Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
industry
INDUSTRIAL
CHARCOAL
PRODUCTION
June 2008
Zagreb, Croatia
www.drveniugljen.hr
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Editors:
Dr Julije Domac
Dr Miguel Trossero
Production:
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
INDUSTRIAL CHARCOAL
PRODUCTION
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
CONTENTS
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
UNITS
Area
2
ha hectare (10,000 m )
Distance
m metre
Energy
J Jouletoe tonne oil equivalent (41,868 TJ)W Watt (=J/s)Wh Watt-hour (3600 J)
Mass
g gram gx gram of matter at a reference moisture content (MCw) of x %m t
tonne (1000 kg) tx tonne of matter at a reference moisture content (MCw) of x
%m
Temperature
o
C degrees Celsius K Kelvin
Time
d day (24 hours)h hours secondyr standard year (365 days, 8760 h)
Volume
3 3
litre m b cubic metre, bulk volume m s cubic metre, solid matter (bulk
3
volume less voidance) m a cubic metre, solid matter including its pores
(apparent volume)
Prefixes
-3
m milli (10 )
-2
c centi (10 )
3
k kilo (10 )
6
M Mega (10 )
9
G Giga (10 )
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
12
T Tera (10 )
15
P Peta (10 )
18
E Exa (10 )
Subscripts
1 with energy units: primary energy 2 with energy units: secondary energy b
3
with m : bulk volume (equal to the specific volume times [1-porosity]) d on a dry
basis daf on a dry and ash-free basis e electric G gross M mechanical m with
3
%: mass percent N net p at constant pressure s with m : specific (or true)
volume of solid material th thermal v at constant volume v with %: volume
percent w on a wet basis
Currencies
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
3
1/ kg/m a is the apparent density. It assumes the volume of a piece of
charcoal, including the pores.
2/ Cited by Foley (1986).
3/ These are dry basis values. Approximately, for dry basis values, fixed carbon
= total charcoal - volatile matter
ash. 4/ EN 1860-
2:2005.
Tabel 1, Standards for barbecue charcoal and charcoal briquettes, according
to EN 1860.
Charcoal: Carbon (fix), dry basis > 75% Ash, dry basis < 8% Moisture, wet
basis < 8% Granulation [d > 80 mm] < 10%
[d > 20 mm] > 80% [0 mm < d < 10
3
mm] < 7% Bulk density > 130 kg/m b
Charcoal briquettes: Carbon (fix), dry
basis > 60% Ash, dry basis < 18%
Moisture, wet basis < 8% Granulation
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
When trees are being cut, their wood contains 50%m-60%m water (on a
wet basis). The question as to what extent the wood is to be dried prior to
carbonisation, should be analyzed from two angles: attainable yield and
productivity. With regard to yield, the basic issue is whether the volatile
matter released during carbonisation does not only carry sufficient energy
for heating the dry-matter wood to the required processing temperature of
o
about 400 C, but also for heating and evaporating all of the water
contained in the wood as well. Theoretical thermodynamical equilibrium
analysis for an ideal process without heat losses shows that the charcoal
making process does not require the wood to be dried further than about
50%m (w) prior to the carbonisation process. One can also make charcoal
from wood at higher moisture contents, but then one has to sacrifice part
of the material that otherwise could have been turned into charcoal.
However, in actual practice it was found that the presence of moisture
may have strong positive effects on charcoal yield. Mok and Antal
speculate that this is due to the moisture’s role as a catalyst in charcoal
5
formation. To develop an understanding of this phenomenon, one should
go beyond thermodynamical equilibrium theory, and analyze
carbonization at the level of secondary chemical reactions of the vapours
released during carbonization.
To some extent the presence of moisture has a negative influence
on productivity. This is because the heating of water, and its evaporation
takes time. Yet another aspect is, that drying always comes with a cost.
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Grønli (2003), while stating that “the details of the chemistry that underlies the
improved yields are not understood.”
8
There are thus several opposing effects, and the optimum moisture
content depends on the technology employed. An MCw of 30% in the wood
feed gives good results in the Carbo Twin Retort. Usines Lambiotte
6
recommend an MCw as low as 10% for the Lambiotte Shaft Furnace.
For the charcoaler, the mass of the output, and therefore that of the wood input
counts. However, wood is most often sold in volumetric units. To make it even
more complicated wood volumes are either given as solid volume, or as bulk
(or stacked) volume. A traditional unit for wood is the stère, which is equal to 1
3
m of stacked (outer) volume. A stère of fuelwood is estimated at
3 3 7
0.65 m s, whereas a stère of pulpwood is approximately 0.72 m s. Conversion
of these units of volume to units of mass, is dependent on the wood species,
and on the moisture content of the wood.
The mass equivalence of a stère of fuelwood, after having been dried to any
8
moisture content, say MCw,2, can be estimated as follows:
ρ
s,0
. kg
1stereMC ≈ 065 MC
w,1 w,2
1 − MCw,2
where ρs,0 is the density of the dry solid wood, and MWw,1 and MCw,2 are the
wet basis moisture contents of the fresh and the dried wood, respectively. The
density of the dry solid wood, ρs,0 is specific for the wood species. Note that the
original moisture content (MWw,1) does not play a role in the estimate of the
dried mass. This is, because the density of the dry wood is supposed to be
known. If that is not the case, the mass of the dried stère can still be estimated,
however, under such a circumstance the initial moisture contents and the mass
of the “wet” stère should be determined. In that case the equivalent mass of a
dried stère can be estimated from:
1 − MCw,2
10
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
mass2 = mass 1.
1 − MC
w,1
10
2 CHARCOAL PRODUCTION PROCESSES
m
biomass feed
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Yields are usually in the range of 5%-20%, and they vary with the skills of
the operators. Also the quality of the charcoal thus manufactured is
variable. Carbonisation rates (or the Cfix content) differ, and there can be
contamination with ash, sand and mud. The range of yields and qualities
is narrower (tending towards higher yields and better qualities) for the
improved kiln methods.
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
There is not much capital involved in mound and pit kilning technology (apart
from labour and feed stock). Productivity is also low. Improved kilning
techniques do involve substantial investments.
13
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Figure 3, Beehive kilns in Canyon Creek, Wise River Ranger District, Montana
(USA)
14
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Most modern industrial charcoal makers use retorts for their process. In a
retort, the pyrolysis vapours are separated from the feed material, before
being combusted. Only the vapours are used to provide the energy
sustaining the process. Exceptionally additional fuels are used, e.g. for
start-up and in case of feed material that is too wet. Direct contact of the
biomass feed with oxygen from air is being prevented. In this manner it
ensured that the entire biomass feed is available for the conversion into
charcoal. If carried out properly, charcoal yields from retort processes can
be very high. However, the development of retort technologies in the past
may have had other reasons than yield optimization alone: separation
enables the manufacturer to produce a variety of chemicals, such as
acetic acid, wood vinegar, and methanol. Today, the production of these
by-products is no longer viable in view of of the competition with other
manufacturing processes.
There are many methods of implementing the retort principle. Most of them
have been developed by the charcoal producers themselves, and few of them
are commercially offered. An implication is that knowledge of the processes
fades away, as firms who employ them halt their production over time. Some
indicative names of existing (or commercially lost) retort processes for the
carbonisation of lump wood are: Arkansas or Waggon Retort, Carbo Twin
Retort, Badger-Stafford Process (no longer in use), SIFIC Process and the
related Lambiotte Retort, Degussa Retort (Reichert Retort), VMR (no longer in
use) and the O.E.T Calusco Tunnel Retort. In these retort processes, the wood
feed is either externally heated through a shell (Carbo Twin Retort, Waggon
Retort, O.E.T Calusco), or through direct contact with the combusted pyrolysis
vapours (Lambiotte, Degussa).
For the carbonisation of biomass grains, such as saw dust or nut shells,
the following indicative names are found: Herreshoff Furnace (storey furnace),
Antal’s flash carbonisation technique (in the R&D phase), the Pyro rotary
furnace (being demonstrated).
15
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
16
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
18
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Exhaust gas
19
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
The Carbo Twin Retort is fed with wood that has been cut to sizes in the range
of 30x30x10cm. The optimum moisture content is about 30% (wet basis). The
o
temperature of the exhaust gas from the Carbo Twin Retort is about 580 C,
and suitable to drive a thermal wood dryer. The charcoal yield, complying with
EN 1860, is 30% or higher.
In comparison with kilning technologies for charcoal production, the Carbo Twin
Retort technology is very low on emissions to air. This is because the vapours
are completely combusted into CO2 and H2O. Thus the emission of other
polluting gases, such as CH4, CO and higher C-compounds is negligeable.
20
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
The Croatian firm Belišće operates a Waggon Retort system. The system
th
is also known under the name of Arkansas Retorts. During the late 19
th
and early 20 centrury it was widely used in Europe and the USA. The
process lost ground due to the development of semicontinuous systems
like those of Lambiotte and Degussa, which showed lower overall
operating costs. The Waggon
1
9
Retort system was particularly noted for high maintenance costs of the
steel waggons and the shell of the retort itself.
The complex operation and the changing heat exposure of the various
plant components result in relatively high maintenance, supervision and
operating costs.
21
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
The O.E.T Calusco Tunnel Retort has been described in the literature, but
its operation could not be confirmed in the course of this project.
20
3.4 LAMBIOTTE
22
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Wood enters the retort from the top through a lock-hopper. On its way down,
the wood passes a drying zone, the carbonisation zone and and a charcoal
cooling zone. The carbonization vapours are removed through the top of the
retort. In the SIFIC variant, the condensable fraction is taken through coolers
and scrubbers, to remove certain commercial components. The remaining gas
is burnt in a combustion combustion chamber. One part of the combustion
gases is injected in the middle of the retort, to serve as a heating medium for
drying and carbonisation. Another part is cooled and re-injected at the bottom
of the retort for cooling the charcoal. The Lambiotte process being continuous,
a homogeneous quality of wood feed is essential. The wood should be
prepared into lieces of about 10 cm, and the moisture content should be below
25% (wet basis).
23
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
technology.
A new market for charcoal could be that of industrial fuels, including fuels
for the electricity sector. Here, charcoal could become an alternative for
mineral coal and fuel oil. In this market, the position of charcoal would be
based on two properties: its biological origin (and thus its suitability as a
sustainable carbon-neutral fuel) and its potential of contributing to the
politically desired diversification of supplies. However, charcoal is not the
only product that can play this role. Alternative products that could serve
the same energy market include pyrolysis oil and wood pellets. Torrefied
19
wood is also occasionally mentioned as an alternative fuel product.
However, whether it can be offered attractively in the market has not been
analyzed nor demonstrated yet.
The potential of pyrolysis oil for the energy market was elaborated by
20
Siemons in 2002. The product is not yet commercially offered at an
industrial scale, although a 2 MW pilot plant is currently being built in
21
Uganda and is planned to be operational in fall 2008.
Wood pellets are traded as a biomass substitute fuel for coal in electrical
power plants. Just a few examples taken from a presentation for the
22
UNFCCC:
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
in blast-furnaceprocesses.
19/ Torrefaction, as a biomass fuel treatment technique (low-temperature
carbonization) has certain advantagesin view of energy use for fuel
preparation (drying, pulverization). See, e.g., Prins, M.J., Ptasinski, K.J. et
al. (2006a)and (2006b).
20/ Siemons (2002).
21/ The plant of Clean Fuels Kakira Ltd. will supply local industries with
pyrolysis oil as a substitute for Heavy FuelOil.22/ Gert Schultz (Energi E2
- Denmark).
2
3
Unit 2 (510 MWe) of Avedoere Power Station in Denmark combusted
300,000 t of wood pellets in 2001.
Unit 2 (82 MWe) of Amager Power Station in Denmark combusts
150,000 t of straw pellets annually.
In 2006, Danish power plants used 570,000 t of wood in the form of
pellets and chips, and 910,000 t of pelletized straw. This is equivalent to an
effective power of 420 MW (assuming a conversion efficiency of 45% and 7000
full-load equivalent operational hours annually).
Denmark is not the only European country that produces and imports biomass
pellets as a substitute for fossil fuels. E.g. also The Netherlands are substantial
importers. An unsubstantiated source claims the existing European
23
consumption of 8 million tonnes of pellets annually. A published market
review is not currently available.
These fuels are suitable for trading because of their ease of application
(storage, handling, combustion), as well as their cost-effective calorific value
and density. Indicative parameter values are given in Table 3. A comparison of
energy density, suggests that in terms of transportation costs, pyrolysis oil is
the most attractive biomass derived fuel, and that charcoal is less attractive
than pellets. On the other hand, this argument only applies when large
transportation distances are involved. Additionally, charcoal is less costly to
pulverize than pellets. So, for power plants and industries such as cement
works, its usage could be more attractive than pellets, especially if theyare
supplied from within the region. A comparative study is not known.
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
23/
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/business/stories/070415woodpellets.ht
ml24/ E.g. Henrich and Dinjus (2003)
Scale-economy
Yield
27
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Clearly, although the issue seems to be simply this: what are the improvements
in yield that we may expect from further R&D?, a theoretical approach should
be quite complicated in order to be valid.
25/ Schenkel, Bertaux et al. (1998).26/ Antal, Mok, Varhegyi and Szekely
(1990), Antal and Grønli (2003).
and conclude that the yield of charcoal would be 27.7% (being the mass ratio
of 3.74 mole of carbon per mole of cellulose). We cannot agree with Antal and
Grønli that this would be an indicator for “the theoretical carbon yield” of the
carbonisation process, since we observe that this charcoal consists purely of
fixed carbon in the formof graphite. One could propose to extend the model by
allowing an incomplete reaction (prior to achieving equilibrium), so that a fixed
carbon content of 75% results, like for commercial charcoal. The maximum
theoretical charcoal yield would then become 37% (= 27.7%/75%). But still - is
this the theoretical maximum? It is hard to say, because the equilibrium
calculations of Antal and Grønli are not based on a chemical reaction model,
but merely on the thermal equilibrium of their own postulated final products
(CO2, C (graphite), H2O, CH4 and CO). An intriguing question concerns the role
of secondary vapour reactions for the formation of charcoal. The relevance of
those reactions is supported by a host of scientific reports, and this was also
recognized by Antal and Grønli.
28
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Antal, M. J. jr. and M. Grønli, The art, science, and technology of charcoal
production, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2003, 42, 1619-1640.
Deglise, X. and Magne, P., Pyrolysis and Industrial Charcoal, in Hall, D.O.,
Overend, R.P., Biomass, Eds., New York, 1987.
30
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Mok, W. S., Antal, M.J. jr., Szabo, P., Varhegyi, G. and Borbala Zelei,
Formation of Charcoal from Biomass in a Sealed Reactor, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 1992,31, 1162-1166
Prins, M.J., Ptasinski, K.J. et al. (2006), "More efficient biomass gasification via
torrefaction." Energy, ECOS 2004 - 17th International Conference on
Efficiency, Costs, Optimization, Simulation, and Environmental Impact of
Energy on Process Systems 31 (15): 3458-3470.
Prins, M.J., Ptasinski, K.J. et al. (2006), "Torrefaction of wood: Part 2. Analysis
of products." Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 77 (1): 35-40.
Schenkel, Y., Bertaux, P. et al. (1998), "An evaluation of the mound kiln
carbonization technique." Biomass and Bioenergy 14 (5-6): 505-516.
Schultz, G. (Energi E2 - Denmark), Modern biomass utilisation,
http://unfccc.int/files/methods
_and_science/mitigation/application/pdf/eu_schultz.pdf.
Violette, M., Mémoire sur les Charbons de Bois, Ann. Chim. Phys. 1853, 32,
304.
ANNEX A ADDRESSES
CARBONISATION EQUIPMENT
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
I.T.B. s.r.l. Via San Rocco 818 24033 Calusco d’Adda (Bg) Italy Tel : +39 035
791 800 Fax : +39 035 794 068 Email : info@itbiomass.com
Lambiotte & Cie S.A. 18, Av. des Aubépines B-1180 Brussels Belgium Tel. :
+32 2 374.44.65 Fax : +32 2 375.31.55 E-mail : mail@lambiotte.com
CHARCOAL MANUFACTURE
Austria
Gebrüder Gruber Gesellschaft m.b.H. Steinholz 23 A-3263 Randegg Tel:
(07487) 8410 gruberholz@aon.at Mr Johann Gruber
Czech Republic
LESS a.s.
Rajnochovice 276 768 71 - Czech Republic Tel: +420 777 320 730 Tel: +420
573 391 118 macik@less.cz www.dreveneuhli.cz/de_index.html Mr.Miroslav
Macík Mr.Pavel Svoboda
EKOGRILL, s.r.o. Cvrčovice - Karla Čurdy 119 CZ-27341 Brandýsek Tel: 313
564 732 ekopor@volny.cz www.volny.cz/ekopor/
Croatia
HORMAR d.o.o.
P. Svačića 15 HR-43280 Garešnica Tel: 043 / 44 50 21 Tel: 098 / 43 61 27 Tel:
043 / 53 14 94 Tel: 098 / 23 95 69 Fax: 043 / 53 14 94 mario.horvat@bj.t-
com.hr Mr. Mario Horvat
KRIŽEVCI - PRODUKT d.o.o. Dr. Ferde Kerna 8 HR-48260 Križevci Tel: 048 /
71 45 94 Fax: 048 / 71 45 94 Mr. Zdenko Jaki
Belišće
France
ETS CALLEGARI CHRISTIAN Chez FAURE 17130 COURPIGNAC France
Phone : +33 5 46 70 30 57 Fax : +33 5 46 49 71 39
Navarre
32
32
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
Chemviron Carbon 58, Avenue Wagram 75017 PARIS 17 France Phone : +33
8 00 80 28 52 Fax : +33 8 00 10 07 12
Carbo France EURL 55290 MONTIERS SUR SAULX France Phone : +33 3 29
75 98 80 Fax : +33 3 29 75 88 83
Germany
proFagus GmbH Uslarer Straße 30
-371 94 Bodenfelde Telefon +49 55 72 1 94 4-0 - Fax +49 55 72 I 94 4-1 31
Netherlands
Carbo Group b.v. Bedrijvenpark Twente 168 7602 KE ALMELO Netherlands
Tel: +31546570462 Tel: +31653449505 Fax: +31546570604 Email:
h.brand@carbo.nl Mr. Hajo Brandt
Slovakia
SLZ CHÉMIA, a.s. Hlavná 133 SK-98111 Hnúšťa Tel: 047/5422104 Tel:
047/5422165 Fax: 047/5422552 predajslzchemia@stonline.sk
www.slzchemia.sk Ing. Jaroslava Maceková
FAO TCP 3101: Industrial charcoal production
34