Blending Coal with Biomass

Tillman, David A.; Duong, Dao N.B.; Harding, N. Stanley

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-380932-2.00004-0

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The proximate analysis gives the gross composition of as-received fuel/biomass, i.e., ash content, moisture content, volatile matter, and fixed carbon. The ultimate analysis measures the weight % of C, H, N, and O, where oxygen is commonly estimated by difference …”

Section: Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Valorization of Textile Sludge and Cattle Manure Wastes into Fuel Pellets and the Assessment of Their Combustion Characteristics

Gadhi,

Mahar,

Qureshi

et al. 2023

ACS Omega

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The textile wastewater sludge (TWS) treatment and disposal are environmentally challenging due to toxic organics and metals. At the same time, cattle manure (CM), with better combustion performance, i.e., calorific value and uniform burning capability, is still underutilized in many parts of the world. This study evaluated and assessed the TWS and CM blending compatibility to convert them into fuel pellets for the direct combustion option and to stabilize toxic contaminants in TWS. After initial drying, grinding, and particle size control of the raw TWS and CM, both were blended at different ratios. The blended and nonblended TWS and CM samples were converted into pellets and analyzed for proximate and ultimate analyses, namely, moisture content, fixed carbon, CHNO, gross calorific value (GCV), bulk density, ash content, and metals, to evaluate the efficacy for energy applications. Out of three blended ratios, i.e., 75:25 (W/W%; CM/TWS), 50:50, and 25:75, the 75:25 blended pellet composition was found appropriate for fuel application. For the 75:25 blend, the obtained GCV was 12.77 MJ/kg, elemental carbon was 27.5%, volatiles were 41.7%, and residue ash was 42.8% of the total weight. Moreover, the blending ratios of 75:25 and 50:50 revealed that elemental and metal (Fe, Cu, Zn, Ni, Cr, Na, Mg, Mn) concentrations in TWS were stabilized to below threshold limits in the obtained residue ash for safe handling. The explored methods of TWS and CM waste processing, blending, and pelletization proposed a new technique for their sustainable waste valorization into energy sources.

show abstract

Section: Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ultimate analysis measures the weight % of C, H, N, and O, where oxygen is commonly estimated by difference. 26 The blended and nonblended pellet samples were ground to below 250 μm particle size. The proximate analysis was performed using a LECO TGA701 following the ASTM D7582-15 standard procedure.…”

Section: Characterization and Analyticalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valorization of Textile Sludge and Cattle Manure Wastes into Fuel Pellets and the Assessment of Their Combustion Characteristics

Gadhi,

Mahar,

Qureshi

et al. 2023

ACS Omega

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The volatile matter (VM) was determined by establishing the loss in weight resulting from heating the fuel sample under rigidly controlled conditions. Several researchers have reported the use of this protocol in the determination of a fuel's volatile matter (Basu, 2013;Miller, 2013;Ilham, 2022;Tillman et al, 2012). This protocol as adapted by Chihobo et al (2016) and Kolmakov et al (2006) for volatile matter determination for acid tar waste was also used in this work.…”

Section: Materials Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acid Tar Waste Beneficiation Through Blending with Coal

Musademba

Simbi²,

Kuipa³

2022

Eksergi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The possibility of blending acid tar waste with coal as a beneficiation method was explored in this work. It was essential to first establish the material properties of the acid tar and coal samples together with that of the blends in terms of proximate analyses. The acid tar waste to coal blending ratios of 3:1, 1:1 and 1:3 were used. It was observed that acid tar waste exhibited high volatile and moisture content with low ash and carbon content when compared with coal. When compared with coal; a 3:1 blending ratio exhibited 56.9 % and 7.6 % reduction in ash and fixed carbon respectively and on the contrary a 38.1 % increase in volatile matter was observed. An opposite trend was obtained with 1:3 blend ratio. The 1:1 blend ratio was found to decrease the volatile and ash content by 8.3 % and 52.7 % respectively whilst fixed carbon boosted by 4.2 %. The choice for the blending ratio to apply is a trade-off between fixed carbon and volatile matter. If volatile matter is of any significance then a 3:1 mixture would be ideal; such a mixture will aid in easier ignition of coal. On the other hand a 1:3 binary mixture yields a higher fixed carbon fraction, whose effect is to boost the calorific value of the fuel, an excellent factor for combustion. Overall however, it makes economic sense to blend coal with acid tar waste for enhancing sustainability.

show abstract

“…Biomass co-firing is the process of blending coal and biomass from different feedstocks. Biomass fuel is widely used as renewable energy that does not emit carbon dioxide (CO2), has been attracting a great deal of attention in recent years (Riaza et al, 2014;Sami et al, 2001;Ashraf et al, 2019;Tillman et al, 2012). The examples of Biomass that can be used in co-firing are wood wastes, short rotation woody crops, agricultural wastes, short rotation herbaceous crops (Demirbas, 2003;Tursi, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Analysis of Co-firing Using Palm Kernel Shells in Chain Grate Stoker Coal Fired Power Plant 2 x 7 MW

Nainggolan,

Hadiyanto,

Utomo

2023

Bri

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-firing is the efforts to reduce the use of fossil fuel (coal) form steam power plant. Adding biomass as a partial fuel to the boiler to reduce coal consumption thereby reducing carbon dioxide emissions which can have an impact on the greenhouse effect. This co-firing study implemented 5-20% palm kernel shells. The emission has decreased very significantly in the use of biomass by 20%, Carbon dioxide (CO2) from 7% to 0.9% and carbon monoxide (CO) from 759 Mg/Nm3 to 105 Mg/Nm3. Slagging index during is still within safe limits. Fouling index when coal firing and co-firings 5%, 15% and 20% are in the high category, while co-firing is 10% in the severe category. Base to acid ratio during co-firing test 5%, 10% and 15% in the high/severe category, while co-firing is 20% is still within safe limits. The potential for corrosion due to the presence of chlorine is Cl-induced active oxidation minor. The toxic properties samples obtained from various co-firings are still in safe condition and meet quality standards.

show abstract

Blending Coal with Biomass

Cited by 17 publications

References 21 publications

Valorization of Textile Sludge and Cattle Manure Wastes into Fuel Pellets and the Assessment of Their Combustion Characteristics

Valorization of Textile Sludge and Cattle Manure Wastes into Fuel Pellets and the Assessment of Their Combustion Characteristics

Acid Tar Waste Beneficiation Through Blending with Coal

Performance Analysis of Co-firing Using Palm Kernel Shells in Chain Grate Stoker Coal Fired Power Plant 2 x 7 MW

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About