gkutney@shaw.ca">gkutney@shaw.ca</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Date: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 17:59</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>, <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have followed the discussion on the definition of syngas (synthesis gas) with great interest. Although there are adamant views that syngas should be narrowly defined, I have yet to see early references that back up this claim. The term "synthesis gas" appears to have gained popularity during the '40's (possibly before) to describe the raw material for the FT process; however, it quickly became the popular term for manufactured gas. In the second edition of the iconic Kirk-Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chemic</DIV>
<DIV>al Technology, one is directed to the chapter on manufactured gas when looking for synthesis gas (see vol. 10, p. 355, 1966), where it is mentioned to produce synthetic chemicals from the water gas and water gas shift reactions. In Riegel's, Industrial Chemistry, 1962, a list of synthesis gas methods are listed that mimic manufactured gas and includes gasification with air. And on p. 892, synthesis gas is simply defined as the mixture of CO and H2.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I respect the opinion of the members of this list, but could you supply early references to back up your definitions. I believe that this is an important issue to be cleared up, as there is definite confusion on whether syngas should have a limited definition or a broad definition.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Gerald Kutney, Ph.D.</DIV>
<DIV>Managing Director</DIV>
<DIV>Sixth Element Sustainable Management</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.6esm.com">www.6esm.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of jim mason</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:40 PM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org">gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] A small literature review re: syngas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Bear Kaufmann <<A href="mailto:bear@allpowerlabs.org">bear@allpowerlabs.org</A>> wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> I looked through some of the papers I have on hand, and extracted the</DIV>
<DIV>> interesting parts as they relate to the latest discussion, FWIW:</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV>> But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV>> higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas intended</DIV>
<DIV>> to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV>> general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>bear, in reading through your 6 examples here, i find 4 of them use</DIV>
<DIV>the term "syngas" in some flavor of a general term for the gas</DIV>
<DIV>produced through some form of biomass thermal conversion. its</DIV>
<DIV>relationship to synthesis processes and no/low nitrogen gas is also</DIV>
<DIV>there of course. but the prevalence of the "generic" usage is</DIV>
<DIV>surprising. i'm surprised to see even some major names in</DIV>
<DIV>pyrolysis/biochar are using it to name the gas from pyrolysis.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>given this over majority leaning towards the generic use, why do you</DIV>
<DIV>summarize the state of affairs by affirming the more "traditional"</DIV>
<DIV>senses of the term? it seems the numbers are leaning in the other</DIV>
<DIV>direction. of course your sample is anecdotal, so putting numbers to</DIV>
<DIV>the resulting statistics is suspect. but still, the emphasis in your</DIV>
<DIV>conclusion i do not see in the sample. btw, how did you generate this</DIV>
<DIV>sample?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>when we started this disucssion, my guess was that the generic usage</DIV>
<DIV>of the term was maybe a 10-20% phenomenon. examples are piling up</DIV>
<DIV>that it is actually much higher than this. it seems even higher in</DIV>
<DIV>the academic world than in our local online circle.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>j</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "Fuel gas can be used directly as fuel in gas burners or internal combustion</DIV>
<DIV>> engines and gas turbines. Fuel gas, after purification and possibly water</DIV>
<DIV>> gas shift to adjust the H2/CO ratio, can be described as a syngas (a mixture</DIV>
<DIV>> of H2 and CO), which can be used to manufacture methanol, ammonia, Fischer</DIV>
<DIV>> Tropsch liquids, or hydrogen for use in fuel cells (4). The suitability for</DIV>
<DIV>> a particular usage, i.e. the fuel gas quality, is determined by the gas</DIV>
<DIV>> composition and the level of contamination by particulates, alkali</DIV>
<DIV>> compounds, nitrogen-containing components, sulphur and tars (5)."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Kalisz, S. et al. Energy Balance of High Temperature Air/Steam</DIV>
<DIV>> Gasification of Biomass in Up-Draft, Fixed-Bed Type Gasifier. Int. Conf. on</DIV>
<DIV>> Incineration and Thermal Treatment Technologies, Phoenix, Arizona (2004).at</DIV>
<DIV>> <<A href="http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf">http://gasunie.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/3265200/3265200.pdf</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "Fast pyrolyzers rapidly (?1 s) heat dry biomass (10% H2O) to ?500?C and</DIV>
<DIV>> thereby thermally transform biomass into bio-oil (?60% of mass), syngas</DIV>
<DIV>> (?20% of mass), and charcoal (?20% of mass). The energy required to operate</DIV>
<DIV>> a fast pyrolyzer is ?15% of the total energy that can be derived from the</DIV>
<DIV>> dry biomass. Modern systems are designed to use the syngas generated by the</DIV>
<DIV>> pyro- lyzer to provide all the energy needs of the pyrolyzer."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Laird, D.A. The Charcoal Vision: A Win Win Win Scenario for</DIV>
<DIV>> Simultaneously Producing Bioenergy, Permanently Sequestering Carbon, while</DIV>
<DIV>> Improving Soil and Water Quality. Agron J 100, 178-181(2008).</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "To improve the thermal efficiency and predict the composition of syngas,</DIV>
<DIV>> several numeric models have been developed for biomass conversion systems."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Rogel, A. & Aguill?n, J. The 2D Eulerian Approach of Entrained Flow and</DIV>
<DIV>> Temperature in a Biomass Stratified Downdraft Gasifier. American Journal of</DIV>
<DIV>> Applied Sciences 3, 2068-2075(2006).</DIV>
<DIV>> Comments: Shows a stratified downdraft model with inputs of air and biomass,</DIV>
<DIV>> outputs of syngas and ashes</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "The term ?pyrolysis? is typically used either for ...[analytical</DIV>
<DIV>> purposes]... or for bioenergy systems that capture the off-gases emitted</DIV>
<DIV>> during charring and used to produce hydrogen, syngas, bio-oils, heat or</DIV>
<DIV>> electricity (Bridgwater et al, 1999)."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Lehmann, J. & Joseph, S. Biochar for environmental management: science</DIV>
<DIV>> and technology. (Earthscan/James & James: 2009).</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "High purity syngas (i.e. low quantities of inerts such as N2) is extremely</DIV>
<DIV>> beneficial for fuels and chemicals synthesis since it substantially reduces</DIV>
<DIV>> the size and cost of downstream equipment. However, the guidelines provided</DIV>
<DIV>> in Table 5 should not be interpreted as stringent requirements. "</DIV>
<DIV>> "There is more latitude with regard to syngas composition for engine</DIV>
<DIV>> combustion than for turbine combustion."</DIV>
<DIV>> "To be considered interchangeable with conventional fossil fuels (natural</DIV>
<DIV>> gas or distillate oils) and to ensure maximum flexibility for industrial or</DIV>
<DIV>> utility applications, syngas heating value needs to be above 11 MJ/m3"</DIV>
<DIV>> "At temperatures greater than 1200-1300oC, little or no methane, higher</DIV>
<DIV>> hydrocarbons or tar is formed, and H2 and CO production is maximized without</DIV>
<DIV>> requiring a further conversion step."</DIV>
<DIV>> "Biomass gasification is the conversion of an organic...carbonaceous</DIV>
<DIV>> feedstock by partial oxidation into a gaseous product, synthesis gas or</DIV>
<DIV>> ?syngas,? consisting primarily of [H2 and CO] with lesser amounts of [CO2,</DIV>
<DIV>> CH4], higher hydrocarbons (C2+), and nitrogen (N2). The reactions are</DIV>
<DIV>> carried out at elevated temperatures, 500-1400oC, and atmospheric or</DIV>
<DIV>> elevated pressures up to 33 bar (480 psia). The oxidant used can be air,</DIV>
<DIV>> pure oxygen, steam or a mixture of these gases. Air-based gasifiers</DIV>
<DIV>> typically produce a product gas containing a relatively high concentration</DIV>
<DIV>> of nitrogen with a low heating value between 4 and 6 MJ/m3 (107-161</DIV>
<DIV>> Btu/ft3). Oxygen and steam-based gasifiers produce a product gas containing</DIV>
<DIV>> a relatively high concentration of hydrogen and CO with a heating value</DIV>
<DIV>> between 10 and 20 MJ/m3 (268-537 Btu/ft3)."</DIV>
<DIV>> "Table 8. Compositions of Biomass-Derived Syngas" - includes N2 from 0-56%,</DIV>
<DIV>> H2 from 5-43.3%, CO from 9-67%, CO2 from 4-40%</DIV>
<DIV>> ...</DIV>
<DIV>> from Ciferno, J.P. & Marano, J.J. Benchmarking biomass gasification</DIV>
<DIV>> technologies for fuels, chemicals and hydrogen production. US Dep of Energy</DIV>
<DIV>> NETL (2002).at</DIV>
<DIV>> <<A href="http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf">http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/BMassGasFinal.pdf</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> "The resulting fuel is a producer gas (a synthesis gas or syngas) that</DIV>
<DIV>> consists primarily of varying ratios of hydrogen and carbon monoxide (CO)."</DIV>
<DIV>> from Mukhtar, S. Manure to Energy: Understanding Processes, Principles and</DIV>
<DIV>> Jargon. (2006).at</DIV>
<DIV>> <<A href="http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1">http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/87462/pdf_2425.pdf?sequence=1</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> In short, the usage from the above doesn't appear entirely clear.</DIV>
<DIV>> But in general, syngas is often suggested to have been upgraded, or of a</DIV>
<DIV>> higher CO/H2/energy content. Syngas is often used to refer to gas intended</DIV>
<DIV>> to be used for synthesis of products. Syngas does also seem to be used as</DIV>
<DIV>> general term in some cases.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> My preferred usage has been to call the gas the air-blown GEK makes</DIV>
<DIV>> "producer gas". Wood gas notes that the carbon source was biomass, though I</DIV>
<DIV>> don't prefer the term. "Syngas" being made with O2 or steam.</DIV>
<DIV>> The problem with the above is it doesn't leave a general catch-all term.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Cheers,</DIV>
<DIV>> Bear Kaufmann</DIV>
<DIV>> All Power Labs</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> _______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>> The Gasification list has moved to</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="mailto:gasification@bioenerglists.org">gasification@bioenerglists.org</A> - please update your email contacts to</DIV>
<DIV>> reflect the change.</DIV>
<DIV>> Please visit <A href="http://info.bioenergylists.org">http://info.bioenergylists.org</A> for more news on the list move.</DIV>
<DIV>> Thank you,</DIV>
<DIV>> Gasification Administrator</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------------------------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV>Jim Mason</DIV>
<DIV>Website: <A href="http://www.whatiamupto.com">http://www.whatiamupto.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Current Projects:</DIV>
<DIV> - Gasifier Experimenters Kit (the GEK): <A href="http://www.gekgasifier.com">http://www.gekgasifier.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Escape from Berkeley alt fuels vehicle race: <A href="http://www.escapefromberkeley.com">www.escapefromberkeley.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> - ALL Power Labs on Twitter: <A href="http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs">http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs</A></DIV>
<DIV> - Shipyard Announce list:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com">http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>- Daniel</DIV>
<DIV>Fredericton, NB Canada</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _____</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _____</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>No virus found in this message.</DIV>
<DIV>Checked by AVG - <A href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Version: 10.0.1202 / Virus Database: 1435/3402 - Release Date: 01/25/11</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/403aede0/attachment-0003.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/403aede0/attachment-0003.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 20</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:41:58 +0100</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Thomas Koch" <<A href="mailto:TK@tke.dk">TK@tke.dk</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "Otto Formo" <<A href="mailto:formo-o@online.no">formo-o@online.no</A>>, "Discussion of biomass pyrolysis</DIV>
<DIV> and gasification" <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>>,</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:9346E1844DED164EB6371F0BF87FBCF74DCDBF@EXCHSERVER.tke.local">9346E1844DED164EB6371F0BF87FBCF74DCDBF@EXCHSERVER.tke.local</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Otto</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>No - our 50 kwel gasifier in Koge is not in operation although almost operational.</DIV>
<DIV>The 700 kw el gasifier in Gjol was never started - green electricity priceses dropped during construction and ther ewas no public funding to finish the project.</DIV>
<DIV>Both gasifier are cheap for sale.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The Viking at TUD have operated for a few thousand hours - as far as I known not really continious and the are now upscaling it to a 500 Kw gasifier. I heard from a friend in Sri Lanka that they have been qouted 3,8 mio EUR for 1 MW gasifier from them. Thus the electricityprice will will be 3-4-5 times higher than the market price.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>An other very interesting project in Denmark is Biosynergi. Henrik Houmann have managed to sell public shares in his gasifier project - that is really impressing - he might be the one that is able to raise sufficient funds to break throgh - although he has many technical challenges ahead of him.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thomas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Fra: Otto Formo [<A href="mailto:formo-o@online.no">mailto:formo-o@online.no</A>]</DIV>
<DIV>Sendt: on 26-01-2011 18:59</DIV>
<DIV>Til: Thomas Koch; Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification; <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Emne: SV: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thomas,</DIV>
<DIV>Does it means that your TKE 3 stage gasifier is still operating in Denmark?</DIV>
<DIV>Have you any connection to or cooperation to the lab of Bioenergy Innovation Centre run by SINTEF in Norway?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Paal`s TLUD ND Gasifier PekoPe was tested by the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen in mid 1990`s. Do you happend to know about how it operates?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It seems someone has focused on the "wrong" terms of combustion and fuel operations.............who knows?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I gues you can find some more detalis about pyrolysis and gasifier units from the Technical Museum of Munich in Bavaria, Germany?</DIV>
<DIV>Some people on the list were doing some investigations over there, just some time back.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Good luck.</DIV>
<DIV>Otto</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>> From: Thomas Koch [<A href="mailto:TK@tke.dk">TK@tke.dk</A>]</DIV>
<DIV>> Sent: 2011-01-26 15:55:14 MET</DIV>
<DIV>> To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification [<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>], <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Dear Andrew</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> To me this a kiss of the death.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> I started my carier developing screew pyrolysis units at the technical universty of Copenhagen for two purposes - one the Viking gasifier - 2 a starw pyrolysis unit.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> 1. It is limited in temperature bedause of material limitations in the steel -</DIV>
<DIV>> 2. It is limited in capacity due to heat tarnsfer limitations om both sides</DIV>
<DIV>> 3. It is hot mowing part inside that has a limited lifetime due to reduced strenght</DIV>
<DIV>> 4. Everywhere you cool eg for bearings tar condenses and cause problems.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> 1. Maks temperature on the steel plate is 600 oC if you expect life times of years even for soem of the most expensive types of refracotory metals. The consequense of that is that mea temperatue inside the biomass will be well below 600 oC having the consequense that almost no gasification takes place.</DIV>
<DIV>> 2. Energy transfer is in the order of 3-4 KW/m2 havinf the consequense that you can pyrolyse 5-10 kg pr hour pr m3 at a mean temperature of 500 oC - thus a Range fuel pyrolyser should have been 4-800 m2 to PYROLYSE (not gasifiy) 4000 kg pr hours. Assuming this made of a 600 mm pipe with a screew inside it is a 2-400 meter long pipe !!! - imagine the termal stresses in such a construction - and even worse thermal transients!!</DIV>
<DIV>> 3. Imagine 18 pipes in series stacked on top of each other you feed into the top and it falls in to the pipe below - each equipped with a screew and 36 - 36 pressurised axel sealings!! and 18 drive mechanisms!! The maintenance cost will far exeed the income from each line in a commercial market</DIV>
<DIV>> 4. Tars are not easy to handle</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Here in Denmark we have designed 2 real staged gasifiers one is the Viking and the other is the TKE 3 stage gasifier.</DIV>
<DIV>> The Viking has a screew pyrolyser very similar to the one that Range use. The TKE gasifier uses an internally heated plug pyrolyser. The reason the I went a way from the Screew pyrolyser was that i could</DIV>
<DIV>> 1. Not see how upscale it</DIV>
<DIV>> 2. Not see hw to make a safety approval</DIV>
<DIV>> 3. See too high maintenance costs</DIV>
<DIV>> But for both gasifiers electricity made from biomass cost s around 50-75 cent US pr kWh in a 3-800 KW gasifier.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> The answer to your last question is -- YES</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Best regards</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV>> <A href="http://www.tke.dk">www.tke.dk</A></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> ________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Fra: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> p? vegne af andrew schofield</DIV>
<DIV>> Sendt: on 26-01-2011 05:25</DIV>
<DIV>> Til: <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>> Emne: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Dear Thomas Koch,</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> How much of a problem for the scaled up Range Fuels plant, was heat transfer from the hot fluid outside the auger-tubes to the celluose inside each parallel screw-tube?</DIV>
<DIV>> we gather a hint of the problem from your description, and Range Fuels needing to consult you about your experience with</DIV>
<DIV>> hot-fluid jacketed screw-pyrolizers.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Dr Reed said he saw the liquid fuel process working at small scale. May I guess this success was with a jacketed single-screw?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Inside the radiation, and convection sections of water-tube boilers steel surface temperatures can vary widely, as water vigorously circulates inside.</DIV>
<DIV>> Water, being more fluid than wood chips screwing along in a tube, keeps steel temperature within certain limits throughout the entire boiler setting.</DIV>
<DIV>> May we use this analogy to describe one problem experienced with Range Fuels attempt at system scale up?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> A culinary anology for heat-jacketed auger-tubes is stir-frying vegitables in a Chinese wok. The chef adroitly presents new surfaces of the food to the hot steel to transfer heat by conduction. The chef can only make a batch of food under a certain size. Size beyond which he may choose to use a pressure cooker which can feed an army.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Would not direct-contact heat exchange between the hot fluid, and the wood be more practical at 4 ton/hr?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Andrew Schofield</DIV>
<DIV>> Renewable Fuel Systems</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Thomas Koch wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> Tom</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Range fuel gasification technology was an externally heated</DIV>
<DIV>> pressuries pipe with a transport screew inside when I saw it.</DIV>
<DIV>> It was very similar to the pyrolysis unit on the wiking gasifier but</DIV>
<DIV>> they had ideas to upscale it to 4 tons pr hour by stacking pipes with</DIV>
<DIV>> screew conveyers. Thinking of the challenges of making the 1 tons pr</DIV>
<DIV>> hour screew pyrolyser in Haslev i have doubts this principle will</DIV>
<DIV>> ever be competitive for energy production - even for atmospherich</DIV>
<DIV>> applications. Thomas Koch</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> From: Thomas Reed <<A href="mailto:tombreed2010@gmail.com">tombreed2010@gmail.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> I attended a few of the formative meetings of Range Fuels back about 2007 when I lived in Denver.</DIV>
<DIV>> I have known Bud Klepper since about 1988 when we worked together on a methanol project.</DIV>
<DIV>> Too bad that many $millions couldn't solve at a large scale what Bud had solved at a small scale.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Tom Reed, Pyrologist</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> Jim of All Power Labs wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> thomas, why did you think a stacked array of skinny auger retorts won't work? this seems a known solution that tends to work as far as i know. of course the proof is in the material handling with specific fuels.</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> did you find it difficult to keep the auger straight and working? difficult to keep the heat out of the motor and bearings at the ends?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> any secret cautionary tales we should know of?</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>> jim</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/61121e23/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/61121e23/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Message: 21</DIV>
<DIV>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:57:13 -0800</DIV>
<DIV>From: "Mark Ludlow" <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: "'Jim Leach'" <<A href="mailto:jleach@danatech.net">jleach@danatech.net</A>>, "'Discussion of biomass</DIV>
<DIV> pyrolysis and gasification'" <<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV>Message-ID: <046701cbbd93$3fc5c940$bf515bc0$@com></DIV>
<DIV>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Hi Jim,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It is a nasty claim. But we shouldn't be shocked or in disbelief. In recent</DIV>
<DIV>history we have the Iraq war as a paradigm, where the Blackwaters and</DIV>
<DIV>Halliburtons hauled money by the C-5-load out of taxpayer's pockets. How</DIV>
<DIV>many deals had side channels? A little experience in D.C. politics would</DIV>
<DIV>erase any remnant of flag-waving innocence.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>When our President started talking about massive infrastructure investments</DIV>
<DIV>last night and put the feel-good marketing phrase "Clean Energy" high on his</DIV>
<DIV>list of infrastructure investments that the government would make.I cringed!</DIV>
<DIV>Saying that the "US is open for business" sounds a lot like saying that</DIV>
<DIV>Washington's K-Street is open for business. Most of the seminal advances in</DIV>
<DIV>technological and industrial America have not been spurred by government</DIV>
<DIV>largess. Without the catalyst of the "sink-or-swim" requirement that private</DIV>
<DIV>investment implies, all of these government initiatives are bound to fail or</DIV>
<DIV>at best, provide scant value for the money invested.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In the 19th Century, sociologist Max Weber had it figured out: Once in</DIV>
<DIV>place, a bureaucracy's main function is to maintain and grow its power and</DIV>
<DIV>structure. The same goes for congressional committee chairman and staffers</DIV>
<DIV>and the lobbyists who feed them and golf with them. (Our new Speaker of the</DIV>
<DIV>House played golf 113-times last year; not with his parish priest, you may</DIV>
<DIV>be assured.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Let the EXXONs of the world pay for "clean energy" development. They will be</DIV>
<DIV>the ultimate benefactors in any case. I still remember the energy crunch of</DIV>
<DIV>the 1970s and how rapidly the Energy Giants moved in to stamp-out the sparks</DIV>
<DIV>of innovation.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Reality is often depressing.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mark</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: Jim Leach [<A href="mailto:jleach@danatech.net">mailto:jleach@danatech.net</A>]</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 9:19 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'; <A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: RE: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>That is a pretty nasty and bold claim, do you have any facts to back that</DIV>
<DIV>up?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>President</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ph 949-496-6516</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Fx 949-496-8133</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mobile 949-933-6518</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> _____</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>[<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of GF</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:41 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>; <A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Government Grants and Ethanol.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think we all agree on: THE GREAT ETHANOL SWINDLE.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This is where our tax dollars are diverted into non economic production</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>of a fuel additive which supposedly saves us from climate change.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The primary players in this scam have made sure their methods together with</DIV>
<DIV>the cash cow they have created "REMAINS INTACT"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The last thing they desire is a new and more efficient system to be</DIV>
<DIV>discovered or adopted.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So how do they protect their interests?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Quite simply, take control of any new committees responsible for the</DIV>
<DIV>selection of grants which might produce an alternative to their scam.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How could such a wasteful and useless system be chosen for Federal</DIV>
<DIV>Investment unless the people on the committee had an agenda which also</DIV>
<DIV>included the grant seekers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The naivety of those who believe that poor judgment on the part of the</DIV>
<DIV>perpetrators is the primary cause of such "losses" should have their voting</DIV>
<DIV>rights revoked.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There are no accidents or poor judgment in politics. That is the excuse</DIV>
<DIV>generated by a stupid and trusting electorate.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It will not matter how merit worthy your claim is for grant money, it will</DIV>
<DIV>not be considered worthy if it challenges an established "funded" system.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It might be chosen if it has "floors", in which case, be prepared to share</DIV>
<DIV>it with at least one member of the committee.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>GF</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-----Original Message-----</DIV>
<DIV>From: Mark Ludlow <<A href="mailto:mark@ludlow.com">mark@ludlow.com</A>></DIV>
<DIV>To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'</DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tue, Jan 25, 2011 11:20 am</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tom writes: Wonder why anyone stays in this field?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Reply: It pays well.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>From: <<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A> [</DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org?">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org?</A>></DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>] On Behalf Of</DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:LINVENT@aol.com">mailto:LINVENT@aol.com</A>> <A href="mailto:LINVENT@aol.com">LINVENT@aol.com</A></DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 6:27 AM</DIV>
<DIV>To: <<A href="mailto:tmiles@trmiles.com">mailto:tmiles@trmiles.com</A>> <A href="mailto:tmiles@trmiles.com">tmiles@trmiles.com</A>;</DIV>
<DIV><<A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A>></DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org">gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Range Fuels Closing Plant</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dear Technologists,</DIV>
<DIV> The failure or whatever it is spun by Mr. Klepper in the article</DIV>
<DIV>announcing the closure of the plant, is by itself devastating to the</DIV>
<DIV>industry. Without a successfully operating plant, the industry has no</DIV>
<DIV>positive markers for the investment community. Do you think that the</DIV>
<DIV>financing group would do another bio-refinery after putting up the money for</DIV>
<DIV>this plant?</DIV>
<DIV> What is more difficult is that nowhere in the technical review</DIV>
<DIV>community used to fund this plant was the critical eye which said "It won't</DIV>
<DIV>work". Of course, the developers may have shopped the technical review until</DIV>
<DIV>they got what they wanted to hear. The DOE is quite apparently not able to</DIV>
<DIV>make the distinction as they approved the funding. This also means that a</DIV>
<DIV>successful technology would not be known by them. It takes a winner to know</DIV>
<DIV>a winner.</DIV>
<DIV> I had early meetings with parts of the Klepper movement. A small</DIV>
<DIV>private group which had put $1+mm into the project and were basically</DIV>
<DIV>abandoneed when the technology was sold to another group for development.</DIV>
<DIV>Their concerns were the reactor design which apparently relied upon a</DIV>
<DIV>mechanical system which they didn't think would scale well. Not knowing what</DIV>
<DIV>the issues with the plant not operating, this may have been a contributing</DIV>
<DIV>factor. They also said that they were sticking with it and just picking my</DIV>
<DIV>brains which I suspected and didn't contribute anything of significance.</DIV>
<DIV> There were also issues with the catalyst. Reports that it produced</DIV>
<DIV>only ethanol using the proprietary catalyst were suspect as most of the</DIV>
<DIV>catalysts for ethanol production produce methanol also. The press statement</DIV>
<DIV>that they ran a methanol batch first and then an ethanol batch, are</DIV>
<DIV>interesting in this regard.</DIV>
<DIV> DOE is doing a lot of soul searching at the behest of the White House</DIV>
<DIV>because of the dearth of bio-energy project successes. Political pressure</DIV>
<DIV>will not make it happen, money will not make it happen, but a serious well</DIV>
<DIV>developed , innovative, simple process and technology will.</DIV>
<DIV> Below are some of the massive failures:</DIV>
<DIV>Occidental's flash pyrolysis unit in Sad Diego: $100mm</DIV>
<DIV>Britestar/EDL pyrolysis unit in Australia: $200mm</DIV>
<DIV>Range Fuels: $300mm</DIV>
<DIV>Molten Metals: $90mm(mostly DOE earmarked funds)</DIV>
<DIV>Hawaii IGT/EPRI/Westinghouse/HPL/ gasification unit: $30-50mm?</DIV>
<DIV>Battelle's dual fluidized bed gasification system: $60mm?</DIV>
<DIV>Thermoselect's two stage combustion system: $125mm/plant 4-5 plants except</DIV>
<DIV>for the one in Japan which I think is still operating.</DIV>
<DIV>PRM's Philadelphia sewage sludge gasification system: $2-3mm (blew up and</DIV>
<DIV>was shut down very shortly after installation, I was called to see if wanted</DIV>
<DIV>the plant for scrap).</DIV>
<DIV>Italian sawdust gasification plant near Venice, 1 Mwe couldn't get an engine</DIV>
<DIV>to run more than 40 hours between valve jobs due to tar fouling of intake</DIV>
<DIV>valves.</DIV>
<DIV>Farmland's acquisition of the Daggett, California Texaco coal gasification</DIV>
<DIV>144 Mwe power plant and reconstituting it in Coffeville, Kansas to run on</DIV>
<DIV>pet coke for ammonia production. Texaco was thrown out of the project,</DIV>
<DIV>Farmland finished the plant got it running on petcoke, had to file</DIV>
<DIV>bankruptcy and sell the 1100 ton/day ammonia production unit using it to a</DIV>
<DIV>separate entity.</DIV>
<DIV> The list goes on and on.</DIV>
<DIV> Wonder why anyone stays in this field?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sincerely,</DIV>
<DIV>Leland T. "Tom" Taylor</DIV>
<DIV>President</DIV>
<DIV>Thermogenics Inc.</DIV>
<DIV>505.463.8422</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="http://www.thermogenics.com/">http://www.thermogenics.com/</A>> <A href="http://www.thermogenics.com">www.thermogenics.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A>> <A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioener">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioener</A></DIV>
<DIV>gylists.org></DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg</A></DIV>
<DIV>ylists.org</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A>> <A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature</DIV>
<DIV>database 5821 (20110126) __________</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> <<A href="http://www.eset.com">http://www.eset.com</A>> <A href="http://www.eset.com">http://www.eset.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-------------- next part --------------</DIV>
<DIV>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...</DIV>
<DIV>URL: <<A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/23213a89/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110126/23213a89/attachment-0001.html</A>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Gasification mailing list</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:Gasification@bioenergylists.org">Gasification@bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/">http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>End of Gasification Digest, Vol 5, Issue 27</DIV>
<DIV>*******************************************</DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD id=INCREDIFOOTER width="100%">
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD width="100%"></TD>
<TD id=INCREDISOUND vAlign=bottom align=middle></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><SPAN id=IncrediStamp><A href="http://www.incredimail.com/?id=614188&rui=128571907&sd=20110126"><SPAN name="imgCache" border="0"><IMG border=0 alt="FREE Animations for your email - by IncrediMail! Click Here!" src="cid:209985D8-5F45-4CAA-AD66-2D29C8AE75B2"></SPAN></A></SPAN></BODY></HTML>