Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 275–283 | Cite as

The potential of small-scale SNG production from biomass gasification

  • Sebastian Fendt
  • Alexander Tremel
  • Matthias Gaderer
  • Hartmut Spliethoff
Original Article

Abstract

Synthetic natural gas (SNG) can be produced from biomass by thermochemical gasification and subsequent synthesis gas methanation and gas processing. For an industrial-scale process with high efficiency (up to 74 %; Rönsch et al. in VGB PowerTech 5:110–116, 2008), the large plant size is associated with a number of disadvantages such as a high biomass transportation volume and local environmental impacts. Small distributed SNG production units would minimize these negative aspects but are expected to cause lower efficiency. In order to show the potential of a small-scale SNG solution, different process chain configurations are simulated using Aspen Plus software. Combined heat and power generation via gasification and direct product gas conversion in a gas engine is compared to a SNG route, where the product gas is further cleaned, converted, and upgraded to SNG. Different gasification technologies (co-current fixed bed, countercurrent fixed bed, and dual fluidized bed) are evaluated. The SNG route is based on a dual fluidized bed gasification, subsequent methanation, and injection into the natural gas grid. As an outcome of the simulations, the efficiencies are calculated with special focus on heat integration and utilization. A maximized utilization of the released process heat results in a strong overall efficiency increase. Depending on the local heat utilization, gasification with subsequent methanation has an advantage compared to direct local power generation. The overall efficiency of the SNG option is found to be up to 73.9 %, which is within the range of the fluidized bed gasification option. The crucial factor for high efficiency, and thus for an economic operation, is the heat demand at the location. With even a small constant heat demand, the SNG solution becomes very competitive as some of the heat otherwise generated on-site is translated into chemical energy and carried to a power generation location elsewhere. It has been shown that SNG production subsequent of a small-scale fluidized bed gasifier can very well be efficient in both energetic and economic regards. The most important and crucial parameter is the heat utilization on-site and thus the local heat demand characteristics.

Keywords

SNG Gasification Biomass Simulation Heat utilization 

Abbreviations

SNG

Synthetic natural gas

CHP

Combined heat and power

CCPP

Combined cycle power plant

REA

Restricted equilibrium approach

LHV

Lower heating value

wt%

Weight percent

cel

Power production costs (in euro cents per kilowatt hour of electricity)

ca

Annual costs (euros)

ron

Revenues on-site heat utilization (euros)

roff

Revenues off-site heat utilization (euros)

Qel

Net power generation per year (kilowatt hours of electricity)

Pint

Internal power consumption (kilowatts)

\( \dot{m} \)

Mass flow (product gas or biomass) (kilograms per second)

η

Efficiency (percent)

References

  1. 1.
    Kopyscinski J, Schildhauer TJ, Biollaz S (2010) Production of synthetic natural gas (SNG) from coal and dry biomass—a technology review from 1950 to 2009. Fuel 89:1763–1783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rönsch St, Dreher M, Vogel A, Kaltschmitt M (2008) Erdgassubstitut aus biogenen Festbrennstoffen. VGB Powertech 5:110–116Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Van der Meijden CM, Veringa HJ, Rabou L (2010) The production of synthetic natural gas (SNG): a comparison of three wood gasification systems for energy balance and overall efficiency. Biomass Bioenergy 34:302–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang L, Weller CL, Jones DD, Milford AH (2008) Contemporary issues in thermal gasification of biomass and its application to electricity and fuel production. Biomass Bioenergy 32:573–581MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gassner M, Maréchal F (2009) Thermo-economic process model for thermochemical production of synthetic natural gas (SNG) from lignocellulosic biomass. Biomass Bioenergy 33:1587–1604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tremel A, Stemann M, Gaderer M, Spliethoff H (2009) Process efficiency of small scale SNG production from biomass. 17th European Biomass Conference & Exhibition, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pröll T, Hofbauer H (2008) Development and application of a simulation tool for biomass gasification based processes. Int J Chem React Eng 6:A89Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    University of Technology Vienna (2010) Biofuels database BIOBIB. http://www.vt.tuwien.ac.at/biobib/wood.html. Accessed 17 May 2011
  9. 9.
    DVGW (2004) Technische Regeln Arbeitsplatt G262, November 2004Google Scholar
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    Verein deutscher Ingenieure (VDI) (2000) Economic efficiency of building installations—Fundamentals and economic calculations. VDI 2067 part 1, Düsseldorf 2000Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rauch R (2011) Development of the biomass CHP Güssing to a biosyngas platform. GreenSyngas consortium meeting in Güssing, Austria, 22–23 February 2011Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baumeister U (2006) Gaserzeugung aus fester Biomasse—Marktfähigkeit heute. Gesellschaft für Nachhaltige Stoffnutzung mbH, http://www.tll.de/ainfo/pdf/mdebioet/btf10_06.pdf. Accessed 19 Dec 2011
  14. 14.
    Pörner (2008) Biofuel of 2nd Generation: EDL finishes project for CHOREN. http://www.poerner.at/80.0.html?&L=2. Accessed 19 Dec 2011
  15. 15.
    Vogel A, Bolhàr-Nordenkampf M, Kaltschmitt M, Hofbauer H (2006) Analyse und Evaluierung der thermo-chemischen Vergasung von Biomasse. Fachagentur für Nachwachsende Rohstoffe, Schriftreihe “Nachwachsende Rohstoffe” Band 29Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    ASUE e.V. (2011) BHKW-Kenndaten 2011. http://asue.de/cms/upload/broschueren/2011/bhkw-kenndaten/asue-bhkw-kenndaten-0311.pdf. Accessed 19 Dec 2011
  17. 17.
    Zweiler R (2008) Energiesysteme der Zukunft—Energetisch und wirtschaftlich optimierte Biomasse-Kraft-Wärmekopplungssysteme auf Basis derzeit verfügbarer Technologien. Projektnummer 812771, Renet-Kompetenzknoten Güssing—Forschungsinstitut für erneuerbare Energie GmbHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastian Fendt
    • 1
  • Alexander Tremel
    • 1
  • Matthias Gaderer
    • 1
  • Hartmut Spliethoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Energy SystemsTechnische Universität MünchenGarchingGermany

Personalised recommendations