[Gasification] water injection of producer gas fired ic engines

[Jesse Klinkhamer]

Dear Peter,

Emulsion has been being used for years and is currently being used in Tokyo
on many major public transit bus routes in the city center as an alternative
cleaner burning fuel.

Please have a look at the simple emulsion systems available.

http://www.kleanindustries.com/s/Refining.asp?ReportID=128054 

There is very little in this world that has not been done before!

Kind regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: gasification-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Peter Wilson
Sent: July 6, 2006 4:47 PM
To: Harmon Seaver
Cc: Gasification
Subject: Re: [Gasification] water injection of producer gas fired ic engines

That is an interesting question. I had always thought that it was possible
to get a higher energy content from producer gas by applying the blue water
gas process, after the initial gasification stage. This would introduce the
water gas shift reaction into the gas at a much earlier stage. What may not
be possible is carrying all the water on board, as well as the weight (and
expense) of another reactor vessel to make the blue water gas.

Has anyone tried this in a vehicle application (somehow I doubt it).

Peter

--
Peter Wilson
Dunedin, NZ


On 7/7/06, Harmon Seaver <hseaver at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/6/06, jim mason <jimmason at whatiamupto.com> wrote:
> (snip)
> >
> > 1.  the relatively high emission of unburned CO is producer gas fired
> > ic motors (10-20% i think) would be reduced, with a related increase
> > in power.
> >
>    Why would there be any unburned CO? There shouldn't be any if the
> engine is appropriate for woodgas; i.e., of high enough compression
> and spark advanced enough. And as long a stroke as possible.
>
>
>
> > 2. the notorisously slow flame front of producer gas would be
> > generally increased as the CO would complete its combusion faster.
> > higher rpms would be possible.  but also for the same reason, the
> > engine would be limited to lower compression ratios.
>
>   Bad move, that. You want at least 16:1 compression. More is better.
>
>
> >
> > for a slow speed genset, all this is likley not helpful, as the slow
> > rpm tends to give enough time for full combustion to happen.  for a
> > mobile application where momentary higher power is needed, this seems
> > very important and potentially very helpful.
>
>    For the vehicle applications, diesels are the best bet -- that way
> you not only have the appropriate compression, but the injection pump
> will automagically add more fuel when needed. So you can have
> essentially almost full rated hp when accelerating or hillclimbing,
> but then run most of the time just on woodgas.
>
>
>
> --
> Harmon Seaver
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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