Effect of Gasification Temperature on Synthesis Gas Production and Gasification Performance for Raw and Torrefied Palm Mesocarp Fibre

Najwa Hayati Abdul Halim; Suriyati Saleh; Noor Asma Fazli Abdul Samad

Najwa Hayati Abdul Halim Faculty of Chemical & Process Engineering Technology, College of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Lebuhraya Tun Razak, 26300 Gambang, Pahang, Malaysia.
Suriyati Saleh Faculty of Chemical & Process Engineering Technology, College of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Lebuhraya Tun Razak, 26300 Gambang, Pahang, Malaysia.
Noor Asma Fazli Abdul Samad Faculty of Chemical & Process Engineering Technology, College of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Lebuhraya Tun Razak, 26300 Gambang, Pahang, Malaysia.

Keywords: Bubbling fluidized bed, gasification, palm mesocarp fibre, synthesis gas

Abstract

Biomass gasification is widely used for converting solid biomass into synthesis gas for energy applications. Raw biomass is commonly used as feedstock for the gasification process but it usually contains high moisture content and low energy value which lowering synthesis gas production. Thus, torrefaction as a pre-treatment process is necessary in order to upgrade the properties of feedstock for producing more synthesis gas production and improving gasification performance. The objective of this work is to study the effect of gasification temperature on the synthesis gas production and gasification performance using raw and torrefied palm mesocarp fibre (PMF). The gasification process is conducted using bubbling fluidized bed using steam as gasifying agent. Based on experimental work, by increasing gasification temperature from 650 – 900 °C, the compositions of hydrogen and carbon monoxide gases were enhanced greatly while carbon dioxide and methane gases were decreased for both raw and torrefied PMF. In terms of gasification performance, synthesis gas yield for raw and torrefied PMF is increased from 0.91 to 1.23 Nm³/kg and 1.10 to 1.35 Nm³/kg respectively. Besides, lower heating value (LHV) of torrefied PMF is 0.04 MJ/Nm³ higher than raw PMF at 900 °C. The result showed that the percentage of cold gas efficiency (CGE) reached maximum of 67% for raw PMF while carbon conversion (CC) at 85.6% for torrefied PMF at a gasification temperature of 900 °C. The higher CC obtained by torrefied PMF is because of the increment of carbon content from 45.2% to 53.7% as a result of torrefaction. Gasification temperature of 800 °C showed the best performance of the PMF gasification since the maximum performances of LHV is achieved and started to decrease once the gasification temperature is operated beyond 800 °C.

References

1. Bach, Q. V., Gye, H. R., Song, D., & Lee, C. J. (2019). “High quality product gas from biomass steam gasification combined with torrefaction and carbon dioxide capture processes,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 44, 14387-14394.

2. Harun, N. H. H. M., Wahid, F. R. A. A., Saleh, S., & Samad, N. A. F. A. (2017). “Effect of torrefaction on palm oil waste chemical properties and kinetic parameter estimation,” Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56, 1195–1200.

3. Karl, J., & Pröll, T. (2018). “Steam gasification of biomass in dual fluidized bed gasifiers: A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 98, 64–78.

4. Kwapinska, M., Xue, G., Horvat, A., Rabou, L. P. L. M., Dooley, S., Kwapinski, W., & Leahy, J. J. (2015). “Fluidized Bed Gasification of Torrefied and Raw Grassy Biomass (Miscanthus × gigantenus). The Effect of Operating Conditions on Process Performance,” Energy and Fuels, 29(11), 7290–7300.

5. Lahijani, P., & Zainal, Z. A. (2011). “Gasification of palm empty fruit bunch in a bubbling fluidized bed: A performance and agglomeration study,” Bioresource Technology, 102(2), 2068–2076.

6. Lau, H. S., Ng, H. K., Gan, S., & Jourabchi, S. A. (2018). “Torrefaction of oil palm fronds for co-firing in coal power plants,” Energy Procedia, 144, 75–81.

7. Li, Y. H., & Chen, H. H. (2018). “Analysis of syngas production rate in empty fruit bunch steam gasification with varying control factors,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 43(2), 667–675.

8. Mazaheri, N., Akbarzadeh, A. H., Madadian, E., & Lefsrud, M. (2019). “Systematic review of research guidelines for numerical simulation of biomass gasification for bioenergy production,” Energy Conversion and Management, 183, 671–688.

9. Muslim, M.B., Saleh, S., & Samad, N. A. F. A. (2017). “Effects of purification on the hydrogen production in biomass gasification process,” Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56, 1495–1500.

10. Muslim, Muhammad Bilal, Saleh, S., & Abdul Samad, N. A. F. (2017). “Torrefied Biomass Gasification: A Simulation Study by Using Empty Fruit Bunch,” MATEC Web of Conferences, 131, 03008.

11. Samad, N. A. F. A., Jamin, N. A., & Saleh, S. (2017). “Torrefaction of Municipal Solid Waste in Malaysia,” Energy Procedia, 138, 313–318.

12. Villetta, M. La, Costa, M., & Massarotti, N. (2017). “Modelling approaches to biomass gasification : A review with emphasis on the stoichiometric method,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 74, 71–88.

13. Wahid, F. R. A. A., Saleh, S., & Abdul Samad, N. A. F. (2017). “Estimation of Higher Heating Value of Torrefied Palm Oil Wastes from Proximate Analysis,” Energy Procedia, 138, 307–312.

14. Xiao, R., Zhang, M., Jin, B., Huang, Y., & Zhou, H. (2006). “High-temperature air/steam-blown gasification of coal in a pressurized spout-fluid bed,” Energy and Fuels, 20(2), 715–720.