Effect of gasification agent on co-gasification of rice production wastes mixtures

Pinto, Filomena; André, Rui Neto; Miranda, Miguel; Neves, Diogo; Varela, Francisco; Santos, João

doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2016.04.048

Cited by 97 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…feedstock type, temperature and pressure) which directly influence on the gasification products. For example, tar reduction was observed to be 23% (Lee et al 2017a), 45% (Pinto et al 2016) and 70% (Cho et al 2016). In the same way, CO generation often differs with feedstock type in the CO 2 atmosphere.…”

Section: Tar Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous studies investigated the impact of CO 2 as a gasifying agent on the tar reduction (Wang et al 2018;Luo et al 2016;Jeremiáš et al 2018). For this purpose, various biomasses such as seaweed (Cho et al 2016), rice (Pinto et al 2016) and swine manure (Lee et al 2019) were tested as feedstock for these studies. Results showed that CO 2 has multiple effects on the tar reduction as well as an enhancement in the syngas production throughout the pyrolysis process.…”

Section: Tar Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Recent advances in carbon capture storage and utilisation technologies: a review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human activities have led to a massive increase in $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 emissions as a primary greenhouse gas that is contributing to climate change with higher than $$1\,^{\circ }\hbox {C}$$ 1 ∘ C global warming than that of the pre-industrial level. We evaluate the three major technologies that are utilised for carbon capture: pre-combustion, post-combustion and oxyfuel combustion. We review the advances in carbon capture, storage and utilisation. We compare carbon uptake technologies with techniques of carbon dioxide separation. Monoethanolamine is the most common carbon sorbent; yet it requires a high regeneration energy of 3.5 GJ per tonne of $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 . Alternatively, recent advances in sorbent technology reveal novel solvents such as a modulated amine blend with lower regeneration energy of 2.17 GJ per tonne of $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 . Graphene-type materials show $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 adsorption capacity of 0.07 mol/g, which is 10 times higher than that of specific types of activated carbon, zeolites and metal–organic frameworks. $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 geosequestration provides an efficient and long-term strategy for storing the captured $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 in geological formations with a global storage capacity factor at a Gt-scale within operational timescales. Regarding the utilisation route, currently, the gross global utilisation of $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 is lower than 200 million tonnes per year, which is roughly negligible compared with the extent of global anthropogenic $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 emissions, which is higher than 32,000 million tonnes per year. Herein, we review different $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 utilisation methods such as direct routes, i.e. beverage carbonation, food packaging and oil recovery, chemical industries and fuels. Moreover, we investigated additional $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 utilisation for base-load power generation, seasonal energy storage, and district cooling and cryogenic direct air $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 capture using geothermal energy. Through bibliometric mapping, we identified the research gap in the literature within this field which requires future investigations, for instance, designing new and stable ionic liquids, pore size and selectivity of metal–organic frameworks and enhancing the adsorption capacity of novel solvents. Moreover, areas such as techno-economic evaluation of novel solvents, process design and dynamic simulation require further effort as well as research and development before pilot- and commercial-scale trials.

show abstract

Section: Tar Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tar Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances in carbon capture storage and utilisation technologies: a review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a study, Indrawan et al [34] utilized a stirrer in a downdraft reactor system to create a uniform mixing feed and prevent bridging inside the reactor; a rotating ash scrapper to unload ash from the reactor and prevent ash accumulation inside the reactor; and an inclined ash screw conveyor to transport the ash into the ash drum. Pinto et al [32] used water to cool the feeding system and avoid clogging inside, which can arise from the feedstock pyrolysis (prior to entry into the reactor). N 2 was blown through the feeding system to help transfer the feedstock smoothly, avoid plugging, and prevent gas backflow.…”

Section: Reactor Dimensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solid Waste Gasification: Comparison of Single- and Multi-Staged Reactors

Zhao¹,

Li²,

Lamm³

et al. 2021

Gasification [Working Title]

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interest in converting waste into renewable energy has increased recently due to concerns about sustainability and climate change. This solid waste is mainly derived from municipal solid waste (MSW), biomass residue, plastic waste, and their mixtures. Gasification is one commonly applied technology that can convert solid waste into usable gases, including H2, CO, CH4, and CO2. Single- and multi-staged reactors have been utilized for solid waste gasification. Comparison in reactor dimensions, operating factors (e.g., gasification agent, temperature, and feed composition), performance (e.g., syngas yield and selectivity), advantages, and disadvantages are discussed and summarized. Additionally, discussion will include economic and advanced catalysts which have been developed for use in solid waste gasification. The multi-staged reactor can not only be applied for gasification, but also for pyrolysis and torrefaction.

show abstract

“…High quality syngas with high hydrogen content can be obtained using steam gasification but with a drawback of high endothermicity and long residence times [32][33][34]. Use of oxygen/air is efficient in reducing reaction times and auto-thermal capability, but the need for gas separation for improved quality of syngas is expensive.…”

Section: Char-oxidationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temperature and gasifying media effects on chicken manure pyrolysis and gasification

Hussein

Burra

Amano

et al. 2017

Fuel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continuous increase in chicken meat consumption calls for the chicken industry for unpreceded dense chicken production and associated waste production. The chicken farms produce large amounts of chicken manure that can no longer be directly used as a fertilizer due to concerns of land pollution and water bodies eutrophication. The gasification of chicken manure can convert the negative economic value chicken manure into fuel to help foster energy security and energy sustainability. The pyrolysis and gasification of chicken manure was studied using different gasifying media and temperatures ranging between 600-1000 o C in 100 o C temperature steps. The evolved gases were analyzed using gas

show abstract

Effect of gasification agent on co-gasification of rice production wastes mixtures

Cited by 97 publications

References 27 publications

Recent advances in carbon capture storage and utilisation technologies: a review

Recent advances in carbon capture storage and utilisation technologies: a review

Solid Waste Gasification: Comparison of Single- and Multi-Staged Reactors

Temperature and gasifying media effects on chicken manure pyrolysis and gasification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About