Sebastian Fendt, Felix Fischer, Reinhard Seiser, … · Institute for Energy Systems Department of...

Institute for Energy SystemsDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringTechnical University of Munich

Sebastian Fendt, Felix Fischer, Reinhard Seiser,

Michael Long, Hartmut Spliethoff

TCS 2016 - Symposium on Thermal and Catalytic

Sciences for Biofuels and Biobased Products

Chapel Hill, North Carolina

November 2, 2016

submission # 2148

Research on small-scale biomass gasification in entrained flow and fluidized bed technology for biofuel production

Located at the TUM Campus Garching, north of Munich Campus Garching: 6000 employees, 12000 students Department of Mechanical Engineering IES-Staff: ~ 55 employees (35 PhD students, 3 Postdocs) Mission: Efficient and low emission fossil and renewable power generation

2S. Fendt | TUM | 2016-11-02 | TCS 2016 | Chapel Hill, NC/US

Prof. Hartmut Spliethoff

Institute for Energy Systems, TUM


Head of Institute: Spliethoff, Hartmut, Prof. Dr.-Ing.

Supervisors: Gleis, Stephan, Dr.-Ing. Wieland, Christoph, Dr.-Ing. Vandersickel Annelies, Dr.-Ing. Fendt, Sebastian, Dipl.-Ing.

Staff: (01.06.2016) 55 Employees 37 PhD students 4 Postdocs

Teaching: Variety of lectures and laboratory courses,

field trips and seminars Term paper, final theses and job offers for

students at the Institute M.Sc. Power Engineering

Institute for Energy Systems, TUMStructure and teaching

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Staff Publications Dissertations


Research and technology areas

Institute for Energy Systems, TUM

Research / Technology

areasCombustion Gasification Evaporation and

therm. cyclesTherm. & chem.

storage

Power generation

Fossil fuels CO2 separation Oxy-fuel Slagging / fouling Emissions

IGCC (CO2-sep. and polygen.)

Char conversion Ash behaviour Trace elements

Highly flexible cycles Heat transfer in

supercritical evaporation

CO2 utilisation (CCU) PtX concepts Thermo-chem.

storage

Biomass and waste

Fuel pre-treatment Energy from waste Deposition Corrosion Emissions

Fuel pre-treatment Fluidized bed Entrained flow Gas treatment SOFC

(dyn.) Organic Rankine Cycle

District heating

CO2 utilisation (CCU) Biomass-to-Gas

(BtG/BtL)

Waste heat utilization

(dyn.) Organic Rankine

Diesel Combined Geothermal cycles Solar thermal

Thermo-chem. Storage

Pumped heat energy storage

System studies and optimization, integrated concepts

CH

P, E

nerg

y sc

enar

ios,

Pro

cess

sim

ulat

ions


01.01.2016 – 31.12.2017 Partners: TUM (Prof. H. Spliethoff) UCSD (Dr. R. Seiser) Research: Biomass utilization through gasification and

subsequent synthesis gas utilization Gas upgrading into highly valuable liquid and

gaseous products (e.g. SNG, Methanol, DME, FT-fuel)

Challenges: scale-up as well as impurities in the product gas like unsaturated hydrocarbons, tars and (organic) sulfur species.

Aims: Increase technological maturity of the conversion process, conducting joint test campaigns on pilot- and bench-scale plants. Optimize measurement techniques (e.g. SPA), gas clean-up methods, catalysts handling and innovative utilization concepts (e.g. SOFCs).

BaCaTeCProject: Evaluation and development of measurement techniques for biomass gasification and synthesis gas upgrading processes

http://www.bacatec.de/de/index.html


01.01.2016 – 31.12.2017 Partners: TUM (Prof. H. Spliethoff) UCSD (Dr. R. Seiser) Presentation Research: Biomass utilization through gasification and

subsequent synthesis gas utilization Gas upgrading into highly valuable liquid and

gaseous products (e.g. SNG, Methanol, DME, FT-fuel)

BaCaTeCProject: Evaluation and development of measurement techniques for biomass gasification and synthesis gas upgrading processes

Source: R. Seiser, 2016

Transition (not only in GER) from fossil to renewable Energy scenario 2050*: decrease of PEC to ~7000 PJ,

with a share of 23% coming from biomass Utilization of little-used biomass resources (like

agricultural residues, straw, green waste, landscape preservation material, forest residues)

Overcome limitations and problems caused by the utilization of these fuels (fuel pre-treatment like HTC and torrefaction, efficiencies, conversion, emissions and tars)

Gasification shows highest potential efficiencies (for electrical power from biomass)

Flexible production of chemicals, fuels and power/heat Also: decrease energy dependency Small-scale (decentralized) units Biomass gasification and pre-treatment


Motivation for energetic utilization of biomass

Introduction

Sources: AEBIOM Statistical Report 2016; Biermann, 2015; FNR, 2014

* Germany


Gasification technologies - overview

Biomass gasification


Entrained flow vs. fluidized bed gasification


Fluidized bed gasification

Entrained flow gasification

- Particle size- Temperature- Residence time

Source: Spliethoff, 2010


Fluidized bed gasification technologies


State-of-the-art in Europe:

Allothermal Fast Internally Circulating Fluidized Bed Gasifiers (FICFB)

Data from: R. Rauch, 2016; C. Aichering, 2016

Well-known technology from coal gasification, but no commercial biomass applicationEuropean R&D activities:Bioliq, PEBG (SP ETC), TUM,…


Entrained flow gasification technologies


Sources: Weiland, 2015, https://www.bioliq.de/, Wang, X. Z. (2014)

Entrained flow gasification: Well-known technology for coal gasification but

almost no experience for biomass No simple scale-down of coal gasifiers! Challenges: Fuel pre-treatment (HTC, torrefaction) Oxygen supply (ASU, electrolysis?) Ash behavior (slagging, non-slagging) Conversion / kinetics

Fluidized bed gasification: Well-known technology in small- to medium-scale (500kW-50MW) applications Agglomeration behavior has to be taken care of (Ca, K and Na in the fuel/ash) Most concepts use a circulating bed configuration (e.g. FICFB) Examples: FICFB Güssing (AT), MILENA (NL), Forster Wheeler (SE), Heatpipe Reformer (GER) Challenges: Complete carbon conversion (average ~ 90%) high cold gas efficiency Formation of organic impurities (tars) in the product gas (2-20 g/m3) condensation, plugging Pressurized operation feeding system


Review: Technologies and important parameters

Entrained flow vs. fluidized bed gasification

Tremel et al. 2013, DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2013.02.001

Autothermal entrained

flow gasifier

Allothermal fluidized bed gasification coupled to gas

upgrading system

Hydrothermal carbonization unit for feedstock pre-treatment


Entrained flow and fluidized bed as well as fuel pre-treatment

Specs:

100 kW

5 bar

1500°C

Specs:

5 kW

5 bar

900°C

Specs:

50 kgdry/batch

50 bar

250°C

Test facilities for biomass utilization

Increasing carbonization with increasing T Energy content, density and brittleness of the biomass

increase Product: energy dense, hydrophobic and easy to mill

material Dehydration and decarboxylation reactions of the

lignin structure Cellulose and small parts of the lignin structure

dissolve in the solution


Hydrothermal carbonization (HTC)

Biomass pre-treatment

0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,80,0

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

H/C

O/C

190,0200,0210,0220,0230,0240,0250,0260,0

T /°C

150 170 190 210 230 250 2700,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

= 3hc = 10 g/100 mL

REnC (dry basis) Yield (dry basis)

Yiel

d / %

Rel

ativ

e En

ergy

Cha

nge

Temperature / °C

40

50

60

70

80

Pressurized vessel

Sampling probe

Burner

Product gas filter

Feeding system

Quench water collection

vessel


Test rig data: Operation: autothermal Temperature: up to 1500°C Pressure: 0 to 5 barg Fuel input: 100 kW (+/- 25 %) Dosing system: pneumatic Gasif. media: Air, O2, H2O, CO2 Operation time: ~10 h

Goals: Realistic conditions (no electrical heating) Investigation of cold gas efficiency, gas

quality, ash melting behavior, tars, …

Entrained flow gasificationTest rig for autothermal biomass gasification (100kW)


Air-blown entrained flow gasification of bio-coal from hydrothermal carbonization


Source: Briesemeister et al., 2016, DOI: 10.1002/ceat.201600192


Air-blown entrained flow gasification - feedstock


Source: Briesemeister, 2016, Project report

HTC-coal from compost

Rhenish lignite

Corncob (raw)

HTC-coal from green waste


For the production of Synthetic Natural Gas (SNG) – the test rig incl. hot gas cleaning

Fluidized bed gasification

Permanent gas components (4-hour-rhythm between different gas measurement locations) Results refer to dry gas without nitrogen dilution Mean deviations between experimental results and simulations within 2.5% However: shift in gas composition over time (starting after ~ 75h) Degradation


Combined biomass gasification with hot gas cleaning and upgrading to SNG

Experimental results

1.5 – 3% (C2-C5) (N2-free, dry gas) Ethene with >1% highest concentration Very low HCs contents after tar reforming 7 – 11 g/m3 after gasifier during normal

operation Good conversion of tars (>>90% for all

substances 21S. Fendt | TUM | 2016-11-02 | TCS 2016 | Chapel Hill, NC/US

Tars and hydrocarbons

Hot gas cleaning

bevor … and after catalytic tar reforming


Understanding of mechanisms and reduction of degradation and poisoning

Different levels of contaminants (H2S, tars) Step-wise increase of contaminant

Power generation in SOFCs with biogenic syngasCoupling of a biomass gasifier with a SOFC

Combined system with electrolysis unit, whereas O2 is added for partial-oxidation in the tar reformer and for post-combustion (membrane). H2 is added for methanation (amount depending on carbon formation or optimized operation (SN=3) Efficiency increase but difficult economics today!!


Combination of Power-to-Gas and Biomass-to-Gas concept

Coupling of power and natural gas grid

… and thanks for funding:


… and thanks to the team at TUM, to our collaborators at UCSD

Thank you for the attention!!!

Contact:[email protected]+49 89 289 16207

Sebastian Fendt, Felix Fischer, Reinhard Seiser, … · Institute for Energy Systems Department of...

Documents

Transcript of Sebastian Fendt, Felix Fischer, Reinhard Seiser, … · Institute for Energy Systems Department of...