|Razi Ahmad||School of Environmental Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia|
|Mohd Azlan Mohd Ishak||-Faculty of Applied Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA,Campus Arau, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia -Coal and Biomass Energy Research Group, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malays|
|Khudzir Ismail||-Faculty of Applied Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA,Campus Arau, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia -Coal and Biomass Energy Research Group, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malays|
|Nur Nasulhah Kasim||Faculty of Applied Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA,Campus Arau, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia|
|Alina Rahayu Mohamed||Department of Chemical Engineering Technology, Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, 02100 Padang Besar, Perlis, Malaysia|
|Asnida Yanti Ani||Faculty of Applied Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA,Campus Arau, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia|
|Raja Razuan Raja Deris||Coal and Biomass Energy Research Group, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia|
|Khairul Adzfa Radzun||Coal and Biomass Energy Research Group, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia|
In this study, co-gasification of palm kernel shell (PKS) and low-rank Malaysian coal (MB) was carried out in a fixed bed reactor. For the pretreated samples, PKS was torrefied at 270°C (PKSTo) and MB was preheated at 250°C (MBPr) for 1 h, respectively, prior to co-gasification at 767°C, with a biomass blending ratio of 52% and a steam flow rate of 55 mL/min. The effect of different blending combinations was investigated towards product yields, namely gas, tar, char and gases composition. The co-gasification on both pretreated (PKSTo/MBPr) and catalyst-pretreated (Cat-PKSTo/MBPr) produced a greater gas yield, with lesser tar and char yield than both untreated PKS and MB (PKSUn/MBUn) and pretreated PKS and untreated MB (PKSTo/MBUn). The PKSTo/MBPr was found to enhance the H2 production by 63.9% and 41% than PKSUn/MBUn and PKSTo/MBUn, respectively, at 45 min of reaction time. Thus, the pretreatment on both samples had a significant impact on the distribution and composition of product yields during co-gasification. As a conclusion, the pretreated sample, which has been upgraded on characteristics such as higher carbon and lower oxygen content than the untreated sample was revealed to enhance gas yield and H2 production during co-gasification.
Biomass; Gasification; Low rank coal; Palm kernel shell; Pretreatment
Currently, the application of the world energy, which releases carbon dioxide, sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide, has become an issue (Taba et al., 2012). The other problems are associated with the usage of fossil fuels and production of greenhouse gas. Thus, gasification, which is established as an energy-efficient technology, has an acknowledged important consideration (Sulaiman et al., 2012; Heidenreich and Foscolo, 2015). Presently, coal is the main feedstock in gasification and is expected to be applied as the energy resource for many decades ahead. However, this direction is difficult to achieve due to the increase in energy demand, which has caused the shortage of supply and the reduction of high-rank coal (Mohr et al., 2015). Consequently, one of the approaches is to utilize the abundant low-rank coal and biomass in gasification.
The low-rank coal is almost partial towards the world's entire coal deposits compared to the high-rank coal. The usage of low-rank coal in thermal conversion is economical due to its low pricing. However, low-rank coal as a substitute for high-rank coal has several limitations, such as low calorific value and high moisture and oxygen content (Rao et al., 2015). These drawbacks can be minimized by using the pretreated or upgraded low-rank coal in gasification (Xia et al., 2015). Similarly, the utilization of biomass, which is a renewable and environmentally friendly resource during gasification, created several problems. Untreated biomass has relatively low energy, high moisture and oxygenated compound, hygroscopic behavior and poor grindability (Chen et al., 2015). Accordingly, the pretreated biomass improved in energy density; hygroscopic characteristics and grindability overcome the disadvantage of untreated biomass and are suitable for further thermochemical conversion (Nhuchhen et al., 2014; Yuliansyah et al., 2019).
Biomass commonly has higher hydrogen content than coal and it is appropriate to mix both together. Further, the alkali and alkaline earth metals (AAEM) in biomass catalyze the gasification of char resulting from coal pyrolysis. Equally, the high silica (SiO2) content in coal acts as an effective catalyst for tar cracking to light hydrocarbon in thermal conversion (Mallick et al., 2017). However, the gasification of biomass indicated more drawback than coal gasification, where biomass has high oxygenated compound and moisture content and low energy density (Ahmad et al., 2014; Kasim et al., 2019; Ahmad et al., 2019). Thus, co-gasification of biomass and coal can be substituted for individual gasification, as it may improve their disadvantages on both feedstocks (Brar et al., 2012).
Co-gasification has been studied by some researchers. It improved the overall gas and hydrogen composition more than individual gasification (Howaniec and Smoli?ski, 2013) and showed the synergistic influence in terms of high gas yield, low tar and char yield at 1:1 biomass–coal ratio (Krerkkaiwan et al., 2013). There were synergistic effects in the decrease of char yield and increase of gas yield in the co-conversion of coal-biomass blending (Yuan et al., 2012). Consequently, the synergy between biomass and coal co-gasification increases the gas yield, gasification efficiency and reactivity of char and reduces the tar yield (Winaya et al., 2015). Upgraded biomass, such as torrefied pellets, was suitable to obtain low tar yield (Dudy?ski et al., 2015), and torrefied bamboo was also established to produce high syngas yields (Kuo et al., 2014). Moreover, the blending of pretreated biomass and sub-bituminous coal in co-gasification was found to minimize the formation of agglomerates in fluidized bed reactors (Strege et al., 2011). Definitely, torrefaction creates the gasification behavior of the biomass in its approach to coal where the H2 composition in the syngas of torrefied biomass is comparable with coal.
Furthermore, one of the most efficient techniques of producing higher gas qualities is steam gasification. It offers the highest composition of hydrogen (Parthasarathy and Narayanan, 2014). Numerous studies have reported enhanced syngas yield and carbon conversion efficiency when steam was utilized as a gasifying agent (Howaniec et al., 2011; Moghadam et al., 2014; Naqvi et., 2016).
Co-gasification of PKS and MB coal was done in a fixed bed reactor. The pretreatment of a blend of both samples produced a higher gas yield with lower tar and char yield than the untreated blend of both samples. The PKSTo/MBPr produced a higher H2 composition of 31.3%, which was more than PKSUn/MBUn sample of 19.1% at 45 min reaction time. The Cat-PKSTo/MBPr showed a minor increase on H2 composition of 32.6%, which is more than PKSTo/MBPr of 31.3% at 45 min reaction time. The lowest CO2 composition at 12.5% was produced by PKSTo/MBPr compared with PKSUn/MBUn at 20.3% in a reaction time of 60 min. Thus, the PKSTo/MBPr, which had been enriched in their properties, improved the co-gasification performance in terms of product yield and gas composition.
This research project is funded by the Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia, under the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS), FRGS/1/2017/TK10/UITM/02/11.
Ahmad, R., Hamidin, N., Ali, U.F.M., Abidin, C.Z.A., 2014. Characterization of Bio-oil from Palm Kernel Shell Pyrolysis. Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences, Volume 7(1), pp. 1134–1140
Ahmad, R., Ishak, M.A.M., Kasim, N.N., Ismail, K., 2018. Optimization of Co-gasification Process Parameters of Pretreated Palm Kernel Shell and Pretreated Malaysian Low Rank Coal using Response Surface Methodology. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, Volume 2013(1)
Ahmad, R., Ishak, M.A.M., Kasim, N.N., Ismail, K., 2019. Properties and Thermal Analysis of Upgraded Palm Kernel Shell and Mukah Balingian Coal. Energy, Volume 167 pp. 538–547
Berrueco, C., Montané, D., Matas Güell, B., del Alamo, G., 2014. Effect of Temperature and Dolomite on Tar Formation during Gasification of Torrefied Biomass in a Pressurized Fluidized Bed. Energy, Volume 66, pp. 849–859
Brar, J.S., Singh, K., Wang, J., Kumar, S., 2012. Cogasification of Coal and Biomass: A Review. International Journal of Forestry Research, Volume 2012, pp. 1–10
Chen, W.H., Chen, C.J., Hung, C.I., Shen, C.H., Hsu, H.W., 2013. A Comparison of Gasification Phenomena among Raw Biomass, Torrefied Biomass and Coal in an Entrained-flow Reactor. Applied Energy, Volume 112, pp. 421–430
Chen, W.H., Peng, J., Bi, X.T., 2015. A State-of-the-art Review of Biomass Torrefaction, Densification and Applications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 44, pp. 847–866
Dudy?ski, M., van Dyk, J.C., Kwiatkowski, K., Sosnowska, M., 2015. Biomass Gasification: Influence of Torrefaction on Syngas Production and Tar Formation. Fuel Processing Technology, Volume 131, pp. 203–212
Heidenreich, S., Foscolo, P.U., 2015. New Concepts in Biomass Gasification. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, Volume 46, pp. 72–95
Howaniec, N., Smoli?ski, A., 2013. Steam Co-gasification of Coal and Biomass – Synergy in Reactivity of Fuel Blends Chars. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Volume 38, pp. 16152–16160
Howaniec, N., Smoli?ski, A., Sta?czyk, K., Pichlak, M., 2011. Steam Co-gasification of Coal and Biomass Derived Chars with Synergy Effect as an Innovative Way of Hydrogen-rich Gas Production. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Volume 36(22), pp. 14455–14463
Kasim, N.N., Mohamed, A.R., Ishak, M.A.M., Ahmad, R., Nawawi, W.I., Ali, S.N., Ismail, K., 2019. The Effect of Demineralization and Torrefaction Consequential Pre-treatment on Energy Characteristic of Palm Empty Fruit Bunches. Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry. Volume 138, pp. 343–350
Krerkkaiwan, S., Fushimi, C., Tsutsumi, A., Kuchonthara, P., 2013. Synergetic Effect during Co-pyrolysis/Gasification of Biomass and Sub-bituminous Coal. Fuel Processing Technology, Volume 115, pp. 11–18
Kuo, P., Wu, W., Chen, W., 2014. Gasification Performances of Raw and Torrefied Biomass in a Downdraft Fixed Bed Gasifier using Thermodynamic Analysis. Fuel, Volume 117(Part B), pp. 1231–1241
Mallick, D., Mahanta, P., Moholkar, V.S., 2017. Co-gasification of Coal and Biomass Blends: Chemistry and Engineering. Fuel, Volume 204, pp. 106–128
Moghadam, R.A., Yusup, S., Uemura, Y., Chin, B.I.F., Lam, H.L., Al Shoaibi, A., 2014. Syngas Production from Palm Kernel Shell and Polyethylene Waste Blend in Fluidized Bed Catalytic Steam Co-gasification Process. Energy, Volume 75, pp. 40–44
Mohr, S.H., Wang, J., Ellem, G., Ward, J., Giurco, D., 2015. Projection of World Fossil Fuels by Country. Fuel, Volume 141, pp. 120–135
Naqvi, M., Yan, J., Danish, M., Farooq, U., Lu, S., 2016. An Experimental Study on Hydrogen Enriched Gas with Reduced Tar Formation using Pre-treated Olivine in Dual Bed Steam Gasification of Mixed Biomass Compost. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Volume 41(25), pp. 10608–10618
Nhuchhen, D., Basu, P., Acharya, B., 2014. A Comprehensive Review on Biomass Torrefaction. International Journal of Renewable Energy & Biofuels, Volume 2014, pp. 1–56
Parthasarathy, P., Narayanan, K.S., 2014. Hydrogen Production from Steam Gasification of Biomass: Influence of Process Parameters on Hydrogen Yield–A Review. Renewable Energy, Volume 66, pp. 570–579
Rao, Z., Zhao, Y., Huang, C., Duan, C., He, J., 2015. Recent Developments in Drying and Dewatering for Low Rank Coals. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, Volume 46, pp. 1–11
Sulaiman, S.A., Atnaw, S.M., Moni, M.N.Z., 2012. Experimental Study on Temperature Profile of Fixed-bed Gasification of Oil-palm Fronds. International Journal of Technology, Volume 3(1), pp. 35–44
Strege, J., Swanson, M., Folkedahl, B., Stanislowski, J., Laumb, J., 2011. Fischer-Tropsch Catalyst Testing in a Continuous Bench-scale Coal Gasification System. Fuel Processing Technology, Volume 92(4), pp. 757–763
Taba, L.E., Irfan, M.F., Wan Daud, W.A.M., Chakrabarti, M.H., 2012. The Effect of Temperature on Various Parameters in Coal, Biomass and Co-gasification: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 16(8), pp. 5584–5596
Valdés, C.F., Chejne, F., Marrugo, G., Macias, R.J., Gómez, C.A., Montoya, J.I., Arenas, E., 2016. Co-gasification of Sub-bituminous Coal with Palm Kernel Shell in Fluidized Bed Coupled to a Ceramic Industry Process. Applied Thermal Engineering, Volume 107, pp. 1201–1209
Winaya, N.S., Hartati, R.S., Lokantara, P., Subawa, G., Putrawan, M.A., 2015. Fluidized Bed Co-gasification of Coal and Solid Waste Fuels in an Air Gasifying Agent. International Journal of Technology, Volume 6(6), pp. 931–937
Xia, W., Xie, G., Peng, Y., 2015. Recent Advances in Beneficiation for Low Rank Coals, Powder Technology, Volume 277, pp. 206–221
Yuan, S., Dai, Z., Zhou, Z., Chen, X., Yu, G., Wang, F., 2012. Rapid Co-pyrolysis of Rice Straw and a Bituminous Coal in a High-frequency Furnace and Gasification of the Residual Char. Bioresource Technology, Volume 109, pp. 188–197
Yuliansyah, A.T., Putri, C.O.,
Clarasinta, B.D. Nonaka, M., 2019. TGA Investigation of CO2
Gasification of Hydrothermally Treated Biomass (Corn Cob-Coconut Shell
Mixture). International Journal of Technology, Volume 10(6), pp. 1166–1173