[Gasification] Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 34
Ananda S.K. Weerakkody
askweerakkody at gmail.com
Mon Aug 21 21:52:32 CDT 2006
Hi Dick,
There are many types of Bio-mass found in mountain loads, which are not very
easy to turn into compost. I'll give you two exaples found in plenty in
tropics. Rice Husk and Coconut Shells. These are ideal gasifying stuff.
Widely used in S.E.Asia for power generation. In fact coconut shell is an
ideal fuel in Kevin's gasifier stoves.Unfortunately the nearest coconut tree
is thousands of Kilometers away to Kevin in Nova Scotia.
I don't know much about methane production from wood chips but Kewin can
turn his 100yrs old wood chips together with plants from the lakes in to a
valuable fertilizer called "VERMI-COMPOST".He can employ "African Night
Crawler Worms" to do this job without pay. They work 24 hours non stop. The
just borns too go to work streight away. They convert any vegetable matter
ncluding Cow Manure into Vermicompost. High quality organic feryilizer.
Ananda
On 8/22/06, gasification-request at listserv.repp.org <
gasification-request at listserv.repp.org> wrote:
>
> Send Gasification mailing list submissions to
> gasification at listserv.repp.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> gasification-request at listserv.repp.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> gasification-owner at listserv.repp.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Gasification digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: which one is better (Kevin Chisholm)
> 2. Re: which one is better (Dick Glick)
> 3. Re: which one is better (Kevin Chisholm)
> 4. Re: Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 33 (Ananda S.K. Weerakkody)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 15:35:27 -0300
> From: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
> To: "Dick Glick" <dglickd at pipeline.com>, <MMBTUPR at aol.com>,
> <redlerm at yahoo.com>, <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
> Message-ID: <004401c6c488$2920ce50$0c9a0a40 at kevin28mxtjznn>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
> reply-type=original
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 15:03:18 -0400
> From: "Dick Glick" <dglickd at pipeline.com>
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
> To: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>, <MMBTUPR at aol.com>,
> <redlerm at yahoo.com>, <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
> Message-ID: <006001c6c48b$4cc428e0$0200a8c0 at cfrdell>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
> reply-type=response
>
> 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
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 17:15:12 -0300
> From: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
> To: "Dick Glick" <dglickd at pipeline.com>, <MMBTUPR at aol.com>,
> <redlerm at yahoo.com>, <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
> Message-ID: <004a01c6c495$5a0a1820$0c9a0a40 at kevin28mxtjznn>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
> reply-type=response
>
> Dear Dick
>
> I live in Nova Scotia... cool in Winter, comfortable in summer., with a
> mean
> annual temperature of about 7 C. There is limited agriculture in the
> immediate area, and manure is in great demand for fields. As far as I
> know,
> there never was an anaerobic manure system within 100 miles of here.
>
> There is a pond in front of my place. I can retrieve trees from it that
> would be more than 100 years old... the outer 2" are rotted, but the
> interior is still solid wood. Clearly, the wood would have to be chipped,
> but still, it took 100 years + to rot 2" of wood. On the other hand, if I
> had access to sufficient manure, to give a C/N ratio of about 30, such
> chips
> would probably go off like a Roman Candle, ie, all the ingredients would
> be
> in place and the reaction would complete in weeks rather than centuries.
>
> I would like to access a practical and reasonably economic system running
> primarily on wood chips, yielding about 3-10 kW of electric power output
> for
> about 10 hours per day. I don't have a source of plant or animal based
> nitrogen for biodigestion, other than harvesting pond weed. I could
> probably
> harvest about 50 tons per year from the pond, to yield a dry weight of
> about
> 3 to 5 tons containing perhaps 1/2 ton of nitrogen. To give you a
> perspective on tankage costs, a concrete basement for a typical home costs
> about $C10,000.
>
> It would seem to me that some solution other than biomethane would be a
> better way to go. More specifically, a gasifier-engine-generator system
> would seem best to me at the present.
>
> I would very much appreciate any further comments on possible ways to make
> biomethane from wood chips economically.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Kevin
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dick Glick" <dglickd at pipeline.com>
> To: "Kevin Chisholm" <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>; <MMBTUPR at aol.com>;
> <redlerm at yahoo.com>; <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
> Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 4:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
>
>
> > 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
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:44:24 +0800
> From: "Ananda S.K. Weerakkody" <askweerakkody at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 33
> To: gasification at listserv.repp.org
> Message-ID:
> <ca424480608202044g5751ffa8qa7c2be43d9f56cb8 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> *Well said! Thank you.*
> *This is a forum, I see, that well respected people in the industry
> participate. Better, just watch ,what they say.*
> **
> *Ananda*
> *(Engr Ananda Weerakkody*
> *Philippines & Sri Lanka)*
>
>
>
> On 8/21/06, gasification-request at listserv.repp.org <
> gasification-request at listserv.repp.org> wrote:
> >
> > Send Gasification mailing list submissions to
> > gasification at listserv.repp.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >
> > http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
> >
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > gasification-request at listserv.repp.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > gasification-owner at listserv.repp.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Gasification digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. List Etiquette, Gasification and Ethanol (Tom Miles)
> > 2. which one is better (shelton victor)
> > 3. Re: which one is better (Michael Redler)
> > 4. Re: which one is better (MMBTUPR at aol.com)
> > 5. Re: which one is better (Dick Glick)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 13:49:22 -0700
> > From: "Tom Miles" <tmiles at trmiles.com>
> > Subject: [Gasification] List Etiquette, Gasification and Ethanol
> > To: <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
> > Message-ID: <000001c6c3d0$f3faed80$0200a8c0 at Hp1270>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> > All,
> >
> > List Etiquette:
> > Those who can find nothing better to post than complaints about other
> list
> > members can do us all a favor by not posting at all. When you post this
> > drivel you drive away valuable contributors to the discussion. People
> > "vote
> > with their feet" and leave the list.
> >
> > We rely on list members treating each other with courtesy and respect.
> We
> > rarely find it necessary to censure or ban anyone from the list. Let's
> > keep
> > it that way.
> >
> >
> > Gasification, Anerobic Digestion and Ethanol:
> > We will increasingly see topics of gasification and anaerobic digestion
> > combined with the production of ethanol. Jane Turnbull described two
> > ethanol
> > plants that are installing gasifiers. One is driving a thermal oxidizer
> > for
> > (volatile organic carbon) emissions control with heat and power
> > byproducts.
> > The other seeks to convert distillers grains and corn stover to energy
> for
> > the evaporators and dryers in the ethanol plant.
> >
> > Gasification to syngas is an important path for the conversion of
> > cellulose
> > to ethanol and other liquid fuels. Several companies have recently
> > proposed
> > pilot and production facilities for the thermal conversion of corn
> stover
> > and/or wheat straw to syngas for liquid fuels production. Gasfiication
> of
> > biosolids from anaerobic digestion is also being proposed. Some of these
> > were for a USDOE soliciation that was due last week. Through grants
> USDOE
> > will make a substantial investment to offset risk in developing the new
> > technology. These are $150 million plants. Some major ethanol producers
> > had
> > cellulose-to-ethanol projects in their development plans prior to the
> > USDOE
> > solicitation and will continue toward that goal. Having just attended a
> > North Central workshop on this topic in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, I can
> > tell you that there are serious public and private investments being
> made
> > in
> > these technologies. There are major technical challenges in converting
> > agricultural wastes to syngas. These will be discussed on this list in
> > coming weeks, months and years as the new facilites are built and
> tested.
> >
> > There are a few processes in which biomass is gasified, the gas is
> > cleaned,
> > and then passed though liquid fermenters to produce alcohol and a
> > byproduct
> > medium calorific value gas. I have worked with one of these systems at
> the
> > pilot scale and the results are interesting.
> >
> > So let's keep an open mind and make positive comments toward the
> > development
> > of these technlogies rather than waste time beating up folks who raise
> > questions that may be only slightly off topic.
> >
> > Thanks for your cooperation
> >
> > Tom Miles
> > Bioenergy Lists Administrator
> > www.trmiles.com
> >
> > Gasification:
> > http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
> > Anaerobic Digestion:
> > http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_listserv.repp.org
> > Bioconversion, Ethanol and Liquid Fuels:
> >
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/bioconversion_listserv.repp.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 08:03:51 +0100 (BST)
> > From: shelton victor <sheltonvictor at yahoo.co.in>
> > Subject: [Gasification] which one is better
> > To: gasification at listserv.repp.org, Tom Jopson <tomj at growpro-inc.com>
> > Message-ID: <20060820070351.78809.qmail at web8411.mail.in.yahoo.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> >
> > hello
> >
> > Which one is better- Gasifier based dedicated gas engines or Gasifier
> > based steam turbines for power generation
> >
> > 1. what will be the unit cost for power generated for the above both and
> > space occupied, invsetment.
> > 2.the syn gas has to be cooled of before engine--whats the min possible
> > temp the gas can be cooled, what will be the problems it the
> temperatures go
> > below the recomended gas temp.any waste heat recovery(WHR) possible
> > 3.although the exhaust of gas engine can be done for WHR up to 180 C,
> but
> > is it viable to generate power using a steam turbine
> >
> > 4. similarly for gasifier based steam turbine the above first cond
> > 5.considering the same power and same fuel for both the cases
> >
> > have a great time
> > bye
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Here's a new way to find what you're looking for - Yahoo! Answers
> > Send FREE SMS to your friend's mobile from Yahoo! Messenger Version 8.
> Get
> > it NOW
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 06:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Michael Redler <redlerm at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
> > To: gasification at listserv.repp.org
> > Message-ID: <20060820131754.39317.qmail at web51315.mail.yahoo.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> >
> >
> > Shelton wrote: "Which one is better- Gasifier based dedicated gas
> engines
> > or Gasifier based steam turbines for power generation?"
> >
> > That's an excellent and provocative question!
> >
> > I don't remember where I picked up these numbers but, I think
> > reciprocating steam engines have a thermal efficiency of 17% and
> Internal
> > combustion engines (Otto) are somewhere around 25%. I don't know that
> steam
> > turbines are.
> >
> > The point I'm getting at is maybe gassifiers can bring boiler efficiency
> > up to the point that all steam technology can compete with IC engines.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > shelton victor <sheltonvictor at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> > hello
> >
> > Which one is better- Gasifier based dedicated gas engines or Gasifier
> > based steam turbines for power generation
> >
> > 1. what will be the unit cost for power generated for the above both and
> > space occupied, invsetment.
> > 2.the syn gas has to be cooled of before engine--whats the min possible
> > temp the gas can be cooled, what will be the problems it the
> temperatures go
> > below the recomended gas temp.any waste heat recovery(WHR) possible
> > 3.although the exhaust of gas engine can be done for WHR up to 180 C,
> but
> > is it viable to generate power using a steam turbine
> >
> > 4. similarly for gasifier based steam turbine the above first cond
> > 5.considering the same power and same fuel for both the cases
> >
> > have a great time
> > bye
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 4
> > Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:17:07 EDT
> > From: MMBTUPR at aol.com
> > Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
> > To: redlerm at yahoo.com, gasification at listserv.repp.org
> > Message-ID: <c1d.1c5aba0.3219c8e3 at aol.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 5
> > Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:45:07 -0400
> > From: "Dick Glick" <dglickd at pipeline.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Gasification] which one is better
> > To: <MMBTUPR at aol.com>, <redlerm at yahoo.com>,
> > <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
> > Message-ID: <005701c6c46f$9d514200$0200a8c0 at cfrdell>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
> > reply-type=original
> >
> > 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
> >
> > End of Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 33
> > *******************************************
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gasification mailing list
> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
>
> End of Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 34
> *******************************************
>
More information about the Gasification
mailing list