Catalytic Pyrolysis of Biomass and Polymer Wastes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Paper 20Th World Energy Congress Rome 2007
BTL: a solution to increase energy efficiency in the Brazilian alcohol business 1 Dr. Eduardo Falabella Souza-Aguiar Coordinator - GTL Cell CENPES - PETROBRAS Avenida Jequitibá, 950, Quadra 7, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil 2 Sirlei Sebastião Alves de Sousa Senior Consultant - GTL Cell FUJB - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, UFRJ Avenida Jequitibá, 950, Quadra 7, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil 3 Fernando Barbosa de Oliveira Process Engineer - GTL Cell CENPES - PETROBRAS Avenida Jequitibá, 950, Quadra 7, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil 1. Introduction Due to 1973 oil crisis, the Brazilian government, then run by a military junta, initiated in 1975 the ProÁlcool program. The ProÁlcool or Programa Nacional do Álcool (National Alcohol Program) was nationwide program financed by the government to phase out all automobile fuels derived from fossil fuels (such as gasoline) in favor of ethanol. It began with the anhydrous alcohol to blend with the gasoline. This mixture has been used since then and is now done with 24% of alcohol and 76% gasoline [1]. The decision to produce ethanol from fermented sugarcane was based on the low cost of sugar at the time. Other sources of fermentable carbohydrates were tested such as the manioc [1]. Sugarcane is in itself an enormously efficient production unit: every ton has an energy potential that is equivalent to 1.2 barrels of petroleum. Brazil is the largest sugarcane world producer, having the lowest production costs, followed by India and Australia. On average, 55% of Brazilian sugarcane is turned into alcohol [2]. Sugarcane is grown in Brazil’s Central-South and North-Northeast regions, with two harvest periods. -
Current Status and Potential of Tire Pyrolysis Oil Production As an Alternative Fuel in Developing Countries
sustainability Review Current Status and Potential of Tire Pyrolysis Oil Production as an Alternative Fuel in Developing Countries Haseeb Yaqoob 1,2, Yew Heng Teoh 1,* , Farooq Sher 3,4,* , Muhammad Ahmad Jamil 5, Daniyal Murtaza 2, Mansour Al Qubeissi 3,4 , Mehtab UI Hassan 2 and M. A. Mujtaba 6 1 School of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Engineering Campus, Nibong Tebal, Penang 14300, Malaysia; [email protected] 2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology, Rahim Yar Khan 64200, Pakistan; [email protected] (D.M.); [email protected] (M.U.H.) 3 School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Automotive Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Environmental and Computing, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK; [email protected] 4 Institute for Future Transport and Cities, Coventry University, Priory Street, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK 5 Department of Mechanical and Construction Engineering, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK; [email protected] 6 Department of Mechanical Engineering, New Campus Lahore, University of Engineering and Technology, Punjab 39161, Pakistan; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (Y.H.T.); [email protected] or [email protected] (F.S.) Abstract: Energy is essential for the nature of life and the development of countries. The main demand for the 21st century is to fulfill growing energy needs. Pakistan, through the use of fossil fuels, Citation: Yaqoob, H.; Teoh, Y.H.; meets energy demands. There is pressure on the economy of the country due to the massive reliance Sher, F.; Jamil, M.A.; Murtaza, D.; Al on fossil fuels, and this tendency is influenced by various environmental impacts. -
Bio-Oil Commercialization Plan
BIO-OIL COMMERCIALIZATION PLAN Bio-Oil Commercialization Plan Prepared for the NH Office of Energy and Planning by Cole Hill Associates 32 Dyke Road PO Box 523 Sugar Hill, NH 03585-5000 (603) 823-5109 July 2004 This material was prepared with financial support from the New Hampshire Governor’s Office of Energy and Community Services (ECS) and the New Hampshire Department of Resources and Economic Development (DRED). However, any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed are those of Cole Hill Associates and do not necessarily reflect the views of ECS (now the NH Office of Energy and Planning) or DRED and do not constitute an endorsement of products or services mentioned. Since this Plan was produced, Cole Hill Associates has relocated: Gerald W. Stewart Cole Hill Associates 4 St. Andrews Lane Bluffton, SC 29909 Telephone/Fax (843) 705-5924 Cell Phone (843) 368-5661 Cole Hill Associates Page 56 July 2004 BIO-OIL COMMERCIALIZATION PLAN Introduction I. Commercialization Plan Summary† A. There is a need for an expanded use of low-grade wood chips in the North Country of New Hampshire.1a,1b,2 B. One alternative is the conversion of wood chips into bio-oil, an environmentally friendly, renewable energy source. C. The objective of this study is to evaluate the economic viability of locating a bio-oil facility in New Hampshire as an alternative use of wood chips, and to inform interested parties as to the current state of bio-oil technology. Contractual requirements for developing this commercialization plan specifically forbid the selection of and /or bias towards any one producer or process. -
1 Estimating Profitability of Two Biochar Production Scenarios
Estimating Profitability of Two Biochar Production Scenarios: Slow Pyrolysis vs. Fast Pyrolysis Tristan R. Brown1 *, Mark M. Wright2, 3, and Robert C. Brown2, 3 Iowa State University 1Biobased Industry Center 2Department of Mechanical Engineering 3Center for Sustainable Environmental Technologies * [email protected] Iowa State University Ames, IA 50011 Tel: (515) 460-0183 Fax: (515) 294-6336 ABSTRACT We estimate the profitability of producing biochar from crop residue (corn stover) for two scenarios. The first employs slow pyrolysis to generate biochar and pyrolysis gas and has the advantage of high yields of char (as much as 40 wt-%) but the disadvantage of producing a relatively low-value energy product (pyrolysis gas of modest heating value). The second scenario employs fast pyrolysis to maximize production of bio-oil with biochar and pyrolysis gas as lower-yielding co-products. The fast pyrolysis scenario produces a substantially higher value energy product than slow pyrolysis but at the cost of higher capital investment. We calculate the internal rate of return (IRR) for each scenario as functions of cost of feedstock and projected revenues for the pyrolysis facility. The assumed price range for delivered biomass feedstock is $0 to $83 per metric ton. The assumed carbon offset value for biochar ranges from $20 per metric ton of biochar in 2015 to $60 in 2030. The slow pyrolysis scenario in 2015 is not profitable at an assumed feedstock cost of $83 per metric ton. The fast pyrolysis scenario in 2015 yields 15% IRR with the same feedstock cost because gasoline refined from the bio-oil provides revenues of $2.96 per gallon gasoline equivalent. -
Biomass with CO2 Capture and Storage (Bio-CCS)
Biomass with CO2 Capture and Storage (Bio-CCS) The way forward for Europe This document has been prepared on behalf of the Advisory Council of the European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP) and the Steering Committee of the European Biofuels Technology Platform (EBTP). The information and views contained in this document are the collective view of the ZEP Advisory Council and EBTP Steering Committee and not of individual members, or of the European Commission. Neither the ZEP Advisory Council, the EBTP Steering Committee, the European Commission, nor any person acting on their behalf, is responsible for the use that might be made of the information contained in this publication. European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants Contents KEY CONCLUSIONS........................................................... ....................................................................... 4 1 WHY EUROPE NEEDS TO GO CARBON-NEGATIVE ....................................................................... 5 1.1 More powerful technologies are now needed to keep global warming below 2°C........................5! 1.2 Bio-CCS: the only large-scale technology that can remove CO2 from the atmosphere.... ........... 5! 1.3 The EBTP/ZEP Joint Taskforce Bio-CCS: uniting high-level European stakeholders ................. 6! 2! CO2 CAPTURE AND STORAGE.......................................................................................................... 7! 2.1! CCS could provide almost 20% of global -
Coal Biomass to Liquid Fuels
Small-Scale Coal-Biomass to Liquids Production Using Highly Selective Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis n Background Co-conversion of coal with some biomass to liquid fuels can help to reduce CO2 emissions because of the neutrality of biomass with respect to CO2 emissions. An NETL study [Affordable, low cost diesel fuel from domestic coal and biomass, DOE/NETL2009/1349, January 2009], in fact, has indicated that addition of even moderate amounts of biomass to coal for the production of liquids can potentially reduce Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) CO2 emissions relative to petroleum diesel baseline; for example, 20% less CO2 is produced with 8% biomass addition, with Carbon Capture, Storage, and Utilization (CCUS). Fischer-Tropsch synthesis (FTS) is a leading technology for converting syngas from gasification to hydrocarbons in coal to liquids (CTL) and coal-biomass to liquids (CBTL) processes. However, conventional FT catalysts produce undesirable waxes (C21+) that need to be upgraded to liquids (C5-C20) by hydrotreating. This adds significantly to the cost of FTS. Development and commercialization of a cost-effective gasification/FTS-based CBTL process to produce renewable gasoline and diesel can reduce the nation’s dependency on oil imported from foreign countries, help to stabilize the prices at the pump, and lower the emission of greenhouse gases. PLEASE CONTACT PARTICIPANTS PROJECT COST Santosh Gangwal Doe Technical Project Officer Chevron Energy DURATION Total Project Principal Investigator Arun Bose Technology Start Date Value Southern Research -
2013 DOE Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) Project Peer Review
2013 DOE Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) Project Peer Review Catalytic Conversion to Liquid Hydrocarbons from Pyrolysis Oil and Syngas May 20, 2013 Bio-Oil Technology Area Review Fei Yu and Philip H. Steele Sustainable Energy Research Center (SERC) Mississippi State University (MSU) *On many slides, the slide notes section has important additional information* This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information Goal/Objective Statement • MSU pyrolysis/syngas program goals: – Develop hydrocarbon and biodiesel fuels from raw bio-oil produced from southern pine and agricultural products and residues; develop auger reactor designs that can provide test quantities of raw bio-oil; test designs at pilot plant scale – Develop technologies for biomass gasification and catalytic conversion of cleaned syngas to hydrocarbon biofuels. This is accomplished through the design and optimization of syngas-to-hydrocarbons pilot plant, including biomass gasification, syngas cleanup, syngas upgrading as well as new catalyst material development. • The MSU pyrolysis/syngas program goals support the development of technologies for conversion of forest resources into cost-competitive liquid fuels, such as renewable gasoline, jet fuel and diesel. Technologies to be tested at laboratory (and pilot scale in FY14). 2 Project Quad Chart Overview Timeline Barriers •Project start date: June 1, 2006 • Barriers addressed •Project end date: June 30, 2014 • Pyrolysis •Percent complete: – Tt-A Feeding dry biomass SERC phase I: 100% – TT-G Fuel synthesis and SERC phase II: 100% upgrading SERC phase III: 90% SERC phase IV: 40% • Syngas – Tt.-F. Syngas Cleanup and Conditioning Budget • Total project funding – Tt-G. Fuels Catalyst Development - DOE share: $15,587,449 - Contractor share: $4,414,254 Partners & Roles • Funding received in FY 2011 (DOE & cost share): Pyrolysis $4,597,536 •Piedmont Bio-Products: licensee • Funding in FY 2012 (DOE & cost share): $4,922,748 Syngas • ARRA Funding: $0 •MS Choctaw Lignite LLC. -
Pyrolysis Oils: Characterization, Stability Analysis, and Catalytic Upgrading to Fuels and Chemicals
University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Open Access Dissertations 2-2011 Pyrolysis Oils: Characterization, Stability Analysis, and Catalytic Upgrading to Fuels and Chemicals Tushar Vispute University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations Part of the Chemical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Vispute, Tushar, "Pyrolysis Oils: Characterization, Stability Analysis, and Catalytic Upgrading to Fuels and Chemicals" (2011). Open Access Dissertations. 349. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/349 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PYROLYSIS OILS: CHARACTERIZATION, STABILITY ANALYSIS, AND CATALYTIC UPGRADING TO FUELS AND CHEMICALS A Dissertation Presented by TUSHAR P. VISPUTE Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY February 2011 Chemical Engineering © Copyright by Tushar P. Vispute 2011 All Rights Reserved PYROLYSIS OILS: CHARACTERIZATION, STABILITY ANALYSIS, AND CATALYTIC UPGRADING TO FUELS AND CHEMICALS A Dissertation Presented by TUSHAR P. VISPUTE Approved as to style and content by: _______________________________________ George W. Huber, Chair _______________________________________ W. Curt Conner, Member _______________________________________ Scott M. Auerbach, Member ____________________________________ T. J. (Lakis) Mountziaris, Department Head Chemical Engineering ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to deeply acknowledge the help and support of my advisor Prof. George W. Huber on this fascinating research program. George is an excellent mentor and provides an outstanding research environment in the group for graduate students to work and develop. -
Pyrolysis Oil and Upgrading
PNNL-22133 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Production of Gasoline and Diesel from Biomass via Fast Pyrolysis, Hydrotreating and Hydrocracking: 2011 State of Technology and Projections to 2017 SB Jones JL Male February 2012 PNNL-22133 Production of Gasoline and Diesel from Biomass via Fast Pyrolysis, Hydrotreating and Hydrocracking: 2011 State of Technology and Projections to 2017 SB Jones JL Male February 2012 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352 Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 State of Technology for FY2011 ................................................................................................ 3 2.1 Feedstock and Feedstock Preparation ................................................................................ 3 2.2 Fast Pyrolysis ..................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Upgrading ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.4 Hydrocracking .................................................................................................................... 7 2.5 Hydrogen Generation ......................................................................................................... 8 -
Production of Metallurgical Charcoal from Biomass Pyrolysis: Pilot-Scale Experiment
22nd International Symposium on Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis Kyoto, 2018 Production of metallurgical charcoal from biomass pyrolysis: pilot-scale experiment a a b b a A. Phounglamcheik *, R. Pitchot , A. Andefors , N. Norberg , and K. Umeki * corresponding author: [email protected] a Division of Energy Science, Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden b Future Eco North Sweden AB, SE-961 50 Boden, Sweden Replacement of fossil coal with biomass fuel is a key strategy to decrease CO2 emission in the Nordic industry. Charcoal produced from pyrolysis of forest residue is expected for the application in metallurgical process. Quality of charcoal can reach the requirement, i.e. high carbon content, low volatile, low ash content, and high heating value at high pyrolysis temperature. Nevertheless, to produce charcoal with such high quality, the products distribution may shift toward pyrolysis oil and gas. We have suggested to increase the charcoal yield while keeping its quality by adsorbing large molecule fractions of pyrolysis oil on the pore structure of charcoal produced at relatively high temperature (>600 °C). This study aims at demonstrating the suggested pyrolysis process to produce metallurgical charcoal with high efficiency. The effect of various operation parameters was investigated in batch operations with ca. 130 kg dry wood chips for this purpose. The experiment was conducted in a pilot-scale auger-type pyrolysis reactor. Two cylindrical pipes with screw conveyers and external heating/cooling media are connected for pyrolysis and vapor adsorption. In the pyrolysis reactor, woodchips are heated indirectly with flue gas generated from a propane burner. In the vapor adsorption pipe, charcoal and volatiles are cooled down and part of pyrolysis volatile is condensed and absorbed on the surface of charcoal. -
A Comprehensive Characterization of Pyrolysis Oil from Softwood Barks
polymers Article A Comprehensive Characterization of Pyrolysis Oil from Softwood Barks Haoxi Ben 1,*, Fengze Wu 1, Zhihong Wu 1 , Guangting Han 2,3, Wei Jiang 2,3 and Arthur J. Ragauskas 4,5 1 Key Laboratory of Energy Thermal Conversion and Control of Ministry of Education, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China 2 Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China 3 State Key Laboratory of Bio-Fibers and Eco-Textiles, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China 4 Joint Institute for Biological Sciences, Biosciences Division, Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA 5 Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-188-5107-5775 Received: 17 July 2019; Accepted: 19 August 2019; Published: 23 August 2019 Abstract: Pyrolysis of raw pine bark, pine, and Douglas-Fir bark was examined. The pyrolysis oil yields of raw pine bark, pine, and Douglas-Fir bark at 500 ◦C were 29.18%, 26.67%, and 26.65%, respectively. Both energy densification ratios (1.32–1.56) and energy yields (48.40–54.31%) of char are higher than pyrolysis oils (energy densification ratios: 1.13–1.19, energy yields: 30.16–34.42%). The pyrolysis oils have higher heating values (~25 MJ/kg) than bio-oils (~20 MJ/kg) from wood and agricultural residues, and the higher heating values of char (~31 MJ/kg) are comparable to that of many commercial coals. The elemental analysis indicated that the lower O/C value and higher H/C value represent a more valuable source of energy for pyrolysis oils than biomass. -
Production of Liquid Biofuels
ENERGY TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM ANALYSIS PROGRAMME IEA-ETSAP and IRENA © Technology-Policy Brief P10 – January 2013 - www.etsap.org, www.irena.org Production of Liquid Biofuels INSIGHTS FOR POLICY MAKERS Liquid biofuels are made from biomass and have qualities that are similar to gasoline, diesel or other petroleum derived fuels. The two dominant liquid biofuels are bioethanol and biodiesel (i.e. 80% and 20% of the market, respectively), that together meet about 3% of the global transport fuel demand and are produced using 2-3% of the global arable land. Bioethanol can be produced from sugarcane, corn, sugar beets, wheat, potatoes, sorghum and cassava. In 2011, the largest producers of bioethanol were the United States (63%) using corn, Brazil (24%) using sugarcane, and China. Biodiesel is made from vegetable oils, derived from soybeans, rapeseed, palm seeds, sunflowers, jatropha as well as from animal fat or waste oils. The largest producers of biodiesel in 2011 were the European Union (43%), the United States (15%), Brazil and Argentina (each around 13%). The advantage of biofuels is that they can substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the transport sector (up to 70%-90% compared to gasoline) with only modest changes to vehicle technology and existing fuel distribution infrastructure. The disadvantage is that, apart from sugarcane ethanol, large-scale production of liquid biofuels based on today’s technology and feedstock would compete with food production for arable land and water, with limited expansion potential in certain cases. Also of concern would be the conservation of biodiversity and the risk of important land-use changes. The use of shared international standards is crucial to ensure that liquid biofuels are produced in a sustainable manner, minimising these possible negative environmental and social impacts due to land-use change and competition for food.