Interactive processes in gasification and combustion—II. Isolated carbon, coal and porous char particles

Annamalai, K.; Ryan, William E.

doi:10.1016/0360-1285(93)90010-c

Cited by 120 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 123 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The burning process is quasi-steady. 4. The physical and thermal properties of particles and the media, such as thermal conductivity, specific heat and density are assumed constant during the burning process.…”

Section: Thermal Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling Flame Propagation of Coal Char Particles in Heterogeneous Media

Bidabadi

Mohammadi

Bidokhti

et al. 2015

Period. Polytech. Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Thermal Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, extensive studies have been conducted, as summarized in several comprehensive reviews [1][2][3][4][5]. Because of its low price and ease of use, coal will continue to be one of the main energy sources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Flame Propagation of Coal Char Particles in Heterogeneous Media

Bidabadi

Mohammadi

Bidokhti

et al. 2015

Period. Polytech. Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The kinetic rate constants for the heterogeneous reactions are given as, 10) Carbon oxidation: Annamalai et al, 1993 …”

Section: Heterogeneous Reactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Firing Coal: Feedlot and Litter Biomass Fuels

Annamalai¹,

Sweeten²,

Mukhtar³

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The kinetic rate constants for the heterogeneous reactions are given as, 10) Carbon oxidation: Annamalai et al, 1993 C O CO + → l Sn =-1 if a species 'k' is consumed at the particle surface, or +1 only if species is produced at the particle surface and if reaction order depends upon the species produced.…”

Section: ( ) ( )mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…where the reaction rate per unit volume (kg/m 3 s) and the heating value of the reaction is given by: The chemical kinetic rate constant is expressed as (Annamalai et al, 1993):…”

Section: Gasification Reactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Firing Coal: Feedlot and Litter Biomass (Cfb and Clb) Fuels in Pulverized Fuel and Fixed Bed Burners

Annamalai¹,

Sweeten²,

Mukhtar³

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intensive animal feeding operations create large amounts of animal waste that must be safely disposed of in order to avoid environmental degradation. Cattle feedlots and chicken houses are two examples. In feedlots, cattle are confined to small pens and fed a high calorie grain-diet diet in preparation for slaughter. In chicken houses, thousands of chickens are kept in close proximity. In both of these operations, millions of tons of manure are produced every year. The manure could be used as a fuel by mixing it with coal in a 90:10 blend and firing it in an existing coal suspension fired combustion systems. This technique is known as co-firing, and the high temperatures produced by the coal will allow the biomass to be completely combusted. Reburn is a process where a small percentage of fuel called reburn fuel is injected above the NO x producing, conventional coal fired burners in order to reduce NO x . The manure could also be used as reburn fuel for reducing NO x in coal fired plants. An alternate approach of using animal waste is to adopt the gasification process using a fixed bed gasifier and then use the gases for firing in gas turbine combustors. In this report, the cattle manure is referred to as feedlot biomass (FB) and chicken manure as litter biomass (LB). The report generates data on FB and LB fuel characteristics. Co-firing, reburn, and gasification tests of coal, FB, LB, coal: FB blends, and coal: LB blends and modeling on cofiring, reburn systems and economics of use of FB and LB have also been conducted. The biomass fuels are higher in ash, lower in heat content, higher in moisture, and higher in nitrogen and sulfur (which can cause air pollution) compared to coal. Small-scale cofiring experiments revealed that the biomass blends can be successfully fired, and NO x emissions will be similar to or lower than pollutant emissions when firing coal. Further experiments showed that biomass is twice or more effective than coal when used in a reburning process. Computer simulations for coal: LB blends were performed by modifying an existing computer code to include the drying and phosphorus (P) oxidation models. The gasification studies revealed that there is bed agglomeration in the case of chicken litter biomass due to its higher alkaline oxide content in the ash. Finally, the results of the economic analysis show that considerable fuel cost savings can be achieved with the use of biomass. In the case of higher ash and moisture biomass, the fuel cost savings is reduced.

show abstract

Interactive processes in gasification and combustion—II. Isolated carbon, coal and porous char particles

Cited by 120 publications

References 123 publications

Modeling Flame Propagation of Coal Char Particles in Heterogeneous Media

Modeling Flame Propagation of Coal Char Particles in Heterogeneous Media

Co-Firing Coal: Feedlot and Litter Biomass Fuels

Co-Firing Coal: Feedlot and Litter Biomass (Cfb and Clb) Fuels in Pulverized Fuel and Fixed Bed Burners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About