[Gasification] Engine operation on producer gas

Jim Leach jleach at danatech.net
Thu Jun 2 17:03:58 CDT 2011


Tom,
It is way more complicated than that and gases can have the same heating
value and still have widely different combustion characteristics,
particularly  when burned in a gas engine.  An example is landfill gas vs.
producer gas that have the same heating value.  I have spend two years on
this subject and I am done discussing it here.
 
Best Regards,
 
JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.
President
 
DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Ph 949-496-6516
Fx 949-496-8133
Mobile 949-933-6518
 

  _____  

From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of
linvent at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 11:52 AM
To: gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Engine operation on producer gas


Work by various groups has shown that high compression engines do not suffer
the predetonation of methane based spark ignited engines when operated on
produced gas, which in turn allows for higher BMEP. The Caterpillar fuels
handbook states that low BTU gases can be run on their engines because the
air:fuel ratio is much lower and the stiochiometric mix of around 80BTU/SCF
going into the cylinder is around the same as a methane fired engine.
Hydrogen will cause 60% derating of a SI engine, and producer gas 20-30%. CO
does have an impact on the overall flame speed of the mix and compression
tolerance. 
 
Sincerely,
Leland T. "Tom" Taylor
President
Thermogenics Inc. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Leach <jleach at danatech.net>
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
<gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Sent: Thu, Jun 2, 2011 11:53 am
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification


Tom,
CO does moderate flame speed as you say, but it does not correct the
hydriogen problem for an Otto cycle engine.  The single best indicator for
fuel suitability for a gas engine is the methane number, and a producer gas
has a very low methane number.  The relatively high CO content does not
help.  For even very modest BMEP operation, a methane number of at least 60
is required.  A producer gas from biomass will make just about that and so
that will eliminate all high BMEP engines from consideration or
alternatively, they can be substantially derated.
 
Best Regards,   
 
JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.
President
 
DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Ph 949-496-6516
Fx 949-496-8133
Mobile 949-933-6518
 

  _____  

From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
<mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org?> ] On Behalf Of
linvent at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 4:31 AM
To: gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification


With the exception that CO found in producer gas moderates the H2 combustion
rate and moves the potential compression ratio way up above CH4 tolerable
compression levels. There is also the question of whether taking the
producer gas to methane has the economic benefit of doing so when you are
then competing with natural gas which in the US is selling for $4/mmBTU. 
 
Sincerely,
Leland T. "Tom" Taylor
President
Thermogenics Inc. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Leach <jleach at danatech.net>
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
<gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Sent: Wed, Jun 1, 2011 5:35 pm
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification


Thanks again Florian,
 
I do have a couple of comments.  You still have to cool the product gas down
for the gas turbine, not because of the turbine, but because of the gas
control valves.  They have temperature limits that cannot be exceeded,
typically about 60C.  Also, there is an energy benefit to methanation for
application to engines.  The benefit is that converting the H2 to CH4 will
allow engines with higher BMEPs to be applied, and that means higher
efficiency, and greater output for the same engine frame size.
 
Best Regards,
 
JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.
President
 
DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Ph 949-496-6516
Fx 949-496-8133
Mobile 949-933-6518
 

  _____  

From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
<mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org?> ] On Behalf Of
Florian Nagel
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 4:07 PM
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification


Hi James
 
Regarding gas engines, you are right that cooling is a must from a
thermodynamical perspective. Regarding gas turbines, a hot gas cleaning
process would be very nice to have (excuse me mentioning gas turbines in the
last sentence of the last comment
clearly doesn’t belong there
) because the
turbines have the potential to stand high combustion temperatures. The
according exhaust gas would be in turn very hot, which makes the use of this
heat possible in a bottoming cycle. So, looking at a gasturbine combined
cycle, high fuel gas temperature does make sense if you adjust the
combustion temperature in a way that the gas turbine stands it and if you
use the exhaust heat. However, this requires a hot gas cleaning process. At
PSI, we operated high-temperature fuel cell  with producer gas that was
cleaned in a hot gas cleaning system where the gas temperature never dropped
below 500C. Thus, there are ways to remove tars, etc. at high temperature
(Catalytic partial oxidation or high-temperature reforming steps). Anyways,
I wouldn’t go so far and say that this technology is readily available ;o)
 
In any case, methanation is a great way to convert woody biomass into a more
usable and storable form but I don’t quite see it in combination with gas
engines. Just to expensive and without real efficiency benefit if you aim at
electricity as end product.
 
Cheers
Florian
 
From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
<mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org?> ] On Behalf Of Jim
Leach
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 17:18
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification
 
Thanks Florian,
 
If one wants to burn the product gas in an engine or a gas turbine you have
to cool and clean the gas anyway.  So dropping the temperature would be a
part of the tar removal process and would occur anyway.  Adding water is not
good because the product gas must be well below the dew point for the
combustion device.  So it you put it in for methanation, you will have to
take it out later. But what I was interested in was simply converting the H2
to CH4, because engines (including GT's) don't really like H2 (it burns too
fast).  Reciprocating engines in particular, would much prefer a steady diet
of CH4.  But I think I understand from your answer is that it is not worth
it.  Unfortunately, an answer I was expecting.
 
JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.
President
 
DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Ph 949-496-6516
Fx 949-496-8133
Mobile 949-933-6518
 
 
  _____  

From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
<mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org?> ] On Behalf Of
Florian Nagel
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 2:52 PM
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification
Hi James
 
I cant comment on the cost of the methanation step but I can comment on your
idea regarding a methanation step as fuel upgrade in a gasification- and gas
engine-based power plant. I did my thesis together with Jan at PSI working
on the combination of high-temperature fuel cells with woody biomass
gasifiers: http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/view/eth:41553 . Hi Jan, I m
still on that list as you see :D
 
Methanation is an exothermic process that yields the highest methane
concentration in the product gas when kept around 400C process temperature.
Hence, you ll first have to cool your syngas down to 400C. Depending on your
gasifier type and syngas composition, you might get into carbon deposition
problems (Boudouard reaction for example where 2 CO molecules decompose into
carbon and carbon dioxide). You can overcome these problems by injecting
steam into your syngas (which will cool it down at the same time..) which
you will also need to increase your hydrogen atom content in a way that
allows methanation. Then you can take it from there and produce methane.
 
Problem I see is that by introducing water into your fuel gas, you already
lower its heating value. This results in a lower combustion temperature in
your gas engine. Gas engines are limited by the Carnot efficiency rule that
clearly states that the efficiency of a combustion engine increases with the
difference between the temperature of the hot compressed combusted gas and
the temperature of the expanded exhaust gas. Hence, the efficiency of a
combustion engine running on humidized syngas should definitely be lower
than running on unhumidified syngas. Next problem is, during the methanation
you have to cool the reactor. Thus you are again reducing the energy content
of your syngas or by that time synthetic methane (relative to the energy
content of the initial feedstock). The energy you extract from the
methanation process is in form of low-temperature heat (400C) which you can
hardly use economically to produce electricity with a steam cycle. Once you
have your synthetic methane gas mixture, you ll have to reduce the high
water content of it to not run into above mentioned efficiency issues of the
combustion engine. This can only be done by cooling the gas close to ambient
temperature were the water simply condenses. Another point in the process
were you extract energy at very very low temperature level. I would consider
this energy as a complete loss. From there you can use the dried, cold
synthetic methane in your engine and produce electricity.
 
To put it in numbers: Good gasification-gas engine plants reach efficiencies
around 25 to 30% without bottoming-cycle (steam cycle to use exhaust heat).
The methanation process has an efficiency around 65%. Together with a very
high combustion engine efficiency of 42.5%, you end up with a maximum
efficiency of a gasification-methanation-gas engine scheme of around 27.5%.
However, with considerably higher equipment cost. I definitely recommend not
to use a methanation step as fuel upgrading step but to use the syngas
directly in your engine. In any case, the world totally changes if you aim
at using high-temperature fuel cells, gas turbines or if you want to make
the wood energy transportable and storable. The latter was the idea of the
PSI methanation project given Switzerlands dependence on foreign gas
imports.
 
Cheers
Florian 
 
From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
<mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org?> ] On Behalf Of Jim
Leach
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 15:51
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification
 
Jan,
I am curious what method you selected for tar removal. Also, was the
methanation step expensive?  The methane would make a better engine fuel
than the H2 and CO but I am concerned about the cost.
 
Best Regards,
 
 
 
JAMES T. LEACH, P.E.
President
 
DANA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite D
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Ph 949-496-6516
Fx 949-496-8133
Mobile 949-933-6518
 
 
  _____  

From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
<mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org?> ] On Behalf Of Jan
Kopyscinski
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 1:13 PM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification
Hi Kevin,

I did my Phd thesis on this topic. You can find more information there:
http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/view/eth:1059

or under www.bio-sng.com <http://www.bio-sng.com/>  and www.biosng.com
<http://www.biosng.com/> , http://www.biofuelstp.eu/bio-sng.html and on
other pages.

In  a nut shell the process consits of:
1) low temperature steam gasification
2) gas cleaning (ash, tar, H2S, ...)
3) methanation = conversion of the syngas into methan (catalytic process,
mostly Nickelcatalyst)
 CO + 3 H2 --> CH4 + H2O
 CO + H2O --> H2 + CO2

If you use a different catalyst you can go for higher hydrocarbon such as
Fischer Tropsch Diesel, or Methanol, ....

4) Fuel upgrading = removal of H2O, CO2

We at the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland (http://tpe.web.psi.ch/)
investigated this process from wood to BioSNG in two scales for more than
1000h.

Regards

Jan
- 
Dr. sc. Jan Kopyscinski
Postdoctoral fellow
Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering
Schulich School of Engineering
University of Calgary
2500 University Drive NW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada  T2N 1N4
 
Email: jan.kopyscinski at ucalgary.ca
Phone: 001 403 2109575 




  _____  

Von: Kevin <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
Gesendet: May 31, 2011 5:02:24 PM
An: "Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification"
<gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Betreff: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification
Dear Jan
 
Very interesting!!
 
What steam temperature and pressure is required to gasify wood?
 
Once one has such gas, what sort processing is required to convert it to
CH4? (That is, what temperatures, pressures, catalysts, etc)
 
Is there any way this can be done on a small scale?
 
Is there any way this process can be modified to produce methanol on a small
scale? If so, this would be awesome... it would then yield a very portable
liquid fuel.
 
Thanks!
 
Kevin

----- Original Message -----
From: Jan  <mailto:jan.kopy at web.de> Kopyscinski
To: Discussion of biomass  <mailto:gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
pyrolysis and gasification
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification
 

Hi,

First of all, there are at least two different types of biofuel:
First Generation:  agricultural feedstock, which is converted by means of
biochemical processes (i.e., digestion) --> Biogas
Second Generation: woody biomass that is converted via thermochemical
converiosn into a producer or so-calles syngas (Gasification).
Thus, if your goal is to produce Methan or Natural Gas substite for a gas
engine or transportation fuel you have different options. But you need to
know what is your feedstock (dry , wet, digestable or not digestable such as
wood):
If you have a rather dry feedstock you can go for steam gasifiaction (no
air, means no Nitrogen). The produced syngas you can catalytilcally convert
to CH4, CO2 and H2O. Prior to the methanation process you need to remove the
sulphur since it is deactivating your catalyts. H2O and CO2 can then be
removed. This process has been investiaget by the Paul Scherrer Institiute
in Switzerland (www.psi.ch <http://www.psi.ch/>  and www.bio-sng.com
<http://www.bio-sng.com/> ).
Removal of nitrogen is too expensive, thus you should avoid feeding it into
your process. 2 vol% to max 5vol% N2 in the methan rich gas is acceptable.

Regards,

Jan

  _____  

Von: "Pannirselvam P.V" <pannirbr at gmail.com>
Gesendet: May 31, 2011 12:46:54 PM
An: "Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification"
<gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Betreff: Re: [Gasification] back to gasification

Dear A.D Karve  
 
      One of the project we have been studying  is based on the
IGT,Instuite  Gas technology patented process  called Biotherm , in which
the  wood  gas or syngqs  can be passed into the biodigestor, in which  CO
and  Hydrogen can  be converted into  methane ; the  NOX .COX, SOX removed
via simple  known wet or  dry process using activated charcoal and  lime ;
the methane is then compressed.The N  can be removed  as ammonia,as this can
be very toxic to bio methane bacteria; Syngas obtained via pyrogas can
reduce this N2 problem and complexity.Thus pyrogas technology  has more
potential than  wood gas technology
 
  we are studying how to make this complex process into simple innovative
process to  make possible charcoal and  methane economy which is practiced
in the developed country  in big scale  can be  made possible in developing
village level technology too in small scale ,The project is yet in design
stage to reduce CO2 to use as liquid  fertilizer too increasing the
calorific valued the compressed biogas.
 
Yours truely
Pannirselvam
 
 
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Anand Karve <adkarve at gmail.com> wrote:
Dear List,
We are already using, in India, wood gas made from agricultural waste
to run stationary internal combustion engines. But, for using it as
automobile fuel, it would have to be filled into cylinders, for which
the nitrogen in the wood gas would have to be removed in order to
reduce its bulk and to increase its calorfiic value. Does anybody have
a suggestion as to how this can be achieved?
Yours
A.D.Karve

_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list

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

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

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



--
************************************************
P.V.PANNIRSELVAM
ASSOCIATE . PROF.
Research Group ,GPEC, Coordinator
Computer aided  Cost engineering

DEQ – Departamento de Engenharia Química
CT – Centro de Tecnologia / UFRN, Lagoa Nova – Natal/RN
Campus Universitário. CEP: 59.072-970
North East,Brazil
*******************************************
https://sites.google.com/a/biomassa.eq.ufrn.br/sites/
 and
http://ecosyseng.wetpaint.com/


Fone ;Office
84 3215-3769 ,  Ramal 210
Home : 84 3217-1557

Mobile :558488145083

Email:
pvpa at msn.com
panruti2002 at yahoo.com
pannirbr at gmail.com
pvpa at msn.com


 
 

  _____  

 
_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list

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

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

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

  _____  

 
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> 
Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1509/3671 - Release Date: 05/31/11



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6172 (20110601) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 

_______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Gasification at bioenergylists.org  to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings
use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg
ylists.org  for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/ 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6173 (20110602) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6174 (20110602) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6174 (20110602) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com/> 

_______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Gasification at bioenergylists.org  to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings
use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg
ylists.org  for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/ 


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6174 (20110602) __________


The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.


http://www.eset.com


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6175 (20110602) __________


The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.


http://www.eset.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110602/089ceac9/attachment.html>


More information about the Gasification mailing list