4.4 Article

Gasification and its emission characteristics for dried sewage sludge utilizing a fluidized bed gasifier

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10163-011-0016-y

关键词

Sewage sludge; Gasification; Emission characteristics; Fluidized bed gasifier; Cold gas efficiency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Various research has attempted to determine the proper treatment of sewage sludge, including thermal technologies. Efficient thermal technologies have been focused on because of their energy saving/energy recovery. Gasification technology can be considered one of these approaches. In this study, the characteristics of gasification reactions were investigated with the aim of finding fundamental data for utilizing sewage sludge as an energy source. For the experiments on sewage sludge gasification reaction characteristics, a laboratory-scale experimental apparatus was set up with a fluidizing bed reactor of 70-mm inner diameter and 600-mm total height using an electric muffle furnace. The experimental materials were prepared from a sewage treatment plant located in Seoul. The reaction temperature was varied from 630 to 860 degrees C, and the equivalence ratio from 0.1 to 0.3. The gas yields, compositions of product gas, and cold gas efficiencies of product gas were analyzed by GC/TCD and GC/FID installed with a carboxen-1000 column. The experimental results indicated that 800 degrees C, ER 0.2 was an optimum condition for sewage sludge gasification. The maximum yield of product gas was about 44%. Producer gas from experiments was mainly composed of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and methane. The cold gas efficiency of sewage sludge gasification was about 68%. The H-2/CO ratio and CO/CO2 ratio were about 1.1 and 1.4, respectively, in optimum reaction conditions. Gaseous pollutants such as SO2, HCl, NH3, H2S, and NO2 were also analyzed at various gasification/combustion conditions, and their gaseous products were compared, showing significantly different oxidized product distributions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据