Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed

biomass and coal in an entrained-ow reactor
Wei-Hsin Chen a,, Chih-Jung Chen b, Chen-I Hung b, Cheng-Hsien Shen c, Heng-Wen Hsu c
a
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan, ROC
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan, ROC
c
Green Energy and Environment Research Laboratories, Industrial Technology Research Institute, Hsinchu 310, Taiwan, ROC

h i g h l i g h t s

" Gasication phenomena of raw bamboo, torreed bamboo, and coal are studied.
" The carbon conversions of the three fuels are higher than 90%.
" The coal gas efciency is sensitive to the type of fuel.
" The gasication performance of torreed bamboo is enhanced and closer to that of coal.
" With optimum operation, syngas formation from torreed biomass is amplied by 88%.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Gasication of torreed biomass is a promising technique for producing synthesis gas (syngas) of higher
Received 14 September 2012 quality than has previously been available. In this study, in order to evaluate the potential of the tech-
Received in revised form 21 December 2012 nique, gasication processes for three different materials, which include raw bamboo, torreed bamboo
Accepted 10 January 2013
(at 280 C for 1 h), and high-volatile bituminous coal in an entrained-ow gasier using O2 as the gasi-
Available online xxxx
cation agent, are studied numerically and compared to each other. The obtained results suggest that in all
cases, the carbon conversions of the three fuels are higher than 90%. However, the cold gasication ef-
Keywords:
ciency for raw bamboo is low, mainly due to the relatively lower caloric value of the material. In the case
Torrefaction and gasication
Entrained-ow gasier
of the torreed bamboo fuel, the gasication performance is enhanced signicantly and is quite similar to
Carbon conversion the coal gasication under the same conditions. It appears that the optimum oxygen-to-fuel mass ow
Coal gas efciency ratios for the gasication of raw bamboo, torreed bamboo, and coal are 0.9, 0.7, and 0.7, and their equiv-
Numerical simulation alence ratios are 0.692, 0.434, and 0.357, respectively. Under optimum conditions with respect to the
Clean coal technology equivalence ratio, the cold gas efciency of torreed bamboo is improved by 88%, as compared to raw
bamboo.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction as an essential energy resource, development of a method by

Fossil fuels are currently crucial sources of primary energy. It
has been reported that the reserves of oil and natural gas could last
another 4060 years [1]. In contrast, the coal reserve is reported to
be available for over another 100 years, and its price is relatively
lower than that of oil and natural gas. Therefore, there is a trend
toward the consumption of more coal instead of using oil as an en-
ergy source. Over the past several decades, however, burning coal
has caused numerous serious air pollution problems; it has also
emitted a tremendous amount of carbon dioxide, especially from
coal-red power plants. For these reasons, while coal is consumed
Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +886 7 3740611.
E-mail address: weihsinchen@gmail.com (W.-H. Chen).
which to utilize it in a cleaner way has become an important task.
Over the years, the development of clean coal technology (CCT) has
drawn much attention [2]. Gasication plays a key role in carrying
out CCT where coals are converted into syngas (i.e. CO + H2), the
main component in the product gas, in an insufcient oxygen envi-
ronment [3,4].
In fact, not only coal but also other materials, such as biomass,
slurry, and petroleum coke, can be employed as feedstocks in gas-
ication [57]. Biomass is an important source of renewable en-
ergy in the world. For instance, according to statistics from the
International Energy Agency (IEA) in 2011, around 10% of the pri-
mary energy demand worldwide came from biomass. Biomass
can be converted into gas products alone by gasication [8]; it
can also be gasied with coal through co-gasication [9,10]. Raw
biomass is generally characterized by high moisture content and

0306-2619/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034

Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
2 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx
Nomenclature
A pre-exponential factor or area (m2)
Ap surface area of particle (m2)
Ap,c cross-sectional area on the particle normal to the direc-
tion of the ow (m2)
B temperature exponent
C molecular concentration (kmol m3) or turbulence con-
stant
cp specic heat (J kg K1)
D diffusion coefcient (m2 s1)
Ea activation energy (J kmol1)
FD drag force (kg m1 s2)
Gk generation of turbulence kinetic energy
DH0 heat of reaction (at 298 K and 1 atm)
Keq equilibrium reaction rate
k reaction rate constant or turbulence kinetic energy
(m2 s2)
M molecular weight (kg mol1)
m mass (kg)
N reaction apparent order
Pr Prandtl number
pn partial bulk pressure of the gas phase species (Pa)
p pressure (Pa)
r radial coordinate (m) or species reaction rate per unit
area (kg m2 s1)
R universal gas constant (J kmol K1)
R species consumption rate at particle surface (kg s1)
S source term
Sc Schmidt number
Sr summation of species reaction rates (kg m2 s1)
T temperature (K)
TP fuel particle temperature (K)
T out outlet mean temperature (K)
t time (s)
u gas velocity component (m s1)
low energy density as compared to those of coals. Typically, the
higher heating value of coal is in the range of 2535 MJ kg1
[11], whereas it is between 15 and 20 MJ kg1 for raw biomass
[12]. This restricts the applications of raw biomass in industry.
To use biomass more efciently, a variety of pretreatment
methods for improving biomass have been developed. Torrefaction
is one of the most noteworthy routes. It is a thermal pretreatment
process where raw biomass is heated in an oxygen-free environ-
ment at temperatures of 200300 C [1316] in order to perform
thermal degradation while avoiding oxidation of the biomass.
The moisture contained in the biomass is reduced, and the compo-
nents of low-molecule volatiles are released as a result of torrefac-
tion. As a consequence, the properties of the biomass are improved
to a great extent. The advantages of torrefaction of biomass include
intensifying caloric value and energy density [17,18], reducing O/
C and H/C ratios [19], producing hygroscopic materials, and mak-
ing the grindability and storage of biomass easier [20]. Moreover,
the properties of torreed biomass become more uniform com-
pared to those of raw biomass [21].
On account of property improvement of biomass from torrefac-
tion, this pretreatment method is conducive to the performance of
gasication if torreed biomass rather than raw biomass is used as
feedstock. In the study of Prins et al. [22], it was pointed out that
the gasication temperature of raw wood was lower than that of
torreed wood due to the high O/C ratio and high moisture content
in the former. As a result, wood was generally over-oxidized in a
gasier, which led to thermodynamic loss. Because torrefaction
can decrease moisture and O/C ratios and thereby reduced
Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
V velocity (m s1) or mass fraction of volatiles
v velocity (m s1)
vr stoichiometric coefcient of reaction r or relative
velocity (m s1)
w reaction rate (kg m3 s1)
x coordinate (m)
Y stoichiometric coefcient or species
y mass fraction
z axial coordinate (m)
Greek letters
a molecular fraction
b effectiveness factor
e turbulence dissipation rate (m2 s3)
k thermal conductivity (W mK1)
l viscosity (kg ms1)
q density (kg m3)
sij symmetric stress tensor (kg m1 s2)
g rate exponent for species
Subscript
d drag
f forward
h high temperature or energy
i species i or spatial coordinate
j momentum or spatial coordinate or species j
l low temperature
p fuel particle
r reaction or relative velocity
t turbulence
k kinetic energy
l viscosity
e dissipation
thermodynamic loss, it has been seen as a promising method by
which to achieve more efcient gasication of wood. Deng et al.
[23] focused on the torrefaction of rice straw and rape stalk and
found that the heating values of torreed rice straw and rape stalk
could be increased up to 17% and 15%, respectively. They also came
up with a conceptual system by combining coal gasication and
biomass torrefaction. Couhert et al. [24] investigated the impact
of torrefaction on the production of syngas from wood gasication
in an entrained-ow reactor. They addressed the fact that chars
from torreed wood were less than those from wood, and the
quantity of produced syngas increased with the severity of
torrefaction. Strege et al. [25] used blends of subbituminous coal,
torreed biomass, and untreated biomass to study their gasica-
tion phenomena in a bench-scale oxygen-blown uid-bed gasier
that was coupled to a modular xed-bed FischerTropsch reactor.
Their results indicated that the bed temperature diverged rapidly
and material agglomeration occurred in the bed when a blend of
coal and torreed biomass was replaced by a blend of coal and
raw biomass; therefore, using torreed biomass as the feedstock
of gasication was found to be conducive to minimizing the
formation of agglomerates.
In examining the literature published recently on this topic, a
number of studies of biomass torrefaction have been implemented,
and much valuable information has been reported. However, very
few papers have highlighted the gasication of torreed biomass,
and there still remains a lot of knowledge that is not available
in sufcient detail. Therefore, the objective of this study is to
investigate the reaction behavior of torreed biomass. Particular
 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx
emphasis is placed on the comparison of gasication characteris-
tics among coal, raw biomass and torreed biomass.
2. Numerical method
2.1. Geometry of reactor
Fuel gasication in an entrained-ow gasier is explored in the
present study, and the geometry of the gasier is sketched in
Fig. 1a. The gasier was a cylindrical, dry feed, and pressurized en-
trained-ow reactor [7], and its height and diameter were 5151.2
and 270.3 mm, respectively. The reactants and carrier gas were
blown into the gasier from the top of the reactor. Fuel and carrier
gas were sent into the gasier from the center inlet, whereas oxy-
gen was transported from the concentric ring inlet. The distance
from the oxygen inlet to the gasier centerline was 45 mm. The
diameter of the center inlet and the width of the concentric ring in-
let were 20 and 5 mm, respectively.
2.2. Assumptions and governing equations
Fuel reactions in a gasier are related to uid dynamics, heat and
mass transfers, and chemical reactions. To make the physical prob-
lems involved in these processes more tractable, some hypotheses
are adopted. (1) A steady, axisymmetric, incompressible, and
turbulent ow eld is adopted. (2) Thermal radiation and the body
force of the ow in the gasier are ignored. (3) The formation of
air pollutants from gasication, such as NH3, HCN, H2S, CS2, and
COS, are disregarded. (4) The wall of the gasier is adiabatic.
Accordingly, a two-dimensional and steady ow with turbulence
and chemical reactions is studied numerically, and the steady-state
time-averaged NavierStokes, energy, and species equations are
solved. The standard ke turbulence model is also adopted. The
aforementioned governing equations and the constants used in the
standard ke turbulence model are tabulated in Table 1.
2.3. Discrete phase model
The behavior of fuel particles in uid is modeled by an Eulerian
Lagrangian approach that considers the inertia and hydrodynamic
Fig. 1. Schematics of (a) geometry and (b) grid system of the investigated entrained-ow gasier.
Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
3
drags coupled to mass, energy, and momentum transport from the
particles into the uid. A discrete-phase-model (DPM) is employed
to track the trajectories of fuel particles through the continuous
phase of uid. In the model, the velocity change of a particle is
written as
mp dV P =dt F d 1
where VP is the particle velocity, and Fd is the drag force of the uid
on the particle. The drag force Fd is expressed as
qAp;c C D v 2r
FD 2
2
where q, AP,c, and vr are the density of the surrounding uid, the
cross-sectional area on the particle normal to the direction of the
ow, and the relative velocity between the particle and the uid,
respectively. CD is the drag coefcient, and it is a function of the par-
ticle Reynolds number [26].
Several heat and mass processes of fuel particles take place in
the gasication reactions, so they are considered in the source
terms of the governing equations. To begin with, the moisture in
the fuel particles is evaporated; then, the particles undergo devol-
atilization processes; furthermore, the particles are converted into
volatiles, chars, and ash; nally, the volatiles and chars are con-
sumed to produce gases [27]. The consumption rate of species i
at the particle surface (Ri ) is presented by
Ri Ap byi r i 3

0 r i N
ri ki pn  4
D
In the preceding two equations, Ap is the surface area of the particle;
b is the effectiveness factor; yi is the mass fraction; r is the per unit
0
area species reaction rate; ki is the reaction rate constant; pn is the
partial bulk pressure of the gas phase species; D is the diffusion
coefcient, and N is the apparent order of reaction. The reaction rate
0
constant ki follows the Arrhenius equation, and the apparent order
of the reaction depends on the oxygen concentration [28]. For the
order of unity (N = 1), the consumption rate of species i at the par-
ticle surface is given by
4 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Table 1
A list of governing equations and the turbulence model.

Governing equation
Continuity Dmp
@
@xi quij mp;0
_ p;0
m
   
Momentum @p P 18lC D Re
@
@xi qui uj  @x j
@x@ i sij  qu0i u0j qp d2p 24
up  u m_ p Dt
  P DH 0
Energy @
@xi qcp ui T @x@ i k @x
@T
i
 qcp u0i T 0  j Mjj Rj
 
Species @Y j 0 0
@xi qui Y j @xi qD @xi  qui Y j Sr Ri
@ @

Turbulence model
Kinematic viscosity lt = qClk2/e
h  i
Kinetic energy l rlkt @x Gk  qe
@xi qui k @xi
@ @ @k
i
h  i
Dissipation rate @
qui e @x@ i l rlet @e
C 1e Gk ke  C 2e Gk q ek
2
@xi @xi
Heat conductivity l @T
qcp u0i T 0 k @x
@T
i
cp Prtt @x i

Diffusion coefcient l @Y
qu0i Y 0j qD @x
@Y
i
 Sctt @x i

Cl C1e C2e rk re Prt Sct

Constant
0.09 1.44 1.92 1.0 1.3 0.85 0.7

0
ki D where V is the mass fraction of volatiles; k is the reaction rate con-
Ri Ap byi pn 0 5
D ki stant; A is the pre-exponential factor; TP is the fuel particle temper-
ature, and Ea is the activation energy of the reaction. The values for
For the reaction order of zero (N = 0), the consumption rate is ex- Yl, kl, Yh, kh, El, and Eh are listed in Table 2 [31].
pressed as When chars are produced from fuel devolatilization, their gasi-
Ri Ap byi ki
0
6 cation can be described by the following equations [32]:
k1 1
N = 0 represents the solid depletion rate equal to the chemical reac- C 1=2O2 ! CO DH0 111 MJ kmol 13
tion rate. On the other hand, if there is no reaction at the surface,
namely, N = 1, the solid depletion rate changes to the diffusion-con- k2
C CO2 ! 2CO DH0 172 MJ kmol
1
14
trolled rate.
k3 1
2.4. Chemical reactions C H2 O ! CO H2 DH0 131 MJ kmol 15
With regard to gas-phase chemical reactions, the relevant equa-
When fuel particles are decomposed into volatiles, chars and tions include [33]
ashes in a high-temperature environment, the compositions re-
k4 1
leased from the fuel can be presented by the following equilibrium H2 1=2O2 ! H2 O DH0 242 MJ kmol 16
equation [29]:
k5 1
Fuel ! a1 CH4 a2 H2 a3 CO a4 CO2 a5 H2 O a6 Char CO 1=2O2 ! CO2 DH0 283 MJ kmol 17
X
a7 Ash; ai 1 7
k6 1
i CO H2 O ! CO2 H2 DH0 41:1 MJ kmol 18
Considering the devolatilization process that dominates fuel
k7 1
reactions in the initial injection period [30], volatile release is de- CH4 1=2O2 ! CO 2H2 DH0 35:7 MJ kmol 19
scribed by a two-step devolatilization model [31], and it is given
as follows:
kl
Fuel !1  Y l  Charl Y l Table 2
Kinetic parameters of reactions.
 Volatile for low temperature 8
Devolatilization
Yl 0.3
kh
Fuel !1  Y h  Charh Y h Yh 1
kl (s1) 200,000
 Volatile for high temperature 9 kh (s1) 1.3  107
El (J kmol1) 104.6
where Y denotes the stoichiometric coefcient. When the Eh (J kmol1) 167.4
temperature is relatively low, the reaction is dominated by Eq. kf (kmol1m m3m3 s1)a A (kmol1m KB m3m3 s1) B Ea (J kmol1)
(8), but it is dominated by Eq. (9) if the temperature is relatively
Gasication
high. Consequently, the reaction kinetics of volatiles is expressed k1 0.002 0 7.9  107
by: k2 242 0 2.75  108
k3 426 0 3.16  108
dV k4 5  1010 0 1.68  108
kl Y l kh Y h Fuel 10
dt k5 2.2  1020 0 1.67  106
k6 2.6  1010 0 8.4  108
kl Al expEa;l =RT P 11 k7 4000 1 1.26  106
k8 4400 0 1.68  108
PN
kh Ah expEa;h =RT P 12 a
m i1 v 0i .

Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx 5

CH4 H2 O ! CO 3H2
k8
DH0 206 MJ kmol
1
20 Torrefied bamboo CH1:048 O0:465 1:0295O2
! CO2 0:5240H2 O 26
In the species equation, Sr is the summation of various species
reaction rates, and it is expressed as:
Coal CH0:879 O0:291 1:07425O2 ! CO2 0:4395H2 O 27
X
Nr
Sr Mj;r wj;r 21 Carbon conversion (CC) and cold gas efciency (CGE) are two vi-
j1 tal indices used for evaluating the performance of gasication.
! They are dened as follows [37]:
  YNr
0 1 Y Nr
00 0  1
wj;r v 00
j;r v 0
j;r kf C gi  C gi 22 _ out yCO2 12
m yCO 12 yCH4 12
K 44 28 16
i1 eq i1 CC % @1  A  100 28
m_ in;fuel yc
kf AT B eEa =RT 23
 
In the above equation, the forward reaction rate constant kf is estab- _ out yH2 HHVH2 yCO HHVCO yCH4 HHVCH4
m
lished based on the Arrhenius law, where A is the pre-exponential CGE %
_ in;fuel HHVfuel
m
factor, and B is the temperature exponent. Their values in various
 100 29
chemical reactions are listed in Table 2 as well.
where yi is the mass fraction of species i in the product gas. That is,
2.5. Boundary conditions CC is evaluated from the concentrations of CO2, CO, and CH4 in the
product gas, whereas CGE is determined from the concentrations of
The fuel at 300 K was fed into the gasier from the top of the H2, CO, and CH4.
reactor, and a carrier gas (i.e. air) at 300 K was employed to aid
in the transporting of the fuel particles. Their mass ow rates were
3. Results and discussion
controlled at 0.023 and 0.025 kg s1, respectively. The sizes of the
fuel particles were in the range of 44250 lm, and the average
Three different fuels, comprised of raw bamboo, torreed bam-
particle size was 103 lm. This was determined using the
boo [38], and high-volatile bituminous coal [39], serve as the basis
RosinRammler distribution function [34]. Oxygen was used as
of this study. The torreed bamboo was produced from the torre-
the oxidant. The centerline of the gasier was an axisymmetric line
faction of raw bamboo at 280 C for 1 h followed by natural cooling
so that no heat and mass uxes could pass through the line. The
to ambient temperature. The properties of the fuels, such as prox-
wall of the gasier was conceived as an adiabatic wall, and no slip
imate, elemental, and caloric analyses, are summarized in Table 3.
conditions were obeyed. At the outlet, the pressure was xed at
In this study, the O/F ratio was controlled between 0.5 and 1.1 by
2 MPa, implying that the value was the operating pressure.
varying the mass ow rate of oxygen. According to the O/F ratio,
the ER was in the range of 0.2250.849.
2.6. Numerical method and validation

The commercial software ANSYS FLUENT V12 was used in this 3.1. Gasication phenomena
study to simulate coal and biomass gasication phenomena. In
the simulations, the SIMPLE algorithm was utilized to solve the Fig. 2 rst demonstrates the isothermal contours of the three
governing equations in association with the boundary conditions. fuels in the gasier, where the mass ow rates of fuel and air (car-
A rst-order upwind scheme was employed to calculate the con- rier gas) are 0.023 and 0.025 kg s1, respectively and the O/F ratio
vection and diffusion uxes. A 20  1000 (viz., radial  axial) grid is 0.9. Under the condition of O/F = 0.9, the mass ow rate of oxy-
system was adopted for the predictions in that the system satised gen is 0.01545 kg s1. The gure shows that the high-temperature
the requirement of grid independence [35]. Solid tests for the val- zone is always located in the vicinity of the fuel and oxygen inlets,
idation of chemical kinetics (Table 2) have been carried out in a regardless of which fuel is consumed. This is attributed to the mix-
previous study [35], where the numerical predictions were in good ing of fuel and oxidizer followed by the occurrence of exothermic
agreement with the experimental results. combustion (i.e. Eqs. (13), (16), (17), and (19)). The temperature
decreases downward as a consequence of the endothermic gasi-
2.7. Parameters and performance indices cation reactions (i.e. Eqs. (14), (15), and (20)). The maximum tem-
perature in the gasier depends highly on the type of fuel. It can be
The oxygen-to-fuel (mass ow rate) ratio (O/F ratio) and equiv- seen that relatively more volatile matter (=80.13 wt.%) and less
alence ratio (ER) are two important parameters in practicing fuel
gasication. The ER is dened as the following [36]:
  Table 3
m_ oxygen =m_ fuel real Proximate, elemental, and caloric analyses of fuels.
ER   24
_ oxygen =m
m _ fuel stoichiometric
Raw bamboo Torreed bamboo Coal
(at 280 C for 1 h)
The
 stoichiometric
 mass ow ratio of oxygen to fuel,
_ oxygen =m
m _ fuel stoichiometric , can be obtained in accordance with the Proximate analysis (wt.%, dry basis)
VM 80.13 58.80 34.86
elemental analysis and the law of conservation of mass or atoms.
FC 17.75 37.78 58.92
When determining ER, it is assumed that the fuel is comprised of Ash 2.12 3.42 6.22
carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, and nitrogen is ignored due to its Elemental analysis (wt.%, dry basis)
low content. When the three fuels react with oxygen stoichiometri- C 46.78 58.43 67.71
cally, they are individually expressed as follows: H 6.38 5.10 4.95
N 0.25 0.34 1.18
Raw bamboo CH1:635 O0:743 1:03725O2 O 46.59 36.13 26.16

! CO2 0:8175H2 O 25 HHV (MJ kg1) 18.75 22.50 26.22

Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
6 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Fig. 2. Isothermal proles of the gasication of (a) raw bamboo, (b) torreed bamboo, and (c) coal (O/F = 0.9).

xed carbon (=17.75 wt.%) are contained in the raw bamboo
(Table 3); meanwhile, its O/C and H/C ratios are higher.
Consequently, the higher heating value (HHV) of raw bamboo is
lower (=18.75 MJ kg1), and the maximum temperature in the gas-
ier is 1348 K (Fig. 2a). The HHV of the torreed bamboo is shown
to be 22.50 MJ kg1, so more heat is released from its burning com-
pared to that of the raw bamboo. This is the reason that the max-
imum temperature of the torreed bamboo reaches 2268 K
(Fig. 2b). The HHV of coal is shown to be 26.22 MJ kg1, which is
much higher than that of the raw bamboo and the torreed
bamboo. Hence, when the coal reacts with oxygen in the gasier,
the highest temperature is 2840 K (Fig. 2c). Corresponding to the
gasication of the raw bamboo, torreed bamboo, and coal, the
average temperatures at the exit of the gasier are shown to be
437, 935, and 1002 K, respectively. This reveals that the role of heat
sink played by endothermic gasication (i.e. Eqs. (14), (15), and
(20)) has a profound effect on temperature distribution.
In examining the concentration contours of CO and H2 shown in
Fig. 3, the gure depicts that the concentrations of CO and H2 from
the gasication of the raw bamboo are relatively low, especially in
the case of H2 (Fig. 3a). When the torreed bamboo is gasied, the
formation of H2 is intensied markedly compared to that of the
raw bamboo, whereas the CO formation increases slightly
(Fig. 3b). By virtue of the higher HHV and larger amount of carbon
contained in the coal, the CO concentration from coal gasication is
further enlarged (Fig. 3c). The distributions of H2O and CO2 are dis-
played in Fig. 4. As a result of the maximum temperature of the
raw bamboo gasication being lower (Fig. 2a), it is relatively dif-
cult to complete the endothermic reduction reactions (i.e. Eqs. (14),
(15), and (20)). As a consequence, the concentrations of H2O and
CO2 from the gasication of the raw bamboo are shown to be high-
er (Fig. 4a). The gasication of the torreed bamboo is conducive to
the formation of H2 (Fig. 3b), so less H2O is retained at the exit of
the gasier (Fig. 4b). However, it is noted that more CO2 is pro-
duced in contrast to the raw bamboo. With regard to coal gasica-
tion, the concentrations of H2O and CO2 at the exit are the lowest
among the three fuels. A comparison between the gasication of
raw bamboo and torreed bamboo reects that the latter is closer
to that of coal. It is thus pointed out that the improved properties
of biomass from torrefaction make the gasication of biomass ap-
proach that of coal. The concentration of CH4 is extremely low
(<0.01%) in all cases. Hence, the concentration contours of methane
are not presented. Figs. 24 indicate that the temperature and spe-
cies concentrations are almost invariant adjacent to the exit of the
reactor, implying that fully developed fuel gasication has been
accomplished. The designed geometry of the reactor allows the
implementation of fuel gasication.
3.2. Syngas formation and gasication performance
Fig. 5 displays the proles of mole fractions of H2, CO, and syn-
gas (i.e. H2 + CO) in the product gas under the gasication of the
three fuels where the O/F ratio is 0.9. For the raw bamboo, most
atomic hydrogen is transformed to H2O (Fig. 4a), so the concentra-
tion of H2 is very low. On account of insufcient oxygen supplied in
an environment of gasication, some CO is generated. The mole
fractions of CO and syngas (i.e. CO + H2) in the product gas are
around 0.162 and 0.175, respectively. When the torreed bamboo
is gasied, the H2 formation is raised signicantly, whereas the for-
mation of CO is close to that of the raw bamboo. The mole fraction
of syngas in the product gas is 0.364, accounting for a 109% incre-
ment in contrast to that of the raw bamboo. This results clearly
indicate that torrefaction is able to facilitate syngas formation from
biomass gasication, and this behavior is qualitatively consistent
with the results of Couhert et al. [24]. With regard to coal

Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx 7

Fig. 3. Concentration proles of CO and H2 for the gasication of (a) raw bamboo, (b) torreed bamboo, and (c) coal (O/F = 0.9).

Fig. 4. Concentration proles of H2O and CO2 for the gasication of (a) raw bamboo, (b) torreed bamboo, and (c) coal (O/F = 0.9).

gasication, the mole fraction of syngas is found to be 0.574, stem-
ming from the increase in the CO generated.
Upon inspection of the carbon conversion (CC) shown in Fig. 6,
the values for the raw bamboo, torreed bamboo, and coal are 92.2,
91.3, and 98.5, respectively, revealing that over 90% of the carbon
in these fuels was converted to CO, CO2, and CH4. Unlike CC, the
cold gas efciency (CGE) is sensitive to the type of feedstock. Spe-
cically, the values of CGE from the gasication of the raw bamboo,
torreed bamboo, and coal are 29.0, 49.8, and 69.1%, respectively.
The CGE of the bamboo is amplied by a factor of 1.72

Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
8 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

0.7
(a) 2000 Bamboo
Bamboo
Torrefied bamboo
0.6 Torrefied bamboo
Coal
Coal

Outlet mean temperature (K)

1500
0.5
Mole fraction

0.4
1000
0.3

0.2
500

0.1

0 0
CO H2 Syngas 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1
Species O/F ratio

Fig. 5. Proles of mole fractions of CO, H2, and syngas in product gases (O/F = 0.9).
(b) 0.8

120 100
CC
CGE 0.6
100
80 Syngas mole fraction
Carbon conversion (%)

Cold gas efficiency (%)

80 0.4
60

60

40 0.2
40

20
20 0
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1
O/F ratio
0 0
Raw bamboo Torrefied bamboo Coal Fig. 7. Proles of (a) the mean temperature at the exit of the gasier and (b) mole
Feed fraction of syngas at various O/F ratios.

Fig. 6. Proles of carbon conversion and cold gas efciency for different fuels
(O/F = 0.9).
(=(49.8%  29%)/29%) after experiencing torrefaction. The value of
the CGE is determined from the heating values and mass fractions
of CO, H2, and CH4. The high CC and low CGE resulting from raw
biomass gasication are attributed to the high concentrations of
CO2 and H2O as well as to the low concentrations of CO and H2
in the product gas. Accordingly, it should be pointed out that a high
CC value does not with certainty lead to better gasication perfor-
mance. The difference in the CGE between the raw biomass and the
coal is around 40%. Nevertheless, the CGE of the bamboo is in-
creased by 21% (=49.8%  29%) from the torrefaction process, as a
result of more H2 being produced (Fig. 5). These results qualita-
tively agree with the ndings of Deng et al. [23].
3.3. The effect of O/F ratio on gasication
The proles of the mean temperatures at the exit of the gasier
from the gasication of the three fuels and the mole fraction of
syngas at various O/F ratios (0.51.1) are presented in Fig. 7. The
outlet mean temperature is obtained by
R the bamboo is torreed (Table 3). The formations of CO and H2 are
AR
q  T  v dA
T out
A
q  v dA
Obviously, the outlet mean temperatures rise with increasing O/F
ratios, regardless of which fuel is consumed (Fig. 7a). This arises
from the fact that the exothermic oxidation reactions are intensied
as the O/F ratio increases. It is noted that the difference in outlet
mean temperature between the raw bamboo and torreed bamboo
becomes pronounced (>500 K) as the O/F ratio becomes larger than
or equal to 0.9. This reects that the O/F ratio has a pronounced
inuence on the thermal behavior of gasication at O/F = 0.9. The
higher mean temperature resulting from the reactions of the torr-
eed bamboo is conducive to its gasication. Consequently, the syn-
gas formation from the torreed bamboo is much higher than that
of raw bamboo (Fig. 7b). Unlike the outlet mean temperature, the
maximum syngas formations of raw bamboo, torreed bamboo,
and coal take place at O/F = 0.9, 0.8, and 0.7, respectively.
The proles of the gas concentrations of CO, H2, CO2, and H2O at
various O/F ratios are plotted in Fig. 8. In the case of the raw bam-
boo gasication, it can be seen that the concentrations of CO2 and
H2O are higher than those of CO and H2 within the investigated
range of O/F ratios (Fig. 8a). This can be explained by higher atomic
O/C and H/C ratios in raw biomass which facilitate the formations
of CO2 and H2O. The O/C and H/C ratios are reduced notably when
30 thus enlarged to a certain extent (Fig. 8b). Again, this means that
torrefaction can improve the gasication performance of biomass.

Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx 9

(a) Bamboo 3.4. Gasication performance at various equivalence ratios

0.6
CO2 The O/F ratio merely provides an indication of oxygen supply. In
H 2O
0.5 H2 view of the different amounts of C, H, and O contained in biomass
CO and coal (Table 3), the equivalence ratio is a more feasible indicator
by which to describe oxidant supply in terms of the nature of fuel.
0.4
The distributions of the CC for the three fuels at various equiva-
Mole fraction

lence ratios are shown in Fig. 9. It is not surprising that an increase

0.3 in ER leads to the growth of the CC, resulting from more oxygen
supplied for reactions. By virtue of the lower HHV for raw bamboo,
0.2 a higher ER is required to reach a higher CC. Alternatively, coal is
featured by a higher HHV; more heat is liberated when it is oxi-
dized. As a consequence, a higher CC can be obtained at a relatively
0.1 lower ER compared to that of raw bamboo. As a whole, whether
raw biomass, torreed biomass, or coal is used for gasication, a
0 CC of over 97% can be achieved if the value of the ER is high
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1
enough.
O/Fratio Instead of the monotonic distributions developed in the CC, the
CGE curves of the three materials are characterized by a maximum
(b) Torrefied bamboo distribution, as shown in Fig. 10. This characteristic is consistent
0.6
CO2
H 2O
0.5 H2
CO
100
0.4
Mole fraction

90
0.3
Carbon conversion (%)

0.2 80

0.1 70

0
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 60
O/Fratio
Raw bamboo
Torrefied bamboo
50
(c) Coal Coal
0.6
CO2
H 2O 40
0.5 H2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
CO
ER
0.4
Mole fraction

Fig. 9. Distribution of carbon conversion versus equivalence ratio.

0.3
90
0.357 Raw bamboo
0.2
80 Torrefied bamboo
Coal
0.1 70
Cold gas efficiency (%)

60 0.434
0
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1
O/Fratio 50

Fig. 8. Distributions of gas concentration in the product gas from the gasication of 40
(a) raw bamboo, (b) torreed bamboo, and (c) coal at various O/F ratios.
0.692
30

Overall, a lower O/F ratio is conducive to CO formation, whereas a 20

higher O/F ratio makes the formation of H2 go up. In regard to coal
gasication, the concentrations of CO and H2 are higher than those 10
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
of CO2 and H2O when the O/F ratio is less than 1.0, stemming from ER
the lowest O/C and H/C ratios and the highest HHV among the
three fuels. Fig. 10. Distributions of cold gas efciency versus equivalence ratio.

Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
10 W.-H. Chen et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx
with results of Kumar et al. [40]. The most appropriate ER values
for the gasication of raw biomass, torreed biomass, and coal
are shown to be 0.692, 0.434, and 0.357, respectively. Correspond-
ing to these values, the O/F ratios are 0.9, 0.7, and 0.7, and the max-
imum values of CGE are 28.98%, 54.52%, and 80.82%, respectively.
The pronounced difference between the curves for raw bamboo
and torreed bamboo reveals that torrefaction can make the prop-
erties of biomass move toward that of coal, and the maximum CGE
of bamboo is improved by 88%. When the ER exceeds the most
appropriate values, the CGE decays, implying that over oxidation
of fuel occurs, whereby the syngas formation decreases.
4. Conclusions
The gasication phenomena of three different fuels, including
raw bamboo, torreed bamboo, and coal in an entrained-ow gas-
ier are explored and compared using a numerical method. In view
of the signicant differences in caloric values among the three
fuels, the reaction temperature in the gasier is signicantly af-
fected by the feedstocks. The maximum temperature from the gas-
ication of raw biomass is lower. Once bamboo is torreed, the
maximum temperature rises notably. It is noted that the values
for the CC of the three fuels are higher than 90%, but there exists
a pronounced discrepancy in the CGE. The concentrations of H2O
and CO2 in the product gas from the gasication of raw bamboo
are relatively high, so its CGE is merely around 29%. More H2 and
CO are generated from the gasication of torreed bamboo, and
its CGE increases to 49.8, accounting for a 77% enhancement in
the CGE. The higher the O/F ratio or ER, the higher the CC is. How-
ever, the CGE decreases once the ER is large to a certain extent. Cor-
responding to the gasication of raw bamboo, torreed bamboo,
and coal, the optimum values of ER are 0.692, 0.434, and 0.357,
respectively. Under conditions of optimum ER, the CGE of bamboo
is amplied by 88% after undergoing torrefaction. Torrefaction
makes the gasication behavior of biomass approach that of coal;
it is thus summarized that this thermal pretreatment method is a
promising technique by which to improve the properties of bio-
mass for the purpose of enhancing its gasication performance.
Taiwan is a subtropical island with abundant biomass. In addition,
over 6.3 MT of refuse was incinerated in 2011 [41]. Therefore, tor-
refaction is a potential method to upgrade biomass and refuse for
the developments of solid fuel and gasication while they are con-
sumed for energy.
Acknowledgment
The authors gratefully acknowledge the nancial support of the
National Science Council, Taiwan, ROC, for this study.
References
[1] BP. Statistical Review of World Energy; 2012.
[2] Pettinau A, Ferrara F, Amorino C. Techno-economic comparison between
different technologies for a CCS power generation plant integrated with a sub-
bituminous coal mine in Italy. Appl Energy 2012;99:329.
[3] Chen WH, Chen JC, Tsai CD, Jiang TL. Transient gasication and syngas
formation for coal particles in a xed-bed reactor. Int J Energy Res
2007;31(9):895911.
[4] Grobl T, Walter H, Haider M. Biomass steam gasication for production of SNG
process design and sensitivity analysis. Appl Energy 2012;97:45161.
[5] Zhan X, Zhou Z, Wang F. Catalytic effect of black liquor on the gasication
reactivity of petroleum coke. Appl Energy 2010;87:17105.
[6] Jakobs T, Djordjevic N, Fleck S, Mancini M, Weber R, Kolb T. Gasication of high
viscous slurry R&D on atomization and numerical simulation. Appl Energy
2012;93:44956.
[7] Shen CH, Chen WH, Hsu HW, Sheu JY, Hsieh TH. Co-gasication performance of
coal and petroleum coke blends in a pilot-scale pressurized entrained-ow
gasier. Int J Energy Res 2012;36:499508.
[8] Ahmed II, Gupta AK. Sugarcane bagasse gasication: global reaction
mechanism of syngas evolution. Appl Energy 2012;91:7581.
Please cite this article in press as: Chen W-H et al. A comparison of gasication phenomena among raw biomass, torreed biomass and coal in an en-
trained-ow reactor. Appl Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.034
[9] Chmielniak T, Sciazko M. Co-gasication of biomass and coal for methanol
synthesis. Appl Energy 2003;74:393403.
[10] Chen WH, Wu JS. An evaluation on rice husk and pulverized coal blends using a
drop tube furnace and a thermogravimetric analyzer for application to a blast
furnace. Energy 2009;34:145866.
[11] Du SW, Chen WH, Lucas JA. Pulverized coal burnout in blast furnace simulated
by a drop tube furnace. Energy 2010;35:57681.
[12] Chen WH, Du SW, Tsai CH, Wang ZY. Torreed biomasses in a drop tube
furnace to evaluate their utility in blast furnaces. Bioresour Technol
2012;111:4338.
[13] Chen WH, Cheng WY, Lu KM, Huang YP. An evaluation on improvement of
pulverized biomass property for solid fuel through torrefaction. Appl Energy
2011;88:363644.
[14] Chen WH, Hsu HC, Lu KM, Lee WJ, Lin TC. Thermal pretreatment of wood
(Lauan) block by torrefaction and its inuence on the properties of the
biomass. Energy 2011;36:301221.
[15] Rousset P, Macedo L, Commandre JM, Moreira A. Biomass torrefaction under
different oxygen concentrations and its effect on the composition of the solid
by-product. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2012;96:891.
[16] Duncan A, Pollard A, Fellouah H. Torreed, spherical biomass pellets through
the use of experimental design. Appl Energy 2013;101:23743.
[17] Tapasvi D, Khalil R, Skreiberg , Tran KQ, Grnli M. Torrefaction of Norwegian
birch and spruce: an experimental study using macro-TGA. Energy Fuels
2012;26:523240.
[18] Chen WH, Lu KM, Tsai CM. An experimental analysis on property and structure
variations of agricultural wastes undergoing torrefaction. Appl Energy
2012;100:31825.
[19] Wu KT, Tsai CJ, Chen CS, Chen HW. The characteristics of torreed microalgae.
Appl Energy 2012;100:527.
[20] Repellin V, Govin A, Rolland M, Guyonnet R. Energy requirement for ne
grinding of torreed wood. Biomass Bioenergy 2010;34:92330.
[21] Li J, Brzdekiewicz A, Yang W, Blasiak W. Co-ring based on biomass
torrefaction in a pulverized coal boiler with aim of 100% fuel switching.
Appl Energy 2012;99:34454.
[22] Prins MJ, Ptasinski KJ, Janssen FJJG. More efcient biomass gasication via
torrefaction. Energy 2006;31:345870.
[23] Deng J, Wang GJ, Kuang JH, Zhang YL, Luo YH. Pretreatment of agricultural
residues for co-gasication via torrefaction. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2009;86:3317.
[24] Couhert C, Salvador S, Commandre JM. Impact of torrefaction on syngas
production from wood. Fuel 2009;88:228690.
[25] Strege J, Swanson M, Folkedahl B, Stanslowski J, Laumb J. FischerTropsch
catalyst testing in a continuous bench-scale coal gasication system. Fuel
Process Technol 2011;92:75763.
[26] Morsi SA, Alexander AJ. An investigation of particle trajectories in two-phase
ow systems. J Fluid Mech 1972;55:193208.
[27] Silaen A, Wang T. Effect of turbulence and devolatilization models on coal
gasication simulation in an entrained-ow gasier. Int J Heat Mass Trans
2010;53:207491.
[28] Smith IW. The combustion rate of coal char: a review. Proc Combust Inst
1982;19(1):104565.
[29] Wen CY, Chaung TZ. Entrainment coal gasication modeling. Indust Eng Chem
Prod Res Dev 1979;184:68495.
[30] Du SW, Chen WH, Lucas J. Performance of pulverized coal injection in
blowpipe and tuyere at various operational conditions. Energy Convers
Manage 2007;48:206976.
[31] Du SW, Chen WH. Numerical simulation and practical improvement of
pulverized coal combustion in blast furnace. Int Commun Heat Mass
Transfer 2006;33:32734.
[32] Roberts DG, Harris DJ. Char gasication with O2, CO2 and H2O: effects of
pressure on intrinsic reaction kinetics. Energy Fuels 2000;14:4839.
[33] Jones WP, Lindstedt RP. Global reaction schemes for hydrocarbon combustion.
Combust Flame 1988;733:23349.
[34] Macias-Garcia A, Cuerda-Correa Eduardo M, Diaz-Diez MA. Application of the
RosinRammler and GatesGaudinSchuhmann models to the particle size
distribution analysis of agglomerated cork. Mater Charact 2004;52:15964.
[35] Chen CJ, Hung CI, Chen WH. Numerical investigation on performance of coal
gasication under various injection patterns in an entrained ow gasier. Appl
Energy 2012;100:21828.
[36] Lv PM, Xiong ZH, Chang J, Wu CZ, Chen Y, Zhu JX. An experimental study on
biomass airsteam gasication in a uidized bed. Bioresour Technol
2004;95:95101.
[37] Skodras G, Someus E, Grammeils P, Palladas A, Amerantos P, Basinas P, et al.
Combustion and environmental performance of clean coal and products. Int J
Energy Res 2007;31:123750.
[38] Rousset P, Aguiar C, Labbe N, Commandre JM. Enhancing the combustible
properties of bamboo by torrefaction. Bioresour Technol 2011;102:822531.
[39] Chen WH. A simplied model of predicting coal reaction in a partial oxidation
environment. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer 2007;34:6239.
[40] Kumar K, Eskridge K, Jones DD, Hanna MA. Steam-air uidized bed gasication
of distillers grains: effects of steam to biomass ratio, equivalence ratio and
gasication temperature. Bioresour Technol 2009;100:20628.
[41] Environmental Protection Administration. Yearbook of Environmental
Protection Statistics of Republic of China (Taiwan); 2012.