Moving torrefaction towards market introduction – Technical improvements and economic-environmental assessment along the overall torrefaction supply chain through the SECTOR project

Thrän, Daniela; Witt, Janet; Schaubach, Kay; Kiel, J.H.A.; Carbo, M.C.; Maier, Jörg; Ndibe, Collins; Koppejan, Japp; Alakangas, Eija; Majer, Stefan; Schipfer, Fabian

doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.03.004

Cited by 122 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Creating standardized high quality fuel pellet will only be a problem when ash content of the input material is already high as it will only be increased during torrefaction. The straw pellets produced here were able to meet many of the requirements for the highest quality class of pellets made from thermally treated non-woody biomass such as bulk density (>600 kg/m 3 ), durability (>97.5%, see optimization of durability in [9]) and ash content (<5%). However, the S content was posing a problem as it was above the threshold of 0.05% for the highest quality class.…”

Section: General Fuel Charactersitic Of the Torrefied Biomass Pelletsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The high standard deviation, which is observed when recording the pellet hardness across 20 pellets, as proposed here, may reflect the inhomogeneity of the torrefied material leading to different structural bonds in the pellets. In order to produce torrefied pellets with high durability and a respective hardness, application of steam and water prior to densification may be crucial to help plasticize the material and reduce the softening temperature of the remaining lignin [9].…”

Section: Hardness and Modefied Hardgrove Index Of The Torrefied Biomamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At temperatures in the range of 250-300 • C, and in the absence of air, the biomass undergoes a mild form of pyrolysis and is converted into a solid fuel with chemical and mechanical properties similar to coal [7]. This process has been studied on a large variety of feedstock applying different torrefaction settings (e.g., temperature, and time) mainly on lab-scale [8] and most recently also in pilot scale plants [9]. Several technological innovations were made over the past years to bring the process to commercial scale [10] and techno-economic assessments assuming European and Northern American conditions were conducted [11,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim of the work presented here, which was part of the SECTOR-project (funded under the EU FP7 programme) [9], is to test a grindability method (GM) for torrefied biomass pellets, which is simple, fast and reliable and based on the grinding of pellets rather than pre-crushed material. The method will result in a single parameter: the specific grinding energy (SGE), i.e., the energy consumed when a defined pellet mass (2.5 kg), at a defined mass flow is ground to a particle top size Energies 2016, 9, 794 3 of 15 of 1 mm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Torreﬁed Biomass Pellets—Comparing Grindability in Different Laboratory Mills

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The firing and co-firing of biomass in pulverized coal fired power plants around the world is expected to increase in the coming years. Torrefaction may prove to be a suitable way of upgrading biomass for such an application. For transport and storage purposes, the torrefied biomass will tend to be in pellet form. Whilst standard methods for the assessment of the milling characteristics of coal exist, this is not the case for torrefied materials-whether in pellet form or not. The grindability of the fuel directly impacts the overall efficiency of the combustion process and as such it is an important parameter. In the present study, the grindability of different torrefied biomass pellets was tested in three different laboratory mill types; cutting mill (CM), hammer mill (HM) and impact mill (IM). The specific grinding energy (SGE) required for a defined mass throughput of pellets in each mill was measured and results were compared to other pellet characterization methods (e.g., durability, and hardness) as well as the modified Hardgrove Index. Seven different torrefied biomass pellets including willow, pine, beech, poplar, spruce, forest residue and straw were used as feedstock. On average, the particle-size distribution width (across all feedstock) was narrowest for the IM (0.41 mm), followed by the HM (0.51 mm) and widest for the CM (0.62 mm). Regarding the SGE, the IM consumed on average 8.23 Wh/kg while CM and HM consumed 5.15 and 5.24 Wh/kg, respectively. From the three mills compared in this study, the IM seems better fit for being used in a standardized method that could be developed in the future, e.g., as an ISO standard.

show abstract

Section: General Fuel Charactersitic Of the Torrefied Biomass Pelletsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hardness and Modefied Hardgrove Index Of The Torrefied Biomamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Torreﬁed Biomass Pellets—Comparing Grindability in Different Laboratory Mills

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Integrating torrefaction plant to an existing or new wood processing plant can improve the torrefaction economic significantly (Thrän et al 2016). In the same paper, the different geographical locations were compared, and Southeast US was found a high potential region for a competitive and economical torrefied pellet plant.…”

Section: Fig 4 Torrefaction Cost Components By Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review of Torrefied Wood Economics

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This literature review aims to provide a systematic analysis of studies on the financial aspects of producing torrefied biomass and torrefied pellets. There are substantial differences in the specific technologies, operating conditions, scale of the demonstration, and properties of biomass feedstock. There is a lack of reports that consider the entire supply chain, which is required for an understanding of the high-cost steps. To obtain a robust view of the torrefaction processes' financial prospects the authors have used both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed papers that allowed the researchers to include thirty-one papers in this analysis. All these studies establish that the prices of the biomass and the final torrefied product are critical. The product yield and caloric content, which are related to pricing, were also key financial drivers. The lower freight costs due to high-energy density of the torrefied pellets was recognized and calculated, but some other benefits were not quantified. There is a need for a detailed and flexible torrefaction financial model that includes variations in financial assumptions and biomass properties. Given the uncertainty around many specific steps, there is value in including stochastic tools in these financial analyses.

show abstract