Technoeconomic analysis of a low CO2 emission dimethyl ether (DME) plant based on gasification of torrefied biomass

Clausen, Lasse Røngaard; Elmegaard, Brian; Houbak, Niels

doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.09.004

Cited by 113 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this work, the resulting energetic efficiencies are close or even greater than those reported in similar BTL/G assessments [1,15,16]. However, the energetic efficiencies of dedicated DME [38][39][40] and methanol [40,41] production processes are slightly higher than our best biorefinery concept. The lower energetic efficiency obtained in this work is justified by the additional conversion steps necessary to transform DME into derivedproducts.…”

Section: Sensitivity Analysiscontrasting

confidence: 38%

Thermochemical biorefinery based on dimethyl ether as intermediate: Technoeconomic assessment

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Sensitivity Analysiscontrasting

confidence: 38%

Thermochemical biorefinery based on dimethyl ether as intermediate: Technoeconomic assessment

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Numerous studies concluded that the torrefied biomass can avoid many limitations associated with the raw biomass because it produces moisture free hydrophobic solid products (Acharjee et al, 2011), decreases O/C ratio , reduces grinding energy (Repellin et al, 2010;Phanphanich and Mani, 2011), enhances energy density (Yan et al, 2009), increases bulk density and simplifies storage and transportation (Bergman, 2005;Phanphanich and Mani, 2011), improves particle size distribution (Phanphanich and Mani, 2011), intensifies combustion with less smoke (Pentananunt et al,1990), shifts combustion zone to the high temperature zone in a gasifier (Ge et al, 2013), and increases the resistance to the biological decay (Chaouch et al, 2010). Many of these improvements make the torrefied biomass more suitable than the raw biomass for co-firing in the conventional coal power plants, with minor modifications (Clausen et al, 2010).…”

Section: Motivations For Torrefactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Torrefaction is a partial pyrolysis of biomass which is carried out under atmospheric pressure in a narrow temperature range of 200-300 °C, and under an inert environment (Bergman et al, 2005;Clausen et al, 2010;Medic et al, 2011;Prins et al, 2006). It produces three major products such as dark color solid products, yellowish color acidic aqueous products, and non-condensable gaseous products.…”

Section: Overview Of Torrefactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comprehensive Review on Biomass Torrefaction

Nhuchhen¹,

Basu²,

Acharya³

2014

IJREB

174

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomass is a versatile energy resource that could be used as a sustainable energy resource in solid, liquid and gaseous form of energy sources. Torrefaction is an emerging thermal biomass pretreatment method that has an ability to reduce the major limitations of biomass such as heterogeneity, lower bulk density, lower energy density, hygroscopic behavior, and fibrous nature. Torrefaction, aiming to produce high quality solid biomass products, is carried out at 200-300 °C in an inert environment at an atmospheric pressure. The removal of volatiles through different decomposition reactions is the basic principle behind the torrefaction process. Torrefaction upgrades biomass quality and alters the combustion behavior, which can be efficiently used in the co-firing power plant. This paper presents a comprehensive review on torrefaction of biomass and their characteristics. Despite of the number of advantages, torrefaction is motivated mainly for thermochemical conversion process because of its ability to increase hydrophobicity, grindability and energy density of biomass. In addition to this, torrefied biomass could be used to replace coal in the metallurgical process, and promoted as an alternative of charcoal.

show abstract

“…This CO2 will typically be vented to the atmosphere, but if it was compressed and stored underground (CCS), the complete biorefinery would have the effect of reducing the CO2 content in the atmosphere and would thereby be a climate-mitigating technology. Such a biorefinery is investigated in, e.g., [3,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maximizing biofuel production in a thermochemical biorefinery by adding electrolytic hydrogen and by integrating torrefaction with entrained flow gasification

Clausen

2015

Energy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Document Version Peer reviewed version Link back to DTU Orbit Citation (APA):Clausen, L. R. (2015). Maximizing biofuel production in a thermochemical biorefinery by adding electrolytic hydrogen and by integrating torrefaction with entrained flow gasification. Energy, 85, 94-101. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2015 Maximizing biofuel production in a thermochemical biorefinery by adding electrolytic hydrogen and by integrating torrefaction with entrained flow gasification AbstractIn a "conventional" thermochemical biorefinery, carbon is emitted from the plant in the form of CO2 to make the synthesis gas from the gasifier suitable for fuel production. The alternative to this carbon removal is to add hydrogen to the plant. By adding hydrogen, it is possible to more than double the biofuel production per biomass input by converting almost all of the carbon in the biomass feed to carbon stored in the biofuel product. Water or steam electrolysis can supply the hydrogen to the biorefinery and also the oxygen for the gasifier. This paper presents the design and thermodynamic analysis of two biorefineries integrating water electrolysis for the production of methanol. In both plants, torrefied woody biomass is supplied to an entrained flow gasifier, but in one of the plants, the torrefaction process occurs on-site, as it is integrated with the entrained flow gasification process. The analysis shows that the biorefinery with integrated torrefaction has a higher biomass to methanol energy ratio (136% vs. 101%) as well as higher total energy efficiency (62% vs. 56%). By comparing with two identical biorefineries without electrolysis, it is concluded that the biorefinery with integrated torrefaction benefits most from the integration of electrolysis.

show abstract

Technoeconomic analysis of a low CO2 emission dimethyl ether (DME) plant based on gasification of torrefied biomass

Cited by 113 publications

References 6 publications

Thermochemical biorefinery based on dimethyl ether as intermediate: Technoeconomic assessment

Thermochemical biorefinery based on dimethyl ether as intermediate: Technoeconomic assessment

A Comprehensive Review on Biomass Torrefaction

Maximizing biofuel production in a thermochemical biorefinery by adding electrolytic hydrogen and by integrating torrefaction with entrained flow gasification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About