[Gasification] Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 34
Dick Glick
dglickd at pipeline.com
Tue Aug 22 07:02:29 CDT 2006
Hello Ananda --
Composting is what I do starting with all food waste -- let the 'black
soldier fly grubs' -- turn food stuff coming out of the kitchen -- including
various soft papers but no meat as our system is not fully protected from
animal invaders, into a protein rich mixture that we then add to yard
items -- keeping on one area in the yard -- crawlers invade -- and after a
few days -- voila -- a nitrogen rich compost. I have some more info and
pictures if anyone is interested.
Best, Dick Glick
www.CorpFutRes.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ananda S.K. Weerakkody" <askweerakkody at gmail.com>
To: <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 34
> 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
>> *******************************************
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
More information about the Gasification
mailing list