OVERVIEW AND PLASMA GASIFICATION

Innovative Energy Solution


OVERVIEW AND PLASMA GASIFICATION

Brad Culbertson,PhDSenior Research Engineer


Background

Energy technology development founded in 2004.• 7 Employees: 6 engineers and 1 technician. • Growing and in the process of spinning off first technology.

Mission Statement:

Innovative Energy Solution is dedicated to developing innovative, robust, and cost efficient solutions for the global energy sector.

Goals: Provide our customers with a single yet simple solution for solving multiple problems.


PositionFocused portfolio of unique thermal-based solutions in renewable and non-renewable hydrogen generation• Superadiabatic autothermal reforming (SuperATR)

• Charge induced gasification (CIG)

AMMONIA

METHANOL

CIGCARBON DIOXIDE

(Captured)CARBON DIOXIDE

(Captured)

REFINERYRESIDUES

COAL

NATURAL GAS

BIOMASS

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

ENHANCED OIL RECOVERY

HYDROGEN SULFIDE

SuperATR

SYTHESIS GASSYTHESIS GAS

HYDROGEN(renewable)HYDROGEN(renewable)

HYDROGEN(non-renewable)

HYDROGEN(non-renewable)

REFINERY HYDROGEN

ELECTRICITY & STEAM

FOOD: ICE & SODA


SuperATR (Green Pasture Energy)

Ignition PilotU-Shape Cyclic Flow Reactor

Incinerator

Sulfur Condenser3-Way Valves (x2) Inlet/Outlet Piping

Flanges with Gasket (x7)

Spinning off GPE to help refineries and natural gas plants decrease utility costs and emission footprints with tri-generation:• Hydrogen: refinery off-gases, residual fuels (very cheap), hydrogen sulfide (waste)• Cogeneration: Electricity and steam• Emissions: Carbon (reduce and/or capture), NOx and SOx reduction

Reactor

Stand

Three-Way

Valve

Igniter

Auxiliary

Ignition

Port

Exhaust

Pipe

Igniter

Reactor

Body

Three-Way

Valve

Two pilot units at the primary laboratory in Highland (IN)


CIG Motivation

Conventional Partial Oxidation (fluidized bed, entrained flow)• High capital cost: cryogenic oxygen generation, large reactors, gas clean-up.

Capital Cost Breakdown for Coal-Fed IGCC

ASU

12%

AGR

15%

CCU

45%

Gasification

21%

Balance of

Plant

7%

C. Higman and M. van der Burgt, Gasification, Elsevier 2008.


CIG Motivation

Conventional Partial Oxidation (continued)• High operating costs: large quantities of oxygen and fuel to generate high temperatures.

Operating Cost Breakdown

2%

82%

4%

5%2%5%

ASU

Coal Handling

Gasification Block

Gas Cleanup

Balance of Plant

Power Generation

US Department of Energy, Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants (2007).


Solution

Hybrid Plasma / Partial oxidation• Gliding arc plasma: a crossbreed between thermal (equilibrium) and non-

thermal (non-equilibrium) plasma. • Ultra-substoichiometric partial oxidation: Less oxygen consumption. Air

Operation (biomass) has less nitrogen in product• High efficiency: Reduces oxygen usage.• Catalytic effect: speed reactions (smaller reactor)

Radical concept...but also challenging.

Gliding Arc Plasma Discharge (very different from normal plasma)

• Part thermal: for stability and high pressure operation. • Part non-Thermal: Offers good catalytic potential for high selectivity.


CIG Concept

ii

e-e-

O2

ii

e-e-

e-e-

iiH2O

CO

H2

C

OO

OHOH

OO

OO

HH

CC

O

C

OO

CC

O

C

OO

CC

Charged Particles

Radicals

Radicals

(Catalytic Surface)

CC

Catalytic Effect for speeding reactions• ions: for creating catalytic surfaces. • electrons: for radical generations.


CIG Research and DevelopmentsUnique design being developed:

• Coal, biomass, refuse

Inlet

Methane

/Air/O2Flame

Plasma

Filled

Chamber

Exhaust


CIG In Operation


Electrical vs Chemical Power

0 800 1600

0

700

1400

9%

CH4 Power

Electrical Power

Po

we

r (W

)

Total Power (W)

91%

Power Input• Chemical Power: greater 91%• Electric Power: less than 9%


Hydrogen ProductionInitial testing with methane• Hydrogen production increased by almost 3x• Ultra-substoichiometric operation

25% O2, C/O=0.87 30% O2, C/O=0.87 30% O2, C/O=1.25

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

H2 P

roduction (

% o

f E

xhaust

Flo

w)

Experimental Conditions

Flame only

Flame with Steam

Plasma with Steam

Plasma

C/S = 10.33

C/S = 12.95

C/S = 8.47

Plasma Benefit (higher overall efficiency)• Decreased oxygen usage (C/O >> 1)• Air operation much more viable


Commercial OutlooksMini gasifiers: < 100 kW• Wastes from processing plants and farms

Small gasifiers for distributed generation: ~ 1 MW• Refuse from large military installations• Agricultural residue from small farm communities• Dust from saw mills

Cogeneration (electricity and steam) units: ~ 10 MW• Refuse from transfer stations• Agricultural residue from very large farm communities• Pulp and paper mills• Waste coal and fines in upgrading operations

Large gasifiers: > 100 MW• Refinery hydrogen from petroleum coke • Power generation from integrated gasification combined cycle


Acknowledgments

• Department of Energy

• Indiana 21st Century Fund

• Center for Coal Technology Research

• Hoosier Energy

OVERVIEW AND PLASMA GASIFICATION

Documents

Transcript of OVERVIEW AND PLASMA GASIFICATION