IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2021i1p61-d708938.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reliability of Equilibrium Gasification Models for Selected Biomass Types and Compositions: An Overview

Author

Listed:
  • Linda Moretti

    (Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of Cassino and South Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Fausto Arpino

    (Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of Cassino and South Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Gino Cortellessa

    (Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of Cassino and South Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Simona Di Fraia

    (Department of Engineering, University of Naples, 80143 Naples, Italy)

  • Maria Di Palma

    (Department of Engineering, University of Naples, 80143 Naples, Italy)

  • Laura Vanoli

    (Department of Engineering, University of Naples, 80143 Naples, Italy)

Abstract

In this paper, the authors present an overview of biomass gasification modeling approaches with the aim of evaluating their effectiveness as a modeling tool for the design and optimization of polygeneration plants based on biomass gasification. In fact, the necessity to build plant operating maps for efficiency optimization requires a significant number of simulations, and non-stoichiometry equilibrium models may allow fast computations thanks to their relative simplicity. The main objective consists of the assessment of thermodynamic equilibrium models performance as a function of biomass type and composition to better understand in which conditions of practical interest such models can be applied with acceptable reliability. To this aim, the authors developed two equilibrium models using both a commercial software (referred as Aspen model) and a simulation tool implemented in a non-commercial script (referred as analytical model). To assess their advantages and disadvantages, the two models were applied to the gasification simulation of different biomasses, employing experimental data available from the scientific literature. The obtained results highlighted strengths and limitations of using equilibrium models as a function of biomass type and composition. For example, they showed that the analytical model predicted syngas composition with better accuracy for biomass types characterized by a low ash content, whereas the Aspen model appeared to fairly predict the syngas composition at different conditions of ER; however, its accuracy might be reduced if the properties of the treated biomass changed.

Suggested Citation

  • Linda Moretti & Fausto Arpino & Gino Cortellessa & Simona Di Fraia & Maria Di Palma & Laura Vanoli, 2021. "Reliability of Equilibrium Gasification Models for Selected Biomass Types and Compositions: An Overview," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-21, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2021:i:1:p:61-:d:708938
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/1/61/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/1/61/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sanaye, Sepehr & Alizadeh, Pouria & Yazdani, Mohsen, 2022. "Thermo-economic analysis of syngas production from wet digested sewage sludge by gasification process," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 524-539.
    2. Salem, Ahmed M. & Elsherbiny, Khaled, 2022. "Innovative concept for the effect of changing gasifying medium and injection points on syngas quality: Towards higher H2 production, and Free-CO2 emissions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    3. Valentina Segneri & Jean Henry Ferrasse & Antonio Trinca & Giorgio Vilardi, 2022. "An Overview of Waste Gasification and Syngas Upgrading Processes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-7, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2021:i:1:p:61-:d:708938. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.