sábado, 7 de dezembro de 2013

Fwd: farming with only less water and sunlight


******************************************************************************************
Dr.PAGANDAI .V.PANNIRSELVAM
ASSOCIATE . PROF.UFRN.
Research Group ,GPEC, Coordinator Computer aided  Cost engineering
DEQ – Departamento de Engenharia Química
CT – Centro de Tecnologia / UFRN, Lagoa Nova – Natal/RN
Campus Universitário. CEP: 59.072-970;North East,Brazil

********************************************************************************************
Recent web home page :http://greentechvision.snack.ws/
Project, Projetos: https://sites.google.com/a/biomassa.eq.ufrn.br/sites/
Newsletters, Jornal: http://storify.com/ufrngpec 
Web On line  simulation and modeling of ecobusiness,
Espaço Simulação e Modelagem de Econegócios on line http://rizzoma.com/topic/39080026fabcc04f140acb7d294d62e1/ 
********************************************************************************************
Twitter and  Skype :@ufrngpec
Fone ;Office,84 3215-3769 ,  Ramal 210 e Home : 84 3217-1557
and Mobile :5584 9954 8770
Office email:gpecufrn@biomassa.eq.ufrn.br
**********************************************************************************************

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Pannir Selvam Pagandai V <pvpabr@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 12:23 PM
Subject: Fwd: farming with only less water and sunlight
To: Pagandai Vaithianthan Pannir Selvam <pannirbr@gmail.com>


Find article attached with this mail reagrding natural farming using less water and sunlight
Regards
Kailas
  thanking  Kailash 
--
Pagandai V Pannirselvam

http://ecosyseng.wetpaint.com
http://pannirbr.googlepages.com
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - UFRN
Departamento de Engenharia Química - DEQ
Centro de Tecnologia - CT
Programa de Pós Graduação em Engenharia Química - PPGEQ
Grupo de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Custos - GPEC

Av. Senador Salgado Filho, Campus Universitário
CEP 59.072-970 , Natal/RN - Brasil





segunda-feira, 2 de dezembro de 2013

Unasylva - No. 71 - Charcoal from portable kilns and fixed installations

Fwd: [Gasification] Small gasifiers for electricity


******************************************************************************************
Dr.PAGANDAI .V.PANNIRSELVAM
ASSOCIATE . PROF.UFRN.

Office email:gpecufrn@biomassa.eq.ufrn.br
**********************************************************************************************


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Anderson <psanders@ilstu.edu>
Date: Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 2:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Small gasifiers for electricity
To: gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org, alexis belonio <atbelonio@yahoo.com>, mhbelonio@yahoo.com


Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (psanders@ilstu.edu) Add cleanup rule | More info

Dear all,    Here is the latest from Alexis Belonio who has major progress (and products) for electricity generation using rice husk gasification.   Some are larger than 10 kWe.    I have no additional information, but will forward to the Listserv any further messages.  Email addresses for Alexis and his son Michael are receiving this message also.      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^    Hi Paul,    I am developing such system on small scale, around 10 kWe.  You can visit the following site at youtube    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-Y2Rl5FZMY    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLx-kAw-R-8    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz1soshERwM      Good day!!    Alexis
Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD    Email:  psanders@ilstu.edu     Skype: paultlud      Phone: +1-309-452-7072  Website:  www.drtlud.com
On 12/1/2013 10:12 PM, Tom Miles wrote:

Jeff,

 

You do manage to dig up interesting collections. I note that the patents were all about 1960. At that time our friend Andy  Baker the USFS Forest Products Lab was publishing reviews of charcoal and carbonization. I don't know what would have stimulated the market at that time besides barbecue charcoal.    

 

The gasifiers that I am referring to have a primary purpose of providing hot raw gas for process heat. They wind up with a carbon rich ash that makes good biochar.

 

Tom

 

From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Davis
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2013 6:30 PM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Small steam systems plus gasifiers for electricity

 

On 12/01/2013 06:57 PM, Tom Miles wrote:

Updraft gasifiers (>10 MWth) have been good sources of char for one biochar wholesaler/broker.


Tom,

Sounds like a money producer!

Updraft gasifier anthing like the Thomas Retort?

Can be found at this link:
<http://www.fao.org/docrep/00950e/00950e07.htm>

I found the patents to the other kiln:

<https://www.google.com/patents/US3090731>

<https://www.google.com/patents/US3140987>

<https://www.google.com/patents/US3110652>

<https://www.google.com/patents/US2589895>


Lets get carbonizing....



Jeff



_______________________________________________  Gasification mailing list    to Send a Message to the list, use the email address  Gasification@bioenergylists.org    to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page  http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org    for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:  http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/  


_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Gasification@bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/



sábado, 30 de novembro de 2013

Proceedings | GAS TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE

http://www.gastechnology.org/tcbiomass2013/Pages/2013-Presentations.aspx

tcbiomass2013 Presentations and Posters

View the posters and virtual tours shown at the conference.

 

Gasification I Presentations
  • Making it Real, Kevin Craig, U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
  • Low Grade Fuel to High Quality Energy by Gasification, Ilkka Hannula, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
  • Two Years Experience of the BioDME Project - A complete Wood to Wheel Concept, Ingvar Landälv, Luleå University of Technology
  • Bio2G – A Full-Scale Reference Plant in Sweden for Production of Bio-SNG (Biomethane) Based on Thermal Gasification of Biomass, Dr. Björn Fredriksson Möller, E.ON Gasification Development
  • Techno-economic and Market Analysis of Pathways from Syngas to Fuels and Chemicals, Michael Talmadge, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
  • Indirect vs. Direct Gasification, Bram van der Drift, ECN
  • Green Gases from Solid Biomass: How They Could Boost the Bioenergy Applications with a Decentralized Vision, Marc Perrin, GDF SUEZ - CRIGEN
  • Aviation Biofuels Ready To Fly, Robert M. Sturtz, World Fuel Services
  •  

    Gasification II Presentations
  • Biomass Combined Heat and Power in the Agricultural Processing Sector Using Fluidized Bed Gasification, Matt Summers, West Biofuels LLC
  • Biomass Co-Firing Solutions, Tyler Biddle, Metso Power
  • Green Energy: A Sustainable Energy and Waste Diversion Solution, Tim Cesarek, Enerkem
  • The Role of Structure and Composition in Gasification Reactivity of Biomass Char, Pradeep K. Agrawal, Georgia Institute of Technology
  • Reforming Catalyst Performance During a Pilot Scale Demonstration of Biomass Syngas to Ethanol, Kim Magrini, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
  • Acid Gas and Trace Contaminant Removal from Synthesis Gas Produced by Fluidized Bed Gasification of Wood Using the Morphysorb® Process in the GTI Flex Fuel Test Facility, Dennis Leppin, Gas Technology Institute (GTI)
  •  

    Pyrolysis I Presentations
  • Thermochemical Pathway Developments in Europe – Status and Reflections, Ingvar Landälv, Luleå University of Technology
  • Alternative Heating Oil from Wood Residues - Industrial Demonstration, Reyhaneh Shenassa, Metso Power
  • Practical Application of Bio-based Pyrolysis Oil, Paula Flowers Hassett, Envergent Technologies
  • Stability of Fast Pyrolysis Bio-Oils and Upgraded Products, Anja Oasmaa, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
  • Corrosion Issues Associated with Thermochemical Production of Biofuels, James R Keiser, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
  • Predicting Detailed Products of Secondary Pyrolysis of Diverse Forms of Biomass, Stephen Niksa, Niksa Energy Associates LLC
  • The Path to Commercialization of Drop-in Cellulosic Transportation Fuels, Mitchell Loescher, KiOR
  •  

    Pyrolysis II Presentations
  • Conversion of Algal Biomass to Liquid Fuels by Hydrothermal Processing in Continuous-Flow Reactors, Doug Elliott, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
  • Bio-Oil Stabilization and Upgrading by Hot Gas Filtration, Robert M. Baldwin, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
  • Catalytic Biomass Pyrolysis Technology Development for Advanced Biofuels, David C. Dayton, RTI International
  • Production of an Advanced Bioenergy Carrier (Bio-oil) from Biomass Catalytic Pyrolysis. Effect of Catalyst Deactivation on Bio-oil Yield and Quality, Angelos A. Lappas, Chemical Process and Energy Resources Institute (CPERI) Center for Research and Technology Hellas (CERTH)
  • Light Hydrocarbons as Hydrogen Transfer Agents for Catalytic Pyrolysis, Kristiina Iisa, National Renewable Energy Labatory (NREL)
  • Biomass to Gasoline and Diesel using Integrated Hydropyrolysis and Hydroconversion IH, Dr. Pedro Ortiz-Toral, Gas Technology Institute (GTI)
  • Advances in the Commercialization of IH Technology, Mike Demaline, CRI Catalyst Company
  •  

    Upgrading I Presentations
  • Bridge Building 101: Commercialization of IH Biomass Direct-to-Hydrocarbon Technology, Alan Del Paggio, CRI Catalyst Company
  • Tree to Tank Part 2, Niels R. Udengaard, Haldor Topsoe, Inc.
  • Fuel and Chemical Products from Biomass Syngas, Tricia Gillenwater, LanzaTech Inc.
  • Fuels of the Future – from Wood-based Raw Materials, Sari Mannonen, UPM Biofuels
  • Enabling Extended Catalyst Lifetime in Fixed Bed Hydrotreating of Bio-Oil, Alan Zacher, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
  • Novel Ni-based Catalysts for the Hydrotreatment of Fast Pyrolysis Liquids, Erik Heeres, University of Groningen
  • Conversion of Bio-oil to Hydrocarbons Via a Low Hydrogen Route, Philip H. Steele, Mississippi State University
  •  

    Upgrading-Pretreatment II Presentations
  • Non-Sulfide based Bifunctional Catalyst for Bio-oil Hydrotreating, Huamin Wang, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
  • Improvements in the Upgrading of Biomass Pyrolysis Vapor, Mark R. Nimlos, National Renewable Energy Laboratory(NREL)
  • Upgrading of Bio-crude from Hydrothermal Liquefaction, Jessica Hoffmann, Aalborg University
  • Evaluation of Two Pathways to Produce Torrefied Pellets, Shahab Sokhansanj, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
  • Volatile Yields and Solid Grindability after Torrefaction of Various Biomass Types, Jean-Michel Commandre, CIRAD
  • A New Methodology to Model the Kinetics of Torrefaction, Lina Norberg Samuelsson, KTH Royal Institute of Technology
  •  

    Posters
  • Gasification
  • Pyrolysis
  • Upgrading
  • Pretreatment



  • Fwd: [Gasification] Fluidised bed reactor

     Very good bioenergy list  gasification expert  comments 

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: Thomas Koch <tk@tke.dk>
    Date: Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 6:34 AM
    Subject: Re: [Gasification] Fluidised bed reactor
    To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification <gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org>, Kevin <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>


    Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (tk@tke.dk) Add cleanup rule | More info

    Tom

    I agree very much to your description of the status of FB gasifiers.
    Not real upscaleable to an interesting size  - to many operations problems - too big carbon or thermal losses and too dirty gas to real interesting !
    The 2 Danish FB biomass gasifier - Pyroneer and Skive are struggling a real lot with gas cleaning.

    Do you have any idea of the status of the Viking gasifier development?

    I have asked several times if it is possible to visit the plant for over 2 years - or if there is a public report available with a little data?? but no luck sofar.

    The last information I have from the project is from linked-in where saw that the only engineer I knew on the project have left  this summer.

    Best regards

    Thomas Koch


    -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
    Fra: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org] På vegne af Tom Miles
    Sendt: 30. november 2013 07:01
    Til: 'Kevin'; 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
    Emne: Re: [Gasification] Fluidised bed reactor

    If you want to use the engine exhaust in a gasifier you must consider the heat and material balance for a gasifier and IC engine.

    Fuel input 100%
    Heat loss in FB gasifier 5%
    (Sensible) Heat loss to cooling the gas 25% Cold clean gas efficiency to engine 70% (20% C0, 20% H2, 2% CH4, 12% CO2, 44% N).
    Heat conversion in engine ~25%
    33% to power (~14-17% fuel to power)
    33% to engine jacket heat (17% net)
    33% to exhaust. (17% net, mostly CO2 and N)

    By injecting exhaust into the gasifier you are recycling a lot of inert gas (CO2, N2) and very little heat. The best use of the exhaust gas heat may be in preconditioning the fuel. Danish Technological University (DTU Viking gasifier, 1990-2010,  that is now being commercialized by Weiss) and later All Power Labs (Power Pallet, 2009) have used heat from the exhaust to indirectly dry and pyrolyze incoming fuel. The dried and partially devolatilized wood, along with preheated combustion air, appears to contribute to a stable oxidation zone. Both units make a very good quality gas. These are both fixed bed downdraft gasifiers with pre-pyrolysis zones.
    Peak temperatures reach 1000 C-1200 C in the oxidation zone and 800-900C in the reduction zones.
    http://www.btgworld.com/en/references/publications/handbook-biomass-gasifica
    tion-second-edition


    We have worked with many fluidized bed gasifiers in research and in industrial applications, for producer gas, and for synthesis gas. The fluidized bed is an intriguing reactor that has its use in industrial applications but they are expensive to build and operate.

    Fluidized bed (FB) gasifiers are unique because distributor plates or nozzles in the bed uniformly distribute the reactant (air, steam) in the sand (or media) bed. It is therefore imperative that the fuel be distributed uniformly for good gasification. This good distribution affords good temperature control as the fuel goes through the exo- and endo- thermic reactions that Kevin described. The ideal arrangement is to feed the fuel into the bed and allow sufficient time (depth) for it to completely react before breaking the surface into the vapor space above the bed. Of course there are variations on fluidized bed reactors such as spouted beds, fast beds, or entrained flow reactors. The latter are used for fast pyrolysis to liquid fuels by companies like Ensyn. I think that Dynamotive is the only company that uses a bubbling bed for pyrolysis. Many of the biomass to liquid reactors consumes the char to drive the process so there is no excess char

    When used for gasification fluidized beds can be pretty stable in the
    650-750 C range. The higher temperatures are needed to provide thermal inertia when wetter fuel (>20% MC) is used. Higher temperatures are generated by adding oxidants as Kevin has described. Higher vapor space temperatures (750 C) can be achieved by adding air above the bed. The partial oxidation can reduce NOx precursors in the fuel gas. You can think of the heat balance as consuming between 25% and 33% of the fuel to convert the remainder to chemical (producer gas or syngas) and sensible energy.
    Producer gas is burned directly in a boiler or reformed for use in engines.
    Synthesis gas is usually made using enriched air or oxygen as the reactant or by indirect heating, as in a dual fluid bed. The variety of catalytic reformers used to make synthesis gases can be seen online in the presentations at the TC Biomass 2011 and 2013 conferences.
    http://www.gastechnology.org/tcbiomass2013/Pages/2013-Presentations.aspx

    There are a few small commercial (50-100 tpd) fluidized bed/entrained flow pyrolyzers that are making specialized products (liquid smoke) for the food industry. In general there are no commercial small scale fluidized bed gasifiers or combustors.
    Attempts by US boiler makers and several small entrepreneurs have failed to sustain commercial operation of fluidized bed gasifiers or combustors at the small scale.

    Tom  Miles










    -----Original Message-----
    From: Gasification [mailto:gasification-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Kevin
    Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 9:23 AM
    To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
    Subject: Re: [Gasification] Fluidised bed reactor

    Dear Rex

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Rex Zietsman" <rex@whitfieldfarm.co.za>
    To: <gasification@lists.bioenergylists.org>
    Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 4:18 AM
    Subject: [Gasification] Fluidised bed reactor


    > Kevin,
    >
    > What you say is correct. However, there is benefit in returning some
    > exhaust
    > back to gasification as you force a higher production of CO relative to
    > CO2
    > production. I suspect it is an equilibrium thing...

    # For a gasifier having a relatively high exit temperature, then engine
    exhaust additions to the gasifier intake air could indeed be a way to both
    lower the gasifier exit temperature, and to raise the CO level.

    There is a CO/CO2 equilibrium consideration, and also a kinetics or "speed
    of reaction" consideration.

    Best wishes,

    Kevin
    >
    > Rex
    >
    >
    > ---
    > This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
    > protection is active.
    > http://www.avast.com
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Gasification mailing list
    >
    > to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
    > Gasification@bioenergylists.org
    >
    > to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
    >
    http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg
    ylists.org

    >
    > for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
    > http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/


    _______________________________________________
    Gasification mailing list

    to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
    Gasification@bioenergylists.org

    to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
    http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenerg
    ylists.org


    for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
    http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/



    _______________________________________________
    Gasification mailing list

    to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
    Gasification@bioenergylists.org

    to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
    http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

    for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
    http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/

    _______________________________________________
    Gasification mailing list

    to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
    Gasification@bioenergylists.org

    to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
    http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

    for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
    http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/



    domingo, 24 de novembro de 2013

    Fwd: sustainable biofloc auaculture



    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: Pannirselvam P.V <pannirbr@gmail.com>
    Date: Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 11:33 AM
    Subject: sustainable biofloc auaculture
    To: Mário Cardoso <mcardosozoot@gmail.com>, ecobusinessnetwork@grouplygroups.com, "pannirbr.biomassenergybr" <pannirbr.biomassenergybr@blogger.com>, GPECBIOMASS <biomasstech@googlegroups.com>, 


    Aquaculture 2010 - Meeting Abstract
    801

    SUSTAINABLE BIOFLOC TECHNOLOGY: USING BIOREACTORS TO TREAT AQUACULTURAL EFFLUENTS WHILE PRODUCING BIOFLOCS FOR SHRIMP FEED

    David Kuhn*, Addison Lawrence, Gregory Boardman, Susmita Patnaik, Lori Marsh, George Flick

    *Department of Food Science and Technology 
    Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech)
    FST Building (0418), Blacksburg, VA 24061
    davekuhn@vt.edu
    Seafood is the only protein source in the human diet that is still dependent on wild stocks, whether it comes from direct harvests or use of marine meals/oils in aquaculture diets. Experts agree that overexploitation of wild fisheries is becoming more common. Aquaculture has the potential to reduce pressure on wild populations and meet the world demand for seafood. However, significant challenges still remain and need to be overcome before aquaculture becomes more sustainable. This work addresses two problems facing the aquaculture industry, the reliance on large quantities of fresh water and the need to use unsustainable ingredients in aquaculture feeds. Specifically, researchers have investigated the feasibility of recovering and processing bioflocs generated from wastewater treatment devices used in recirculating aquaculture and using this processed biofloc as a protein-rich component for aquaculture feeds. This biofloc technology consists of two major processes: (1) biologically removing pollutants from fish effluent, which increases the feasibility of water reuse, and (2) using the resulting biofloc as a protein-rich ingredient in shrimp feed, thereby reducing other protein requirements (e.g. fishmeal). 

    Pilot-scale, sequencing batch reactors (SBRs) and membrane biological reactors (MBRs) were successfully used in this study to remove pollutants in fish effluent from a farm that uses recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS). Removals (> 85%) of ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, organic carbon, and suspended solids exceeded 85% for each parameter. Bioflocs harvested from both of these reactor types proved to be a suitable and often superior ingredient, to soybean protein and fishmeal in lab-scale feeding trials with the marine shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. High quality control diets were compared against experimental diets in 35-day feeding trials. Experimental diets were varied greatly and notable independent variables included complete replacement of soybean protein, two-thirds replacement of fishmeal, and no fish oil. Biofloc inclusion always increased growth rates and ranged from a low average increase of 4% to a high average of 67% over the control diets; the latter percent increase was significant at P < 0.01. Based on the results of our studies, it seems that biofloc technology represents a promising option for sustainability of the aquaculture industry.