Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gasification Technology

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

  • 3937 Accesses

Abstract

Gasification is still an evolving technology, not only enabling the clean-up of fossil and biomass fuels for energy production, but also tackling issues associated with growing amounts of municipal solid waste, and providing a low cost fuel for a clean hydrogen economy. A history of gasifier development starts with the utilization of coal as an industrial fuel for process heat and lighting. The ability to produce synthetic gas (syngas) has made gasification an integral component in refinery operations and the production of chemicals. Renewable fuels such as biomass, municipal solid waste, and black liquor from pulp and paper industry are also suitable fuels for gasification. The chemistry and physics of conversion of these organic fuels includes pyrolysis, combustion, gasification, as well as mineral transformations. Integrated gasification and combined cycle processes are discussed with respect to electrical power production. The distinguishing features for different types of gasifiers are described including fixed bed, fluidized bed, and entrained flow gasifiers. More than 12 major gasifiers being marketed today together with several other novel gasifiers for treating biomass and municipal solid waste are described in terms of their main features and performance to produce high quality syngas (i.e., high content of carbon monoxide and hydrogen). The hydrodynamics and kinetics of each type gasifier are reviewed along with salient differences in their performance, such as syngas composition, when using a variety of fuels under different conditions. Critical operational features that are discussed include oxidizing media, air or oxygen blown; fuel feed stock; system pressure; and downstream clean-up. Successful application of gasifier technologies has required improved refractory materials to meet the most challenging gasifier environments. Thermal integration is becoming more critical to not only improving gasifier performance, but also gaining social acceptance for the responsible use of our dwindling fossil fuels. Gas clean-up is considered with respect to the removal of potential pollutants and the shifting to environmentally benign transportation and process fuels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 1,399.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 1,699.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andrus HE et al (2013) ALSTOM’s chemical looping combustion prototype for CO2 capture from existing pulverized coal-fired power plants. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information. Retrieved from https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1113766

  • Akhtar A, Krepl V, Ivanova T (2018) A combined overview of combustion, pyrolysis, and gasification of biomass. Energy Fuel 32:7294–7318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anthony DB, Howard JB, Hottel HC, Meissner HP (1976) Rapid devolatilization and hydrogasification of bituminous coal. Fuel 55:121–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arena U (2012) Process and technological aspects of municipal solid waste gasification. A review. Waste Manag 32:625–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.09.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariyapadi S et al (2008) KBR’S Transport Gasifier (TRIG™) – an advanced gasification technology for sng production from low-rank coals. Paper presented at the Twenty-fifth Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Sep 29 – Oct 02, 2008, Pittsburgh, United States

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur J (1951) Reactions between carbon and oxygen. Trans Faraday Soc 47:164–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASTM. (2013). Standard Practice for Proximate Analysis of Coal and Coke. In Annual Book of Standards (Vol. 5). United States.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayham S, Straub D, Weber J (2017) Operation of the NETL chemical looping reactor with natural gas and a novel copper-iron material. National Energy Technology Laboratory, Pittsburgh/Morgantown…

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bayham S, Straub D, Weber J (2019) Operation of a 50-kWth chemical looping combustion test facility under autothermal conditions. Int J Greenh Gas Con 87:211–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhoi PR, Huhnke RL, Kumar A, Thapa S, Indrawan N (2018) Scale-up of a downdraft gasifier system for commercial scale mobile power generation. Renew Energy 118:25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryers RW (1995) Utilization of petroleum coke and petroleum coke/coal blends as a means of steam raising. Fuel Process Technol 44:121–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charpenay JW (1991) Analysis of coal by thermogravimetry–Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and pyrolysis modelling. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 19:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Adams TA, Barton PI (2011) Optimal design and operation of flexible energy polygeneration systems. Ind Eng Chem Res 50:4553–4566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chitsora CT, Mühlen H-J, Van Heek K, Jüntgen H (1987) The influence of pyrolysis conditions on the reactivity of char in H2O. Fuel Process Technol 15:17–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conn R (1995) Laboratory techniques for evaluating ash agglomeration potential in petroleum coke fired circulating fluidized bed combustors. Fuel Process Technol 44:95–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cothran C (2015) Syngas technologies conference. Global Syngas Technologies Conference, pp 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlin RS, Landham EC Jr (2008) Factors affecting dustcake drag in a hot-gas filter system collecting coal gasification ash. Powder Technol 180:45–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Lasa H, Salaices E, Mazumder J, Lucky R (2011) Catalytic steam gasification of biomass: catalysts, thermodynamics and kinetics. Chem Rev 111:5404–5433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Do R (2020) Technical challenges of Tees Valley project. Personal Communication: July 16, 2020. United States

    Google Scholar 

  • DOE, U. S. (2009) Overview of DOEs gasification program. http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/pubs/pdf/DOE%20Gasification%20Program%20Overview%202009%2009-03%20v1s.pdf

  • Dow (2015) Selexol™ solvent. Retrieved from http://www.dow.com/PublishedLiterature/dh_0043/0901b803800430d0.pdf?filepath=gastreating/pdfs/noreg/170-01432.pdf&fromPage=GetDoc

  • Elliot MA (1981) Chemistry of coal utilization. John Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher D et al (2011) Process analyses and R&D plans forward for dry-sorbent-based processes for removal of CO2 from power plant flue gas (Report No. DOE/NETL-2011/1475). Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher TH, Kerstein AR, Pugmire RJ, Solum M, Grant DM (1992) A chemical percolation model for devolatilization: summary. Brigham Young University

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher T, Solum M, Grant D, Critchfield S, Pugmire R (n.d.) Symposium (international) on combustion. Elsevier, pp 1231–1237

    Google Scholar 

  • Foscolo P, Gallucci K (2008) Integration of particulate abatement, removal of trace elements and tar reforming in one biomass steam gasification reactor yielding high purity syngas for efficient CHP and power plants. Paper presented at the 16th European Biomass Conference and Exhibition, Valencia, Spain

    Google Scholar 

  • Gan H, Nandi S, Walker P Jr (1972) Nature of the porosity in American coals. Fuel 51:272–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Given PH (1984) Concepts of coal structure in relation to combustion behavior. Prog Energy Combust Sci 10:149–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Given PH, Marzec A, Barton WA, Lynch LJ, Gerstein BC (1986) The concept of a mobile or molecular phase within the macromolecular network of coals: a debate. Fuel 65:155–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granite EJ, O’Brien T (2005) Review of novel methods for carbon dioxide separation from flue and fuel gases. Fuel Process Technol 86:1423–1434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guan X, Gardner B, Martin RA, Spain J (2008) Demonstration of hot gas filtration in advanced coal gasification system. Powder Technol 180:122–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hecht ES, Shaddix CR, Molina A, Haynes BS (2011) Effect of CO2 gasification reaction on oxy-combustion of pulverized coal char. Proc Combust Inst 33:1699–1706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidenreich S, Foscolo PU (2015) New concepts in biomass gasification. Prog Energy Combust Sci 46:72–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2014.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen U et al (2006) The design, construction and operation of a 75kW two-stage gasifier. Energy 31:1542–1553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2005.05.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higman C (2014) State of the gasification industry: worldwide gasification database 2014 update. Paper presented at the Gasification Technologies Conference Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Higman C (2017) GSTC syngas database: 2017 update. Paper presented at the 2017 Syngas Technologies Conference, Colorado Springs

    Google Scholar 

  • Higman C, van der Burgt M (2008) Gasification (2nd ed.). United States: Gulf Professional Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochgesand G (1970) Rectisol and purisol. Ind Eng Chem 62:37–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong YC et al (2012) Syngas production from gasification of brown coal in a microwave torch plasma. Energy 47:36–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.05.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard W (2015) Westinghouse plasma gasification: The next generation of waste-to-energy Solutions. Paper presented at the Gasification Technologies Council (GTC), Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang J, Fang Y, Chen H, Wang Y (2003) Coal gasification characteristic in a pressurized fluidized bed. Energy Fuel 17:1474–1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hupa M, Karlström O, Vainio E (2017) Biomass combustion technology development – it is all about chemical details. Proc Combust Inst 36:113–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indrawan NK, Kumar A, Kumar S (2018) In: De S, Agarwal AK, Moholkar VS, Thallada B (eds) Coal and biomass gasification: recent advances and future challenges. Springer, pp 369–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Indrawan N, Mohammad S, Kumar A, Huhnke RL (2019) Modeling low temperature plasma gasification of municipal solid waste. Environ Technol Innov 15:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indrawan N, Kumar A, Moliere M, Sallam KA, Huhnke RL (2020) Distributed power generation via gasification of biomass and municipal solid waste: a review. J Energy Inst 93:2293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaojaruek K, Jarungthammachote S, Gratuito MKB, Wongsuwan H, Homhual S (2011) Experimental study of wood downdraft gasification for an improved producer gas quality through an innovative two-stage air and premixed air/gas supply approach. Bioresour Technol 102:4834–4840

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins RG, Morgan ME (1986) Pyrolysis of a lignite in an entrained flow reactor: 3. Pyrolysis in reactive atmospheres of air, carbon dioxide and wet nitrogen. Fuel 65:769–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang S, Shen L, Niu X, Ge H, Gu H (2016) Chemical looping co-combustion of sewage sludge and zhundong coal with natural hematite as the oxygen carrier. Energy Fuel 30:1720–1729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klara J (2007) Cost and performance baseline for fossil energy plants, vol I. DOE/NETL-2007/1281, rev. 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinhans U, Wieland C, Babat S, Scheffknecht G, Spliethoff H (2017) Ash particle sticking and rebound behavior: a mechanistic explanation and modeling approach. Proc Combust Inst 36:2341–2350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi H, Howard J et al (1977) Coal devolatilization at high temperatures. Paper presented at the Symposium (international) on combustion

    Google Scholar 

  • Könemann J-W (2017) Syngas technologies conference. Global Syngas Technologies Council, pp 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalsky G, Leppin D, Palla R, Jamal A, Hooper H (2003) Morphysorb® applied to De-bottlenecking of gas treating system. Gastips 9:28–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruse A (2008) Supercritical water gasification. Biofuel Bioprod Biorefin: Innov Sustain Econ 2:415–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Villetta M, Costa M, Massarotti N (2017) Modelling approaches to biomass gasification: a review with emphasis on the stoichiometric method. Renew Sust Energ Rev 74:71–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee B, Hong Y et al (2012) PE-IGCC based gasification of low grade coal and biomass for distributed generation in the rural area. Paper presented at the 2012 Seoul S&T Forum, Oct 31 – Nov 3, Seoul

    Google Scholar 

  • Levenspiel O (1999) Chemical reaction engineering (3rd ed.). New York, United States: Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Linde (2015a) Acid gas removal and sulfur recovery. Retrieved from http://www.linde-engineering.de/process_plants/gas_processing/acid_gas_sulfur.php

  • Linde (2015b) Rectisol® wash. Retrieved from http://www.linde-engineering.com/en/process_plants/hydrogen_and_synthesis_gas_plants/gas_processing_plants/rectisol_wash/index.html

  • Lowry HH (1963) Chemistry of coal utilization: Supplementary volume. United States: Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyngfelt A, Linderholm C (2014) Chemical-looping combustion of solid fuels–technology overview and recent operational results in 100 kW unit. Energy Procedia 63:98–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan OP, Yarzab R, Walker PL Jr (1978) Unification of coal-char gasification reaction mechanisms. Fuel 57:643–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahinpey N, Gomez A (2016) Review of gasification fundamentals and new findings: reactors, feedstock, and kinetic studies. Chem Eng Sci 148:14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2016.03.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mak J, Wierenga D et al (2003) New physical solvent treating configurations for offshore high pressure CO2 removal. Paper presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, May 5–8, Houston, Texas, United States

    Google Scholar 

  • Maloney DJ, Jenkins RG, Walker PL Jr (1982) Low-temperature air oxidation of caking coals. 2. Effect on swelling and softening properties. Fuel 61:175–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mark M (2009) Delivering performance in Chinese operations. Paper presented at the Gasification Technologies Conference, Oct 2009, Colorado Springs. United States

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattisson T et al (2014) Innovative oxygen carriers uplifting chemical-looping combustion. Energy Procedia 63:113–130

    Google Scholar 

  • McKendry P (2003) Energy production from biomass (part 3): gasification technologies. Bioresour Technol 83:55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messenger B (2016) Air products to ditch plasma gasification waste to energy plants in Teesside. https://waste-management-world.com/a/air-products-to-ditch-plasma-gasification-waste-to-energy-plants-in-teesside

  • Monazam ER, Shadle LJ (1998) Predictive tool to aid design and operations of pressurized fixed bed coal gasifiers. Ind Eng Chem Res 37:120–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monazam ER et al (2013) Equilibrium and kinetics analysis of carbon dioxide capture using immobilized amine on a mesoporous silica. AICHE J 59:923–935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monazam ER, Spenik J, Shadle LJ (2014) CO2 desorption kinetics for immobilized polyethylenimine (PEI). Energy Fuel 28:650–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreea-Taha R (2000) Modelling and simulation for coal gasification. IEA CoalResearch

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan ME, Jenkins RG (1986a) Pyrolysis of a lignite in an entrained flow reactor: 1. Effect of cations on total weight loss. Fuel 65:757–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan ME, Jenkins RG (1986b) Pyrolysis of a lignite in an entrained flow reactor: 2. Effect of metal cations on decarboxylation and tar yield. Fuel 65:764–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mountouris A, Voutsas E, Tassios D (2006) Solid waste plasma gasification: equilibrium model development and exergy analysis. Energy Convers Manag 47:1723–1737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2005.10.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano J et al (2015) Thermodynamic effects of calcium and iron oxides on crystal phase formation in synthetic gasifier slags containing from 0 to 27 wt.% V2O3. Fuel 161:364–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NETL (2007) Emissions advantages of gasification Retrieved from https://www.netl.doe.gov/research/coal/energy-systems/gasification/gasifipedia/low-emissions

  • NETL (2015) Gasification Technologies. Retrieved from http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/gasifipedia/8-research/

  • NETL (2020) Carbon Capture Technology Research and Breakthrough Concepts. Retrieved from http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon_seq/refshelf/overviews/Carbon%20Capture%20Technology%20Research%20and%20Breakthrough%20Concepts.pdf

  • Newman, S. (1985). Acid and sour gas treating processes. United States

    Google Scholar 

  • Niksa S (1986) The distributed-energy chain model for rapid coal devolatilization kinetics. Part II: transient weight loss correlations combust. Flame 66:111–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niksa S, Liua G-s, Hurt RH (2003) Coal conversion submodels for design applications at elevated pressures. Part I devolatilization and char oxidation. Prog Energy Combust Sci 29:425–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niksa S, Lau C-W (1993) Global rates of devolatilization for various coal types. Combust Flame 94:293–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niu Y et al (2014) Investigations on biomass slagging in utility boiler: criterion numbers and slagging growth mechanisms. Fuel Process Technol 128:499–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunokawa M, Asano T (2014) Progress and utilization of Nakoso 250 MW air-blown IGCC demonstration project. Mech Eng J 1:TEP0045-TEP0045

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong Z et al (2015) Co-gasification of woody biomass and sewage sludge in a fixed-bed downdraft gasifier. AICHE J 61:2508–2521. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.14836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patil K, Bhoi P, Huhnke R, Bellmer D (2011) Biomass downdraft gasifier with internal cyclonic combustion chamber: design, construction, and experimental results. Bioresour Technol 102:6286–6290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pei H, Wang X, Dai X, Jin B, Huang Y (2018) A novel two-stage biomass gasification concept: design and operation of a 1.5 MWth demonstration plant. Bioresour Technol 267:102–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrova V (2013) Wuhan Kaidi commission biomass plant in China. https://renewablesnow.com/news/wuhan-kaidi-commission-biomass-plant-in-china-331353/

  • Probstein RF, Hicks RE (2006) Synthetic fuels. United States: Dover Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radovic LR, Steczko K, Walker PL Jr, Jenkins RG (1985) Combined effects of inorganic constituents and pyrolysis conditions on the gasification reactivity of coal chars. Fuel Process Technol 10:311–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rauch R et al (2004) Steam gasification of biomass at CHP plant Guessing-Status of the demonstration plant. Paper presented at the 2nd World Conference on Biomass for Energy, Industry and Climate Protection, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed M (2007) Systems studies (2007/1255). Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson T, Bronson B, Gogolek P, Mehrani P (2017) Air-blown bubbling fluidized bed co-gasification of woody biomass and refuse derived fuel. Can J Chem Eng 95:55–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.22641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rueter C (2002) CrystaSulf® process fills mid-size niche for Sulfur recovery in multiple applications. GasTIPS Winter 2002:7–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz JA, Juárez MC, Morales MP, Muñoz P, Mendívil MA (2013) Biomass gasification for electricity generation: review of current technology barriers. Renew Sust Energ Rev 18:174–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.10.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid JC, Muller S, Kolbitsch M, Tesch W, Hofbauer H (2015) G-VOLUTIONII Zweibettwirbelschicht Biomasse-Dampfvergaser der zweiten Generation – II, pp 1–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Seed M, Williams A et al (2007) Application of slagging gasification technology to as received lignite in China. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Clean Coal Technologies for our Future, Cagliari, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Sentis L et al (2016) Techno-economic analysis of UNIFHY hydrogen. The Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU), Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Shadle LJ, Monazam ER, Swanson ML (2001) Coal gasification in a transport reactor. Ind Eng Chem Res 40:2782–2792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shindman L (1945) Chemistry of coal utilization. In H. Lowry (Ed.), (Vol. Volume II, pp. 1252–1286). New York, United States: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sikarwar VS et al (2016) An overview of advances in biomass gasification. Energy Environ Sci 9:2939–2977. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6ee00935b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simkins G, Walsh L (2016) ENDS report, Twickenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Skone TJ & James III, R. E. (2013) Life cycle analysis: integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant. https://netl.doe.gov/projects/files/LifeCycleAnalysisIntegratedGasificationCombinedCycleIGCCPowerPlant_060113.pdf

  • Slezak A, Kuhlman JM, Shadle LJ, Spenik J, Shi S (2010) CFD simulation of entrained-flow coal gasification: coal particle density/sizefraction effects. Powder Technol 203:98–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith P (2007) Personnel communication for test results. Kellogg, Brown and Root, Houston

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon PR, Hamblen DG, Yu Z-Z, Serio MA (1990) Network models of coal thermal decomposition. Fuel 69:754–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon PR, Hamblen DG, Serio MA, Yu Z-Z, Charpenay S (1993a) A characterization method and model for predicting coal conversion behaviour. Fuel 72:469–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon P, Fletcher T, Pugmire R (1993b) Progress in coal pyrolysis. Fuel 72:587–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staley BF, Kantner DL, Choi J (2018) Analysis of MSW landfill tipping fees. Environmental Research and Education Foundation (EREF), Raleigh, pp 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Stultz S, Kitto J (1992) Steam, its generation and use (40th ed. ed.). Barberton, Ohio, United States: Babcock & Wilcox

    Google Scholar 

  • Syamlal M, Bissett LA (1992) METC gasifier advanced simulation (MGAS) model (DOE/METC-92/4108). Retrieved from Morgantown, West Virginia, United States: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/10127635

  • Syamlal M, Rogers W et al (1993) MFIX documentation theory guide (DOE/METC-94/1004). Retrieved from Morgantown, West Virginia, United States: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/10145548

  • Syamlal M, Venkatesan S, Cho S Pittsburgh coal conference, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Teichmuller M (1979) Coal Petrology: Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker D, Pezzini P et al (2018) Cyber-Physical Systems: A New Paradigm for Energy Technology Development. Paper presented at the ASME Power Conference, June 24–28, Lake Buena Vista, United States

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhm HS, Hong YC, Shin DH, Lee BJ (2011) Plasma-enhanced gasification of low-grade coals for compact power plants. Phys Plasmas 18(104505):104501–104504. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3646329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UOP (2009) UOP Selexol technology applications for CO2 capture. Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Wyoming CO2 Conference, Jun 23–24. United States

    Google Scholar 

  • UOP (2015) Selexol™ process. Retrieved from http://www.uop.com/objects/97%20Selexol.pdf

  • Van Krevelen DW (1993) Coal: typology, physics, chemistry, constitution. Amsterdam, Netherland: Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Hoeven, B (1945) Chemistry of coal utilization. In H. Lowry (Ed.), (Vol. Volume II, pp. 1252–1286). New York, United States: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Meijden CM, Veringa HJ, Rabou LP (2010) The production of synthetic natural gas (SNG): a comparison of three wood gasification systems for energy balance and overall efficiency. Biomass Bioenergy 34:302–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Essendelft D, Li T, Nicoletti P, Jordan T (2014) Advanced chemistry surrogate model development within C3M for CFD modeling, part 1: methodology development for coal pyrolysis. Ind Eng Chem Res 53:7780–7796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vassilev S et al (2002) Low cost catalytic sorbents for NOx reduction. 1. Preparation and characterization of coal char impregnated with model vanadium components and petroleum coke ash. Fuel 81:1281–1296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber R, Poyraz Y, Beckmann AM, Brinker S (2015) Combustion of biomass in jet flames. Proc Combust Inst 35:2749–2758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen CY, Chaung T (1979) Entrainment coal gasification modeling. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des Develop 18:684–695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen C, Dutta S (1979) Rates of coal pyrolysis and gasification reactions. In Coal conversion technology (pp. 57–170). United States: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whiticar DM, Ralph J (2011) A technical review of municipal solid waste thermal treatment practices. Report no. 1231-10166. Stantec Consulting Ltd, Burnaby, pp 1.1–12.11

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia. (2020) Carbon capture and storage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage

  • Willquist K, Johansson I et al (2017) Critical metal extraction from municipal solid waste incineration ashes and the impact on a circular economy. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th International Slag Valorisation Symposium, Leuven, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson B, Williams N, Liss B, Wilson B (2013) A comparative assessment of commercial technologies for conversion of solid waste to energy. EnviroPower Renewable, Boca Raton Google Scholar

    Google Scholar 

  • Wnukowski M (2014) Decomposition of tars in microwave plasma – preliminary results. Ecol Eng 15:23–28. https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993.1109118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WPC (2013a) Summary of qualifications, Westinghouse Plasma Gasification Technology. Aug 2013

    Google Scholar 

  • WPC (2013b) Westinghouse plasma gasification is the next generation of energy from waste technology. Paper presented at the USEA Annual Meeting, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • WPC (2015) Commercialized and industrial scale plasma gasification technology for the conversion of various waste feedstocks into clean energy. Paper presented at the Power Gen Asia, Bangkok

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao X, Meng X, Le DD, Takarada T (2011) Two-stage steam gasification of waste biomass in fluidized bed at low temperature: parametric investigations and performance optimization. Bioresour Technol 102:1975–1981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanik J, Ebale S, Kruse A, Saglam M, Yüksel M (2007) Biomass gasification in supercritical water: part 1. Effect of the nature of biomass. Fuel 86:2410–2415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu J, Corripio A, Harrison D, Copeland R (2003) Analysis of the sorbent energy transfer system (SETS) for power generation and CO2 capture. Adv Environ Res 7:335–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moriarty P, Honnery D (2016) Can renewable energy power the future? Energy Policy 93:3–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips JN, Booras GS et al (2017) The history of integrated gasification combined-cycle power plants. Paper presented at the ASME Turbo Expo 2017: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson J (2003) The Scot who Lit the World: The Story of William Murdoch, Inventor of Gas Lighting. United States: Gardners Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyk J, Keyser M et al (2006) Syngas production from South African coal sources using Sasol–Lurgi gasifiers. International Journal of Coal Geology 65(3–4):243–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Nierop P, Erasmus H et al (2000) Sasol’s Achievements in the 20th Century as Building Block for the 21st. Gasification Technologies Council, San Francisco, California, USA, 8–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Scala F (2013) Fluidized bed technologies for near-zero emission combustion and gasification. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Woodhead Publishing

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the U.S. Department of Energy in making resources and the time available to prepare this manuscript. In addition, we would also like to extend appreciation to Peter Smith, Ranjani Siriwardane, Esmail Monazam, Tom O’Brien, and Mehrdad Shahnam for their contributions. Research includes Leidos Research Support Team staff under the RSS contract 89243318CFE000003.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Energy Technology Laboratory, Morgantown, WV, USA

    Lawrence J. Shadle, Natarianto Indrawan & Ronald W. Breault

  2. U. S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Albany, OR, USA

    James Bennett

Authors
  1. Lawrence J. Shadle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Natarianto Indrawan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ronald W. Breault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. James Bennett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence J. Shadle .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Circe Biotechnologie GmbH, Vienna, Austria

    Maximilian Lackner

  2. Mewbourne School of Petroleum and Geological Engineering, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

    Baharak Sajjadi

  3. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA

    Wei-Yin Chen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Shadle, L.J., Indrawan, N., Breault, R.W., Bennett, J. (2022). Gasification Technology. In: Lackner, M., Sajjadi, B., Chen, WY. (eds) Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72579-2_40

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation