Miscanthus is resistant to dry, frosty winters in Poland and most European Union countries. Miscanthus gives higher yields compared to native species. Farmers can produce Miscanthus pellets after drying it for their own heating purposes. From the third year, the most efficient plant development begins, resulting in a yield of 25–30 tons of dry matter from an area of 1 hectare. Laboratory scale tests were carried out on the processes of drying, compacting, and torrefaction of this biomass type. The analysis of the drying process was conducted at three temperature levels of the drying agent (60, 100, and 140 °C). Compaction on a hydraulic press was carried out in the pressure range characteristic of a pressure agglomeration (130.8–457.8 MPa) at different moisture contents of the raw material (0.5% and 10%). The main interest in this part was to assess the influence of drying temperature, moisture content, and compaction pressure on the specific densities (DE) and the mechanical durability of the pellets (DU). In the next step, laboratory analyses of the torrefaction process were carried out, initially using the Thermogravimetric Analysis TGA and Differential Scaning Calorimeter DSC techniques (to assess activation energy (EA)), followed by a flow reactor operating at five temperature levels (225, 250, 275, 300, and 525 °C). A SEM analysis of Miscanthus after torrefaction processes at three different temperatures was performed. Both the parameters of biochar (proximate and ultimate analysis) and the quality of the torgas (volatile organic content (VOC)) were analyzed. The results show that both drying temperature and moisture level will affect the quality of the pellets. Analysis of the torrefaction process shows clearly that the optimum process temperature would be around 300–340 °C from a mass loss ratio and economical perspective.

No abstract

This article is a continuation of a case study in which we presented the results of research on processes generated under fire conditions by mixing molten ammonium nitrate (AN) with selected polymers. Here, we present an analysis of how certain materials, which may frequently appear in farm buildings and are commonly used in the immediate vicinity of humans, can potentially form explosives. The chosen materials include polyamides (PA) from which the wear-resistant machine elements are made (e.g., high-performance gears, wheels of transport trolleys); polyvinyl chloride (PVC) used, i.e., in construction carpentry, electrical insulation, and hydraulic pipes; polystyrene (PS) used, i.e., in insulation and containers; and poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), i.e., so-called organic glass and plexiglass. The research results showed that these seemingly harmless and safe materials, mixed with AN and heated under fire conditions, may turn into explosives and stimulate stored AN. This creates significant risks of an uncontrolled fire progress.

On 2 October 2003 in Saint-Romain-en-Jarez (France) a fire in a farm building triggered an explosion in which 26 people were injured. Police investigation, based solely on an analysis of the effects and on general engineering knowledge, showed that the explosion was caused by an uncontrollably generated mixture of ammonium nitrate (AN) and molten plastic crates which formed an explosive mixture similar to ammonium nitrate fuel oil (ANFO). This is the only commonly known example of an ammonium nitrate blast taking place at its end user destination. Is such an explanation of the incident plausible and could a similar blast possibly happen anywhere else? The experimental results support this thesis of French investigators but raise further doubts. Laboratory reconstruction of the self-acting process of generating the explosive material confirmed the investigators’ report. However, other materials at the incident site could have influenced the final outcome too. The lab-recreated explosion of a mixture of AN and molten plastic partially confirmed the report’s thesis.

Polyurethanes (PURs) are a group of polymers with the most versatile properties and the broadest spectrum of application. Their name comes from the urethane group. PURs were introduced to the market on a large-scale basis by Bayer in 1942, in the form of Perlon U and Igamid U fibers produced by gradual polyaddition of diisocyanates and polyols. The development of PURs-production technology and the multitude of applications resulted in their widespread use. This group is so extensive that polyurethanes alone accounted for about 6% of the global production of polymers (2019)—most of them in the form of foam. Therefore, polyurethane can be found in a huge number of products—some of them stored in the vicinity of ammonium nitrate (AN). In the previous two articles, we showed that polymers and AN—stored within the same building—in fire conditions may, under certain circumstances, spontaneously transform into a material of explosive properties. The aim of this article is to check whether PUR, when in contact with AN, creates additional hazards, similarly to the previously tested polymers.