DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.2022.45179

Kinetic Modeling and Optimization of Biomass Gasification in Bubbling Fluidized Bed Gasifier Using Response Surface Method

1Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Madda Walabu University, Bale Robe, Ethiopia

2Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

3Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Jimma Institute of Technology, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia

Received: 11 Mar 2022; Revised: 4 Jun 2022; Accepted: 9 Jul 2022; Available online: 21 Jul 2022; Published: 1 Nov 2022.
Editor(s): Peter Nai Yuh Yek
Open Access Copyright (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Centre of Biomass and Renewable Energy (CBIORE)
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract
This paper presents the kinetic modeling of biomass gasification in bubbling fluidized bed (BFB) gasifiers and optimization methods to maximize gasification products. The kinetic model was developed based on two-phase fluidization theory. In this work, reaction kinetics, hydrodynamic conditions, convective and diffusion effect, and the thermal cracking of tar kinetics were considered in the model. The model was coded in MATLAB and simulated. The result depicted good agreement with experimental work in literature. The sensitivity analysis was carried out and the effect of temperature ranging from 650  to 850  and steam to biomass ratio (S/B) ranging from 0.1 to 2 was investigated. The result showed that an increase in temperature promoted H2 production from 18.73 % to 36.87 %, reduced that of CO from 39.97 % to 34.2 %, and CH4 from 18.01 % to 11.65 %. Furthermore, surface response was constructed from the regression model and the mutual effect of temperature and S/B on gasification products and heating value was investigated. In addition, the desirability function was employed to optimize gasification product and heating value. The maximum gasification product yield was obtained at 827.9  and 0.1 S/B. The response predicted by desirability function at these optimum operational conditions was 30.1 %, 44.1 %, 13.2 %, 12.9 %, 14.035 MJ/Nm3, and 14.5 MJ/Nm3 for H2, CO, CO2, CH4, LHV, and HHV, respectively. Kinetic modeling of the biomass gasification in BFB process is still under development, which considers the diffusion effect, tar cracking, reaction kinetics, and hydrodynamic behavior. Moreover, the large number of previous studies gave priority to a single parameter investigation. However, this investigation can be extended to various parameters analysis simultaneously, which would give solid information on system performance analysis.
Fulltext View|Download
Keywords: Biomass gasification; Syngas; Fluidized bed; Kinetic modeling; Response surface; Optimization

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Research Article
Language : EN
Recent articles
Socio-Economic Prospects of Solar PV Uptake in Energy Policy Landscape of Pakistan Modeling and Experimental Studies on Water Spray Cooler for Commercial Photovoltaic Modules Emissions Characteristics and Engine Performance from the Interaction Effect of EGR and Diesel-Ethanol Blends in Diesel Engine Technical-Environmental Assessment of Energy Management Systems in Smart Ports Green Port Strategies in Developed Coastal Countries as Useful Lessons for the Path of Sustainable Development: A case study in Vietnam A Review on the Recent Breakthrough Methods and Influential Parameters in the Biodiesel Synthesis and Purification More recent articles
Most cited articles
Enhancement and Optimization Mechanisms of Biogas Production for Rural Household Energy in Developing Countries: A review Soybean Opportunity as Source of New Energy in Indonesia Phase Change Material on Augmentation of Fresh Water Production Using Pyramid Solar Still Performance characteristics of mix oil biodiesel blends with smoke emissions Synthesis of Trimethylolpropane Esters of Calophyllum Methyl Esters : Effect of Temperature and Molar Ratio More cited articles
  1. Agu, C. E., Pfeifer, C., Eikeland, M., Tokheim, L. A., & Moldestad, B. M. E. (2019). Detailed One-Dimensional Model for Steam-Biomass Gasification in a Bubbling Fluidized Bed. Energy and Fuels, 33(8), 7385–7397. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.9b01340
  2. Baruah, D., & Baruah, D. C. (2014). Modeling of biomass gasification: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 806–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.129
  3. Basu, P. (2018). Gasification theory. In Biomass Gasification, Pyrolysis and Torrefaction: Practical Design and Theory. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812992-0.00007-8
  4. Basu, P. B. T.-B. G. and P. (Ed.). (2010). Appendix C - Selected Design Data Tables (pp. 329–335). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374988-8.00018-0
  5. Bioenergy. (2020). International Renewable Energy Agency. https://www.irena.org/bioenergy
  6. Capuano, L. (2020). International Energy Outlook 2020 (IEO2020) United States milestones in meeting global energy consumption. US Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/
  7. Chen, X., Che, Q., Li, S., Liu, Z., Yang, H., Chen, Y., Wang, X., Shao, J., & Chen, H. (2019). Recent developments in lignocellulosic biomass catalytic fast pyrolysis: Strategies for the optimization of bio-oil quality and yield. Fuel Processing Technology, 196, 106180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.106180
  8. Coker, A. K. (1995). Physical Property of Liquids and Gases. Fortran Programs for Chemical Process Design, Analysis, and Simulation, 103–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-088415280-4/50003-0
  9. Couto, N., Silva, V., Monteiro, E., Brito, P. S. D., & Rouboa, A. (2015). Modeling of fluidized bed gasification: Assessment of zero-dimensional and CFD approaches. Journal of Thermal Science, 24(4), 378–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11630-015-0798-7
  10. Daners, D. (2008). Chapter 1 Domain perturbation for linear and semi-linear boundary value problems. Handbook of Differential Equations: Stationary Partial Differential Equations, 6, 1–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1874-5733(08)80018-6
  11. Dang, Q., Zhang, X., Zhou, Y., & Jia, X. (2021). Prediction and optimization of syngas production from a kinetic-based biomass gasification process model. Fuel Processing Technology, 212, 106604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2020.106604
  12. Di Blasi, C. (2004). Modeling wood gasification in a countercurrent fixed-bed reactor. AIChE Journal, 50(9), 2306–2319. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.10189
  13. Fairbanks, D. F., & Wilke, C. R. (1950). Diffusion Coefficients in Multicomponent Gas Mixtures. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 42(3), 471–475. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie50483a022
  14. Gopalakrishnan, P. (2013). Modelling of Biomass Steam Gasification in a Bubbling Fluidized Bed Gasifier. Thesis. University of Canterbury. https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/8675/thesis_fulltext.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  15. Gordillo, E. D., & Belghit, A. (2011). A two phase model of high temperature steam-only gasification of biomass char in bubbling fluidized bed reactors using nuclear heat. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 36(1), 374–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.09.088
  16. Grace, J. R. (2020). Hydrodynamics of bubbling fluidization. Essentials of Fluidization Technology, 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527699483.ch7
  17. Hai, I. U., Sher, F., Zarren, G., & Liu, H. (2019). Experimental investigation of tar arresting techniques and their evaluation for product syngas cleaning from bubbling fluidized bed gasifier. Journal of Cleaner Production, 240, 118239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118239
  18. Inayat, M., Sulaiman, S. A., Kurnia, J. C., & Shahbaz, M. (2019). Effect of various blended fuels on syngas quality and performance in catalytic co-gasification: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 105, 252–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.01.059
  19. Karmakar, M. K., & Datta, A. B. (2011). Generation of hydrogen rich gas through fluidized bed gasification of biomass. Bioresource Technology, 102(2), 1907–1913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.08.015
  20. Klose, E., & Köpsel, R. (1993). Mathematical model for the gasification of coal under pressure. Fuel, 72(5), 714. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-2361(93)90662-l
  21. La Villetta, M., 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.027
  22. Li, Y. H., Chen, Z., Watkinson, P., Bi, X., Grace, J., Lim, C. J., & Ellis, N. (2018). A novel dual-bed for steam gasification of biomass. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 8(2), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-017-0288-0
  23. Monteiro, E., Ismail, T. M., Ramos, A., Abd El-Salam, M., Brito, P., & Rouboa, A. (2018). Experimental and modeling studies of Portuguese peach stone gasification on an autothermal bubbling fluidized bed pilot plant. Energy, 142, 862–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.10.100
  24. Motta, I. L., Miranda, N. T., Maciel Filho, R., & Wolf Maciel, M. R. (2018). Biomass gasification in fluidized beds: A review of biomass moisture content and operating pressure effects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 94, 998–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.06.042
  25. Nemtsov, D. A., & Zabaniotou, A. (2008). Mathematical modelling and simulation approaches of agricultural residues air gasification in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor. Chemical Engineering Journal, 143(1–3), 10–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2008.01.023
  26. Raheem, A., Zhao, M., Dastyar, W., Channa, A. Q., Ji, G., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Parametric gasification process of sugarcane bagasse for syngas production. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 44(31), 16234–16247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.04.127
  27. Ramos, A., Monteiro, E., & Rouboa, A. (2019). Numerical approaches and comprehensive models for gasification process: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 110, 188–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.04.048
  28. Rathbone, R. (1993). Fluidization Engineering (Second Edition). Gas Separation & Purification, 7(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-4214(93)85022-n
  29. Ren, J., Cao, J. P., Zhao, X. Y., Yang, F. L., & Wei, X. Y. (2019). Recent advances in syngas production from biomass catalytic gasification: A critical review on reactors, catalysts, catalytic mechanisms and mathematical models. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 116, 109426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109426
  30. Richet, P., Bottinga, Y., Denielou, L., Petitet, J. P., & Tequi, C. (1982). Thermodynamic properties of quartz, cristobalite and amorphous SiO2: drop calorimetry measurements between 1000 and 1800 K and a review from 0 to 2000 K. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 46(12), 2639–2658. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7037(82)90383-0
  31. Safarian, S., Unnþórsson, R., & Richter, C. (2019). A review of biomass gasification modelling. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 110, 378–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.003
  32. Sahoo, A., & Ram, D. K. (2015). Gasifier performance and energy analysis for fluidized bed gasification of sugarcane bagasse. Energy, 90, 1420–1425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.06.096
  33. Samadi, S. H., Ghobadian, B., & Nosrati, M. (2020). Prediction and estimation of biomass energy from agricultural residues using air gasification technology in Iran. Renewable Energy, 149, 1077–1091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.10.109
  34. Sebastiani, A., Macrì, D., Gallucci, K., & Materazzi, M. (2021). Steam - oxygen gasification of refuse derived fuel in fluidized beds: Modelling and pilot plant testing. Fuel Processing Technology, 216, 106783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2021.106783
  35. Smith, J. M. (1950). Introduction to chemical engineering thermodynamics. In Journal of Chemical Education (Vol. 27, Issue 10). https://doi.org/10.1021/ed027p584.3
  36. Tavares, R., Monteiro, E., Tabet, F., & Rouboa, A. (2020). Numerical investigation of optimum operating conditions for syngas and hydrogen production from biomass gasification using Aspen Plus. Renewable Energy, 146, 1309–1314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.07.051
  37. Tong, W., Liu, Q., Yang, C., Cai, Z., Wu, H., & Ren, S. (2020). Effect of pore structure on CO2 gasification reactivity of biomass chars under high-temperature pyrolysis. Journal of the Energy Institute, 93(3), 962–976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2019.08.007
  38. Wang, Y., & Kinoshita, C. M. (1993). Kinetic model of biomass gasification. Solar Energy, 51(1), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-092X(93)90037-O
  39. Xiang, X., Gong, G., Shen, Y., Wang, C., & Shi, Y. (2019). A comprehensive mathematical model of a serial composite process for biomass and coal Co-gasification. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 44(5), 2603–2619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.12.077
  40. Xiong, Q., Mihandoost, M., Yaghoubi, E., & Asadi, A. (2018). Parametric investigation on biomass gasification in a fluidized bed gasifier and conceptual design of gasifier. Chemical Engineering & Processing : Process Intensifi cation, 127, 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2018.04.003
  41. Xiong, Q., Yeganeh, M. M., Yaghoubi, E., Asadi, A., Doranehgard, M. H., & Hong, K. (2018). Parametric investigation on biomass gasification in a fluidized bed gasifier and conceptual design of gasifier. Chemical Engineering and Processing - Process Intensification, 127, 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2018.04.003
  42. Zheng, H., & Vance Morey, R. (2014). An unsteady-state two-phase kinetic model for corn stover fluidized bed steam gasification process. Fuel Processing Technology, 124, 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.02.010
  43. Zhu, L. T., Liu, Y. X., & Luo, Z. H. (2019). An enhanced correlation for gas-particle heat and mass transfer in packed and fluidized bed reactors. Chemical Engineering Journal, 374, 531–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.05.194

Last update:

  1. Flexible syngas-biogas-hydrogen fueling spark-ignition engine behaviors with optimized fuel compositions and control parameters

    Van Ga Bui, Thi Minh Tu Bui, Van Nam Tran, Zuohua Huang, Anh Tuan Hoang, Wieslaw Tarelko, Van Hung Bui, Xuan Mai Pham, Phuoc Quy Phong Nguyen. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 48 (18), 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.09.133

  2. Improving the prediction of biochar production from various biomass sources through the implementation of eXplainable machine learning approaches

    Van Giao Nguyen, Prabhakar Sharma, Ümit Ağbulut, Huu Son Le, Dao Nam Cao, Marek Dzida, Sameh M. Osman, Huu Cuong Le, Viet Dung Tran. International Journal of Green Energy, 2024. doi: 10.1080/15435075.2024.2326076

  3. Concept of twining injector system for spark-ignition engine fueled with syngas-biogas-hydrogen operating in solar-biomass hybrid energy system

    Van Ga Bui, Thi Minh Tu Bui, Van Giao Nguyen, Van Nam Tran, Le Bich Tram Truong, Le Hoang Phu Pham. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 48 (18), 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.11.076

  4. Plastic waste/chickpea straw-to-fuels and power through co-gasification in a novel zero-emission system by CO2 capturing and utilization

    Parisa Mojaver, Shahram Khalilarya, Ata Chitsaz, Samad Jafarmadar. Fuel, 348 , 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2023.128490

  5. Simulation and experimental study of refuse-derived fuel gasification in an updraft gasifier

    Thanh Xuan Nguyen-Thi, Thi Minh Tu Bui, Van Ga Bui. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 12 (3), 2023. doi: 10.14710/ijred.2023.53994

  6. Waste to energy: An experimental study on hydrogen production from food waste gasification

    Ashok Kumar Koshariya, M. Sivaram Krishnan, S. Jaisankar, Ganesh Babu Loganathan, T. Sathish, Ümit Ağbulut, R. Saravanan, Le Thanh Tuan, Nguyen Dang Khoa Pham. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 54 , 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.05.221

  7. A Review on Hydrogen Production from Biomass and Commercialization Assessment Through Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs)

    Pranay Rajendra Lanjekar, Narayan Lal Panwar. BioEnergy Research, 17 (2), 2023. doi: 10.1007/s12155-023-10697-1

  8. Performance and emission characteristics of diesel engines running on gaseous fuels in dual-fuel mode

    Van Nhanh Nguyen, Swarup Kumar Nayak, Huu Son Le, Jerzy Kowalski, Balakrishnan Deepanraj, Xuan Quang Duong, Thanh Hai Truong, Viet Dung Tran, Dao Nam Cao, Phuoc Quy Phong Nguyen. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 49 , 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.09.130

  9. Ce/Pumice and Ni/Pumice as heterogeneous catalysts for syngas production from biomass gasification

    S. Señorans, J. R-Díaz, D. Escalante, L.A. González, L. Díaz. Waste Management, 166 , 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2023.05.017

  10. Recent advances in hydrogen production from biomass waste with a focus on pyrolysis and gasification

    Van Giao Nguyen, Thanh Xuan Nguyen-Thi, Phuoc Quy Phong Nguyen, Viet Dung Tran, Ümit Ağbulut, Lan Huong Nguyen, Dhinesh Balasubramanian, Wieslaw Tarelko, Suhaib A. Bandh, Nguyen Dang Khoa Pham. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 54 , 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.05.049

  11. Fueling the future: A comprehensive review of hydrogen energy systems and their challenges

    Thanh Tuan Le, Prabhakar Sharma, Bhaskor Jyoti Bora, Viet Dung Tran, Thanh Hai Truong, Huu Cuong Le, Phuoc Quy Phong Nguyen. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 54 , 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.08.044

Last update: 2024-06-29 03:44:08

No citation recorded.