Energy Densification of Biomass in a Two-Chamber Reactor

Brian Gallaspy Mentors: S. Kent Hoekman, Wei Yan

Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada, Reno

Introduction
Hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) is a process by which lignocellulosic (woody) biomass is converted into a solid fuel that has a higher energy density than the biomass feedstock had. Broadly, lignocellulosic biomass is composed of three components: cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin. The HTC process is carried out by placing the feedstock in hot, pressurized water. Under these conditions, the hemi-cellulose readily breaks down into simple sugars that dissolve into the water. After this process, the recovered solid biochar has a higher C/O ratio, and thereby a higher energy density. Under optimal HTC conditions, the biochar product has physical and chemical properties similar to a low-rank coal. One implication of this experiment is that the HTC process could be applied to biomass to produce a renewable solid fuel that could replace, or supplement, coal in existing power plants with little to no modification required of the equipment already being used.

Methods
To test how HTC process conditions affect the biochar product, a specially designed two-chamber reactor was used. The idea behind the two-chamber reactor is to keep the biomass isolated from the water until the water is heated to the desired temperature. Once this temperature is reached, the ball valve is opened allowing the biomass to fall into the hot water, and the reaction to begin. After the desired hold time is reached, the reactor is removed from the heater and quickly cooled to room temperature (see Figs. 1 & 3). The biochar is then pelletized and energy density is determined using an oxygen bomb calorimeter.

Conclusion
Figure 4 shows that the HTC process is nearly complete with a hold time of just 1 minute, although the reaction will continue somewhat if held longer. This is valuable data should one want to perform a cost analysis. Figure 6 shows that pelletization increases volumetric energy density by 39%, which is an important factor when considering transportation costs. Figure 5 illustrates that the reaction temperature has a much larger effect on energy densification. The most energy dense product recovered in this project has a calorific value of 24.64 MJ/kg, a 29% increase from the unprocessed feedstock, which has a value of 19.16 MJ/kg. Figure 7 shows the pelletized raw biomass (top left), as well as HTC-processed biomass at different hold times (1, 3 and 5 minutes). Future work could focus on the physical properties of pelletized HTC biochar, as this is important information to have should this process be commercialized.

Figure 1. Diagram of Reactor

Figure 2. Calorimeter

Figure 3. Reactor setup

Acknowledgements
This project was made possible by the NSF- EPSCoR Summer Scholarship Thanks to all of the friendly and helpful faculty and staff at DRI, especially Mr. Dana Sharitz for his welding expertise.

Problem
The introduction of this poster suggests that HTC biochar could be used as a replacement fuel, or a supplement to coal, to produce electricity much in the same way coal is currently used. While technically feasible, it must first be demonstrated that this option makes economic sense. The fundamental question is: Does the HTC biochar yield more energy than is required to run the HTC process? The aim of this project is to help answer this question. Little is known about how the HTC process conditions (temperature, hold time, particle size) individually affect the final properties of the HTC biochar. Using the methods outlined in the next section, data was gathered to help fill in this gap in knowledge.

Results

References
Figure 4. Mass yields after HTC process Figure 5. Effect of temperature (3 min) Hoekman,S.K., Broch,A., Robbins,C., 2011. Energy & Fuels 25, 1802-1810 Acharjee,T.C., Coronella,C.J., Vsquez,V.R., 2011. Bioresource Technology 102, 4849-4854. Yan,W., Hastings,J.T., Acharjee,T.C., Coronella,C.J., Vsquez,V.R., 2010. Energy & Fuels 24, 4738-4742. Yan,W., Acharjee,T.C., Coronella,C.J., Vsquez,V.R., 2009. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 28 (3), 435440.

Figure 6. Mass & Volumetric Energy Density

Figure 7. Pellets