Reliability of Equilibrium Gasification Models for Selected Biomass Types and Compositions: An Overview

Linda Moretti, Fausto Arpino, Gino Cortellessa, Simona Di Fraia, Maria Di Palma and Laura Vanoli
Additional contact information
Linda Moretti: Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of Cassino and South Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy
Fausto Arpino: Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of Cassino and South Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy
Gino Cortellessa: Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of Cassino and South Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy
Simona Di Fraia: Department of Engineering, University of Naples, 80143 Naples, Italy
Maria Di Palma: Department of Engineering, University of Naples, 80143 Naples, Italy
Laura Vanoli: Department of Engineering, University of Naples, 80143 Naples, Italy

Energies, 2021, vol. 15, issue 1, 1-21

Abstract: In this paper, the authors present an overview of biomass gasification modeling approaches with the aim of evaluating their effectiveness as a modeling tool for the design and optimization of polygeneration plants based on biomass gasification. In fact, the necessity to build plant operating maps for efficiency optimization requires a significant number of simulations, and non-stoichiometry equilibrium models may allow fast computations thanks to their relative simplicity. The main objective consists of the assessment of thermodynamic equilibrium models performance as a function of biomass type and composition to better understand in which conditions of practical interest such models can be applied with acceptable reliability. To this aim, the authors developed two equilibrium models using both a commercial software (referred as Aspen model) and a simulation tool implemented in a non-commercial script (referred as analytical model). To assess their advantages and disadvantages, the two models were applied to the gasification simulation of different biomasses, employing experimental data available from the scientific literature. The obtained results highlighted strengths and limitations of using equilibrium models as a function of biomass type and composition. For example, they showed that the analytical model predicted syngas composition with better accuracy for biomass types characterized by a low ash content, whereas the Aspen model appeared to fairly predict the syngas composition at different conditions of ER; however, its accuracy might be reduced if the properties of the treated biomass changed.

Keywords: gasification; biomass; syngas; modeling; equilibrium model; stoichiometric; Gibbs free energy minimization approach (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/1/61/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/1/61/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2021:i:1:p:61-:d:708938

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().