2022
DOI: 10.1007/s40789-022-00531-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Flue gas analysis for biomass and coal co-firing in fluidized bed: process simulation and validation

Abstract: Coal-conversion technologies, although used ubiquitously, are often discredited due to high pollutant emissions, thereby emphasizing a dire need to optimize the combustion process. The co-firing of coal/biomass in a fluidized bed reactor has been an efficient way to optimize the pollutants emission. Herein, a new model has been designed in Aspen Plus® to simultaneously include detailed reaction kinetics, volatile compositions, tar combustion, and hydrodynamics of the reactor. Validation of the process model wa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The concentration of CO ranged from 1000 to 5000 ppm, CO 2 ranged from 16.2-17.2%, NO ranged from 200-550 ppm, and SO 2 ranged from 130-210 ppm (after desulphurization). As the biomass blending increased, the concentration of SO 2 and NOx decreased from almost 200 ppm to 100 ppm and from 350 ppm to 150 ppm, respectively [40]. The simulated gas had a flow rate of 108 L/h, which was generated by two mercury analyzer pumps (2 × 24 L/h) and two exhaust fans (2 × 30 L/h).…”
Section: A Mobile Laboratory Flue Gas Generator and Gas Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The concentration of CO ranged from 1000 to 5000 ppm, CO 2 ranged from 16.2-17.2%, NO ranged from 200-550 ppm, and SO 2 ranged from 130-210 ppm (after desulphurization). As the biomass blending increased, the concentration of SO 2 and NOx decreased from almost 200 ppm to 100 ppm and from 350 ppm to 150 ppm, respectively [40]. The simulated gas had a flow rate of 108 L/h, which was generated by two mercury analyzer pumps (2 × 24 L/h) and two exhaust fans (2 × 30 L/h).…”
Section: A Mobile Laboratory Flue Gas Generator and Gas Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Accordingly, it is urgent to realize the efficient and clean utilization of coal (Yang 2022;Chai 2021). Coal gasification technology is one of the main methods in this regard (Wang 2021a, b;Cao 2021;Ding et al 2022;Smolinski et al 2022;Zhakupov et al 2022). However, gasification generates a large amount of solid waste, known as fine slag (FS), which is usually disposed in landfills and causes environmental pollution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, fossil energy still occupies a dominant position in the world energy consumption. Soot and NO x and CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion are the main reasons for the greenhouse effect, climate change, and harm to living beings. Bio-fuels from biomass pyrolysis or other conversion techniques are clean and low-carbon fuels, which have great potential to partly replace fossil fuels to reduce CO 2 and pollutant emissions. However, due to the presence of nitrogen species in biomass resources, a trace amount of nitrogen compounds (such as pyridine, etc.) exists in bio-fuels, which affects the soot and NO x formation during the cofiring of bio-fuels with fossil fuels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%