[Gasification] which one is better

[Dick Glick]

Hello Kevin and Friends --

Know those problems -- cover the ponds that those manure anaerobic systems 
are associated with and add those things -- if termites attack, as they do 
with rice straw and even eucalyptus, although slow conversion under these 
conditions, but, with stirring will do the trick.  The pond system would 
have to be treated as a batch system -- need more than one pond.

Although seemingly far removed, palm oil ponds -- haven't got those covered 
yet -- produce a magnificent anaerobic compost -- the compost adds 
significant value where organic fertilization is useful.

There is still the old problem -- I live in the semi-tropics and most of the 
list reference their experience from -- the 'use-to-be' -- frigid north.  A 
covered pond may be slow in the north, but the such systems can be treated 
as landfills -- with recirculation of biofluid.

Best, Dick Glick
www.CorpFutRes.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
To: "Dick Glick" <dglickd at pipeline.com>; <MMBTUPR at aol.com>; 
<redlerm at yahoo.com>; <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better


> Dear Dick
>
> Could you pleaser outline a process for attaining methane from spruce, fir 
> and White Birch wood chips, in an area where there is relatively little 
> agricultural or nitrogenous waste?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dick Glick" <dglickd at pipeline.com>
> To: <MMBTUPR at aol.com>; <redlerm at yahoo.com>; 
> <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 12:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
>
>
>> Hello All --
>>
>> Gasification is, possibly, a 'small scale' use of biomass -- biomass 
>> should
>> not be burned -- when separated, biomass waste should be made into 
>> compost
>> and fertilizer (see, for example, 
>> http://www.rain.org/~sals/ingham.html)--
>> when biomass is obtained from a single agricultural source --  
>> methanogenic
>> anaerobic fermentation -- is the only answer.  At least that's the 
>> opinion
>> from this corner -- whatever the scale -- small or country-wide.
>>
>> Best, Dick Glick
>> www.CorpFutRes.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: <MMBTUPR at aol.com>
>> To: <redlerm at yahoo.com>; <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 10:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
>>
>>
>>>               to    Gasification               from    Lewis L Smith
>>>
>>> We should consider a broader range of options for the use of biomass,
>>> including at least the following ---
>>>
>>> •     Undensified feedstock > boiler > steam turbine > kWe or CHP
>>>
>>> •     Densified feedstock > boiler > steam turbine.
>>>
>>> •     Densified feedstock > cofiring with coal [or something else].
>>>
>>> •     Gasification > blending with pipeline natural gas.
>>>
>>> •     Gasification > boiler > steam turbine
>>>
>>> •     Gasification > gas turbine > kWe [with or without waste heat
>>> boiler].
>>>
>>> •     Gasification > IC engine > kWe or CHP
>>>
>>> Cordially. End of message.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gasification mailing list
>>> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
>>> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
>>> http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gasification mailing list
>> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
>> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
>> http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification
>