Re: GAS-L: Tar Standards and Codes

["Tom Reed" <tombreed@attbi.com>]

Dear All:

I am posting this message from my friend Prof. Ganesh at the Indian
Institute of Technology, Bombay, (Prof. Parikh is there also).  They have
probably done more practical work on gasifier/engine systems than any group
in the world.

We look forward to her final publication.....

Yours truly,             Thomas Reed              Moderator GASIFICATION
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anuradda Ganesh" <aganesh@me.iitb.ac.in>
To: "Tom Reed" <tombreed@attbi.com>
Cc: "Thomas Koch" <Tk@tke.dk>; "Kollol Dey" <cicbcal@cal2.vsnl.net.in>;
"Gas - L" <gasification@crest.org>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: GAS-L: Tar Standards and Codes


> Dear Prof Reed and all,
>
> The fact that we are already saying that FB gasifiers have 10,000-50,000
> ppm tar nd DD gasifiers have only 100-1000ppm, shows that one has measured
> them. If accuracy or non-accuracy was not the issue, then it becomes very
> important to define these figures with reference to a particular method of
> sampling and analysis of these tars and particulates.
>
> I will explain this more explicitly. I have just complted a study on
> comparison of three of the sampling techniques commomnly used in India for
> measurement of tar and particulates. The final report is being made and
> is not yet ready for public disclosure. However, I am in a position to
> give this example.
>
> On simultaneous measurement of tar and particlaute using two of the
> techniques, we found that for the same gasifier-system operating, the tars
> measured by one was about 10 times that by the other. The figure for
> particulates , however , was found to be of the same range using both the
> techniques. This still does not qualify the technique giving higher values
> as best or absolute, as we could have something better. Probably what one
> needs to know is, w.r.t. one method (could be any) what is the tolerance
> of
> the end-user-- both numbers and quality/constituents of
> tar/particulate. Then with existing co-relations one could have an option
> of various techniques.
>
>
> You may also be aware, that India already has very clearly laid out
> procedure for testing and certification of updraft and downdraft gasifier
> systems,.India also has a procedure for monitoring the performance of
> gasifiers on site.
>
> Now in view of the discrepency in values, one needs to set the standards
> for amounts of T &P  w.r.t a particular sampling method and analysis
> procedure. Otherwise, a gsifier falling into a" good" gasifier class may
> be
> declared as" bad"  in terms of the T & P  generate , measured by two in
> dependent groups using two different techniques.
>
> anuradda
>
>
>
>
>
> Prof.Anuradda Ganesh
> Energy Systems Engineering,
> I.I.T Bombay, Powai, Mumbai - 400 076.
>
> Phone  (W) 576 7886     (H) 576 8886,  572 0762
> FAX    (91)-22-572 6875, 572 3480
>
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Tom Reed wrote:
>
> > Dear Thomas and all:
> >
> > Thomas puts it very well when he says...
> >
> > >  The problem about this protocol is that it is initiated by
researchers and driven forward by researchers.
> >
> > A second problem is that the EEC (with tons of money) is mostly focussed
on fluidized bed gasifiers which make tars in the raw gas of 10,000-50,000
ppm.  When they reduce them by a factor of 100 they think they are doing
well. But downdraft gasifiers have only initially 100-1000 ppm tar in the
raw gas when properly operated.  Tar measurements suitable for the first
case don't have the sensitivty required for the second case.
> >
> > A third problem is that money and time is no object... the more the
better.  While those of us in small gasifiers want to find a gas that is
clean enough for engines and don't care too much about the exact analysis of
the tar.
> >
> > So, we should all be interested in high sensitivity, low cost, fast
tests and many of us are working on it.  The Bacharach Smoke Meter (cost
$75) comes pretty close to a good quality test and I have been trying to
make it quantitative with some success.
> >
> > Yours truly,                     TOM REED                     BEF
GASWORKS
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: Thomas Koch
> >   To: Kollol Dey ; Gas - L
> >   Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 2:39 AM
> >   Subject: Re: GAS-L: Standards and Codes
> >
> >
> >   Dear Kollol
> >
> >   That is a very relevant subject you discuss.
> >
> >   In EU there have been a work ongoing on stardadisation on tar
measurement going on for some years.
> >   Search on "Tar protocol" to get more information.
> >   The problem about this protocol is that it is initiated by researchers
and drive forward by researchers.
> >
> >   Do you have the tiem to explain how you are used to conduct
performance test?
> >
> >   New input would be very helpfull for us in the biomass field.
> >
> >
> >   Thomas KOch
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     ----- Original Message -----
> >     From: Kollol Dey
> >     To: Gas - L
> >     Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 9:54 AM
> >     Subject: GAS-L: Standards and Codes
> >
> >
> >     Dear ALL,
> >
> >     1.0    I wish to know the internationally accepted standard codes
that are available for conducting the "Performance Test" of a bio gasifier -
whether it be moving bed, fluidised bed or entrained bed type. Can anyone
help?
> >     I understand that ASME has a PTC - 47 which is meant for an IGCC
units. But have no idea as to how much of this can be adopted in checking
the performance of a biomass gasifier? I also understand that ASME had a
code for conducting Performance Tests on a coal based producer gas plant - I
think it was PTC - 16, but I believe this code has been with drawn for
sometime.
> >     If someone is working on such a code - good !
> >     But if this is not so, then isn't it time that a PTC for biomass
gasifiers be drawn up ?
> >
> >     2.0    Further, the petroleum and petrochemical industry rely on API
for standards, codes and recommended practices. Isn't it time that such
things also be introduced in this industry (biomass gasification)  so that
there are guidelines for buyers of biomass gasifiers to go by? I am sure
this will be interest of the industry and will keep away a lot of "tall
claims and counter claims"once the industry sees such internationally
accepted standards and codes.
> >
> >     Comments please !!
> >
> >     K.Dey.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>



Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,  tombreed@attbi.com Biomass =
Energy Foundation, www.woodgas.com
List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>
-
Gasification List Archives http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/200202/
Bioenergy 2002 http://www.bioenergy2002.org/
200 kWe CHP Discussion
http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification/200kWCHP.html
Gasification Reference http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html

>