Next Article in Journal
Improved Cyclability of Liquid Electrolyte Lithium/Sulfur Batteries by Optimizing Electrolyte/Sulfur Ratio
Next Article in Special Issue
Chemical Profiles of Wood Components of Poplar Clones for Their Energy Utilization
Previous Article in Journal
A High Step-Down Interleaved Buck Converter with Active-Clamp Circuits for Wind Turbines
Previous Article in Special Issue
Modeling Woody Biomass Procurement for Bioenergy Production at the Atikokan Generating Station in Northwestern Ontario, Canada
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Ash Deposition in Biomass Combustion or Co-Firing for Power/Heat Generation

1
Department of Chemical & Biochemical Engineering, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5B9, Canada
2
Canmet Energy, Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1M1, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2012, 5(12), 5171-5189; https://doi.org/10.3390/en5125171
Submission received: 6 October 2012 / Revised: 18 November 2012 / Accepted: 23 November 2012 / Published: 7 December 2012
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wood to Energy)

Abstract

:
This paper presents a concise overview of ash deposition in combustion or co-firing of biomass (woody biomass, agricultural residues, peat, etc.) with other fuels for power/heat generation. In this article, the following five research aspects on biomass combustion ash deposition are reviewed and discussed: influence of biomass fuel characteristics, deposit-related challenges, ash deposition monitoring and analysis of ash deposits, mechanisms and chemistry of fly ash deposition, and key technologies for reducing ash deposition and corrosion in biomass-involved combustion.

1. Introduction

The use of green energy sources, e.g., biomass (forestry residues, agricultural residues, peat, etc.) substituting for fossil fuels has attracted increased attention because of the necessity to reduce the environmental impacts of traditional electricity and heat generation from fossil fuels, as well as the depletion of these resources and the soaring prices of fossil fuels. However, large-scale utilization of biomass for power/heat generation is facing some technical challenges, not only the availability and affordability of biomass feedstocks, but the ash deposition/corrosion issues in biomass-fueled boilers. Biomass fuels usually contain high levels of alkali/alkaline metals, in particular potassium, and high chlorine content, as well as low sulphur concentrations, which make the deposition of corrosive ash in biomass-fired boilers a more severe issue than that in traditional coal-fired boilers [1,2,3]. In the past decades, extensive studies have been conducted on the influence of biomass fuel characteristics on fly ash deposition and the deposit-related challenges in biomass-fired boilers, technology development for ash deposition monitoring and analysis, understanding of mechanisms and chemistry of fly ash deposition, and technology development for reducing fly ash deposition and corrosion in biomass-involved combustion processes. This paper aims to present an overview on the abovementioned aspects of ash-related research and technology development.

2. Influence of Biomass Fuel Characteristics on Ash Deposition during Combustion

Understanding the fuel characteristics is necessary in studies on ash deposition as the fuel characteristics would affect fly ash deposition behaviors during combustion and play an important role in optimizing combustor/boiler design for enhanced combustion efficiency and less operation problems, especially when biomass is used [4,5,6].
Table 1. Typical characteristics of solid fuels [7,8,9,10,11,12].
Table 1. Typical characteristics of solid fuels [7,8,9,10,11,12].
CharacteristicsCoalPeatWoodBarkForest residues (coniferous tree with needles)WillowStrawReed canary grass (spring harvested)
Moisture content, wt%6–1040–555–6045–6550–6050–6017–2515–20
C, % (d.b.) 150–8752–5648–5248–5248–5247–5145–4745.5–46.1
H, % (d.b.)3.5–55–6.56.2–6.45.7–6.86–6.25.8–6.75.4–6.05.7–5.8
N, % (d.b.)0.8–1.50.8–30.1–0.50.3–0.80.3–0.50.2–0.80.4–0.60.65–1.04
O, % (d.b.)2.8–11.330–4038–4224.3–40.240–4440–4640–4644
S, % (d.b.)0.5–3.1<0.05–0.3<0.05<0.05<0.050.02–0.100.05–0.200.08–0.13
Cl, % (d.b.)<0.10.02–0.060.01–0.030.01–0.050.01–0.040.01–0.050.14–1.050.09
K, % (d.b.)0.0030.8–5.80.02–0.050.1–0.40.1–0.40.2–0.50.69–1.300.3–0.5
Ca, % (d.b.)4–120.05–0.10.1–1.50.02–0.080.2–0.90.2–0.70.1–0.69
1 on a dry basis.
The fuel characteristics of biomass are very different from those common fossil fuels, including moisture content, ash content, calorific value, and alkali/alkaline earth metal content, etc. [3,13,14]. As shown in Table 1, compared to coal, biomass fuels usually have much higher potassium (K) concentration and moisture content, as well as a lower sulfur component. In herbaceous plants such as straw and energy crops, significantly high chlorine (Cl) concentrations are very common. The distinct features of biomass fuels do not only influence combustion [2], but also significantly change ash behaviors. Firstly, the elements (e.g., K, Cl) in high concentration in biomass are mainly in the form of water soluble inorganic salts, and principally as the corresponding oxides, nitrates, and chloride, etc. (Table 2), which could be easily volatilized during the combustion, leading to high mobility for alkali materials and, hence, high fouling tendency. Theis et al. [15] compared the ash deposition behaviors of three sorts of feedstock—straw, peat and bark with different chemical compositions. They found that straw presented higher fouling propensity than peat and bark, because of the large amounts of water soluble compounds found in the straw. The highly active alkali/alkaline metals (e.g., K, Na, Ca) and Cl contents may easily form vapor phase chloride compounds/ions, and then, deposit and form a sticky layer on the heat exchanger or heat transfer surfaces because of the low (<800 °C) melting points of these chloride compounds (e.g., 770 °C for KCl) [11,16]. Subsequently, more inorganic particles in fly ash will have a high tendency of adhering to the particles in the existing layer, resulting into the ash layer growth [17]. Moreover, some biomass fuels contain substantial amounts of silica, e.g., the silica content in rice straw is typically 10 wt% of dry biomass weight [18]. Silicates associated with alkaline/alkaline metals could melt or sinter at 800–900 °C, which can take place in either the solid phase or more commonly the vapor phase, via fly ash during combustion processes [19]. The produced alkali silicates and mixed alkali and/or calcium chlorides/sulfates tend to deposit on reactor walls or heat exchangers surfaces, causing fouling/corrosion even at a low fusion temperature (<700 °C) [20]. Additionally, the existence of heavy metals such as Pb, Zn and Cd [21,22] in some solid fuels (recycled tires) may also influence the ash melting behaviour as well as fouling and corrosion processes on furnace walls and in the combustor via reaction with Cl to form gaseous compounds during the combustion process, and eventually, form aerosols and agglomerate or condense on fly ash particles upon cooling down of the flue gas [23,24].
Table 2. Water soluble inorganic materials in high plants [25,26,27,28].
Table 2. Water soluble inorganic materials in high plants [25,26,27,28].
ElementCompoundFormulaShare of the element
NaSodium nitrate, chlorideNaNO3, NaCl>90%
KPotassium nitrate, chlorideKNO3, KCl>90%
CaCalcium nitrate, chloride, phosphateCa(NO3)2, CaCl2,Ca3(PO4)220%–60%
MgMagnesium nitrate, chloride, phosphateMg(NO3)2, MgCl2,Ca3(PO4)260%–90%
SiSilicon hydroxideSi(OH)4<5%
SSulphate ionSO42−>90%
PPhosphate ionPO43−>80%
ClChloride ionCl>90%
Although the aforementioned high moisture content in biomass fuels may not greatly influence combustion (e.g., emissions and combustion efficiency) [29], it could affect ash deposition during combustion. Shao et al. [30,31] conducted the first investigation of the effects of moisture content (<5 wt% and 30–35 wt%) in the feed on ash deposition during combustions of individual fuels (woody biomass/peat/coal) and some fuel blends. In their observations, the as-received/air-dried feedstock that contains around 30% to 35% moisture performed better than the oven-dried feedstock in retarding ash deposition and chlorine deposition. Additionally, burning biomass fuels or biomass-coal mixtures containing a low sulfur content is beneficial for significant reduction of SOx/SO2 emissions [32], but it may negatively impact on the ash deposition behaviors, in particular Cl deposition [16,33,34]. It has been commonly accepted that the occurrence of S could alleviate the corrosion problems associated with chlorides deposits via the following sulphation mechanism [35]:
2 KCL + S O 2 + 1 2 O 2 + H 2 O K 2 S O 4 + 2 HCL   Δ H 0 = 646.5 kJ/mol
2 KCL + S O 2 + O 2 K 2 S O 4 + C l 2
In other words, combustion of low-S-containing biomass fuels could increase Cl deposition and the corrosion related to Cl deposits.

3. Challenges with Ash Deposition in a Biomass-Fired or Co-Fired Combustor

As discussed in the last section, ash behaviors during combustion are closely related with the characteristics of biomass fuel (e.g., high K, Cl and moisture content, low S content, etc.), which usually lead to greater ash-related challenges for almost all combustors/boilers when firing or co-firing biomass materials, particularly for boilers fueled with some herbaceous materials like straw and wheat straw [2,36,37,38,39]. Some major negative impacts of the increased ash deposition by biomass combustion/co-firing on the efficiency and operation of a combustion system can be summarized as follows:
(1)
Decrease in the combustor utilization efficiency. The increased ash deposition as well as the changed properties of the ash deposits containing low-melting compounds such as K, Na, S and Ca would form a kind of coating on the bottom ash particles, which is partly in a liquid form, and begin to bind the particles together like glue [40], leading to agglomeration of the ash particles in the combustor. Bed agglomeration would eventually cause de-fluidization for a fluidized bed combustor, which would hence result in greatly reduced combustor utilization efficiency. Moreover, deposition of fused or partially fused ash deposits on the heat exchanger surfaces will retard the boiler heat transfer, leading to a decline in the combustor thermal efficiency, and its capacity too.
(2)
Damage to the combustor equipment. Ash deposits may grow to the extent that the flue gas flow through the boiler may be restricted, often by bridging across the steam tubes and tube bundles. This could cause mechanical damage of the combustor components and boiler equipment, and more importantly, the ash deposits are associated with corrosion at high temperatures. Even for large pulverized fuel furnaces, the ash deposition on burner component and divergent surfaces could result in interference with the burner light-up and operation. Again, the accumulation and subsequent shedding of large ash deposits on the upper furnace and the steam tubes surfaces could restrict gas flow and thus damage the components of the combustion system.
(3)
Maintenance problems. Severe deposits, on steam tubes, in hoppers and on grates (for grate boilers) would require premature shut-down for maintenance. Unplanned outages for off-load cleaning are required for removing the ash deposits. For example, severe slagging occurring in a full-scale boiler (Amager Power Statoion Unit 2 in Denmark) caused the system shut-down undesirably after only weeks of operation burning straw pellets [41]. Moreover, the build-up of accumulations of ash deposits on heat transfer surfaces also leads to increased combustor exit gas temperatures, reducing the boiler efficiency.

4. Ash Deposition Monitoring and Analysis of Ash Deposits

The mostly commonly applied technique for ash-related research involves using air-cooled steel probes as the simulation of superheater tubes or heat exchangers, and collecting the ash deposits during biomass co-firing/combustion to monitor ash deposition rate as well as to collect fly ash deposit for analysis. K-type thermocouples are usually embedded into the outside of a deposition probe wall to monitor the probe’s surface temperatures. The surface temperatures of deposition probe can thus be monitored or controlled to some extent via adjusting the flow rate of cooling air depending on flue gas temperature and the probe properties (i.e., size, metal conductivity). In most of deposit-related studies, the surface temperature of ash deposition probes was controlled at the steam-tube metal temperature in boilers, typically at 430–600 °C [10,12,30,31,42,43,44,45]. On the other hand, ash deposit sampling was performed at the superheater zone in a small boiler furnace or multiple locations in a large scale unit using the air-cooled deposition probes. Generally, after an operation period during the biomass co-firing/combustion test, the sampling probe(s) was/were carefully removed from the combustion system. Ash deposits were then brushed off from the probe surfaces to be weighed and analyzed. An example of the air-cooled ash deposition probe developed by the authors [19,20] is illustrated in Figure 1. In some lab-scale experiments, on-line weight measurements have been achieved by connecting a balance to the probe [33]. Moreover, some researchers employed some detachable rings [45] or coupons [46] on the probe surface to collect deposits instead of a permanent metal surface. Deposit samples collected from these single-used rings/coupons could then be sent for laboratory analyses, which minimized the contamination during brushing off the ash deposits.
Figure 1. Air-cooled ash deposition probe.
Figure 1. Air-cooled ash deposition probe.
Energies 05 05171 g001
After collection, the ash deposits obtained from biomass co-firing/combustion are usually characterized by a variety of laboratory techniques, including inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES), X-ray fluorescence (XRF), X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDX), and ion chromatography (IC). ICP-AES, XRF and SEM-EDX were applied to analyze the major elements present in the fuel ash and deposits, including Si, Al, Fe, Ca, Mg, Ti, Na, K, P, Cl and S [37,45,46,47,48,49], as well as Pb and Zn for some fuels such as recycled tires [21,22]. Most of these elements would contribute to ash deposition and agglomeration/clickers formation, especially for grate and fluidized bed combustion applications. The elemental concentrations determined by ICP-AES can be used to calculate the molar ratios of K/Si and K/Cl, etc.—useful parameters for interpretation of fuel ash/deposit chemistry. The ash elemental compositions are also commonly reported as oxides, in their highest oxidation states, which reflect the principal inorganic compositions. Furthermore, SEM is a particularly powerful analytical technique for the examination of the microstructure of ashes and deposits [50,51,52]. XRD is commonly used for the identification of the major crystalline phases in deposits [47,53,54]. Because of high chlorine contents in most of biomass, IC has been developed as a practical method to determine chlorine and sulphur concentration in the deposits [15,48].
With the abovementioned techniques, researchers have been focusing their efforts on: (1) the mechanisms of ash deposition, slagging/fouling, and high temperature corrosion; and (2) the technologies for tackling the ash-related issues for biomass co-firing/combustion, which are discussed separately in the following sections.

5. Mechanisms and Chemistry of Ash Deposition

Research efforts have been put into attempting to understand the mechanisms involved in the formation [15,44,48,55,56], slagging/fouling [52] and corrosion [35] of the ash deposits during biomass combustion or co-firing. During combustion processes, ash is formed from the fuel-bound inorganic materials through a combination of complex chemical and physical processes. After undergoing different physical processes including fragmentation, shedding, and coalescence during char burnout, the extraneous inorganic materials may be converted into volatile compounds (such as KCl or KOH) or non-volatile ash compounds that remain inside and on the surface of the char depending on the temperature and chemical composition of the particles. Depending on the density and size of the residual ash particles, the combustion technology, operating conditions and the flue gas velocity, a fraction of the non-volatile ash compounds will also be entrained with the flue gas and form the coarse part of fly ash with a large particle size (typically greater than 5 μm, as shown in Figure 2a). In grate furnace combustion, the coarse fly ash can be up to 850 μm depending on the biomass fuel properties and the configuration of the combustor, while the rest remains inside the combustor and form bottom ash [57].
Similarly, the inherent inorganic species may undergo several transformations including chemical and physical reactions during combustion/co-firing. Very small primary particles (about 5–10 nm) are formed by vaporization of the volatile species and subsequent nucleation in the boundary layer first, then they grow by coagulation, agglomeration and condensation in the flue gas. These particles are the basic fine fly ashes with a particle size of <1 µm as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. SEM-EDX images of coarse fly ash (a) and aerosol particles (b) from wood combustion in a grate furnace [57].
Figure 2. SEM-EDX images of coarse fly ash (a) and aerosol particles (b) from wood combustion in a grate furnace [57].
Energies 05 05171 g002
When the flue gas at high temperature containing many coarse and fine particles contacts the relatively cool heat transfer surface, coarse ash particles (typically greater than 10 μm, Stokes number is greater than 1) would cause inertial impaction, a dominant process responsible for the high temperature slag formation. Then, heterogeneous condensation between the pre-existing ash particles and the vapors of volatilized compounds in the flue gas will occur on the heat transfer surfaces. If the concentration of inorganic vapors in the flue gas and the cooling rate in the heat exchanger are both high, a local supersaturation of salts, e.g., Na2SO4, K2SO4, or KCl, could occur and cause formation of new particles by nucleation [11,57]. With the example of potassium, the major and most mobile/volatile alkali in the biomass fuels during combustion, vaporized K may be present mainly as gaseous KCl or KOH in the flue gas at a high temperature >800 °C, as shown in Figure 3. As the gas temperature decreases and given the presence of SO2 in the flue gas, the chloride and hydroxide may be converted to sulphate by homogenous gas-phase reactions (a highly exothermic reaction, thus thermodynamically favorable at lower temperatures), as shown in Equation (1). K2SO4 has a very low vapor pressure and becomes highly supersaturated as soon as it is formed, forming high numbers of new primary particles by homogenous nucleation. However, according to gas phase kinetic considerations, the equilibrium conversion to K2SO4 may not always be possible, i.e., only a part of the K in vapour phase is converted to K2SO4 [58]. The remaining part of the gaseous potassium may present as KCl or K2CO3. As time proceeds in the flue gas, solid KCl or K2CO3 on the particles may also undergo heterogeneous reactions with SO2 (g) and form solid K2SO4.
Generally there are four main mechanisms for ash deposition on heat transfer surfaces, i.e., inertial impaction, condensation of vaporized inorganic compounds, thermophoresis and chemical reactions, as illustrated in Figure 4. Inertial impaction tends to dominate at the wind side [34], whereas it cannot dominate on the lee side of a superheater tube where elements are transported mainly by condensation and partly by diffusion and chemical reactions [17,59]. The condensation of volatile inorganic species is the principle mechanism for the formation of convective pass fouling, e.g., on the heat transfer surfaces in a co-fired boiler, in particular when biomass fuels contain high levels of volatile species. In addition to condensation of vaporized inorganic compounds and inertial impaction, at the initial stage of the deposition when the local temperature gradients are at a maximum, very small, sub-micron ash particles could be transported to cooled surface driven by the local gas temperature gradients regardless inertial impaction.
Figure 3. Equilibrium concentrations in gas phase for the major potassium containing species present in biomass fuel under typical biomass combustion conditions [11].
Figure 3. Equilibrium concentrations in gas phase for the major potassium containing species present in biomass fuel under typical biomass combustion conditions [11].
Energies 05 05171 g003
Figure 4. Schematic of mechanisms of ash formation and deposition on a superheater tube surface [7].
Figure 4. Schematic of mechanisms of ash formation and deposition on a superheater tube surface [7].
Energies 05 05171 g004
This process is called thermophoresis. Such chemical reactions as oxidation, sulphation and chlorination processes would occur within the deposit layer and between gaseous and solid compounds under the combustion conditions [7,15,37,45]. For example, silica in combination with alkali and alkaline earth metals, especially with the readily volatilized forms of potassium present in biomass, can lead to the formation of low melting point compounds which readily slag and foul at normal biomass boiler temperatures (800–900 °C) [7,11]. The produced alkali silicates and/or mixed alkali and/or calcium chlorides/sulfates tend to deposit on the reactor wall or the heat-exchanger surface causing fouling/corrosion at a low fusion temperature (typically <700 °C) [19].

6. Technologies for Reducing Ash Deposition and Corrosion

As discussed before, firing or co-firing high-alkali (K/Na) herbaceous biomass fuels such as switchgrass and wheat straw would lead to severe problems of slagging and fouling on boiler surfaces, and the chlorine compounds in volatile ash would result in corrosion of heat transfer surfaces inside the boiler. Various technologies for reducing ash deposition as well as corrosion have been studied. These include: (1) addition of so-called combustion additives such as sulphur or SO2 and Al2O3/SiO2 [10,20,41,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76]; (2) co-firing bio-fuels with low fouling-tendency fuels [8,55,77,78,79,80,81]; (3) pretreatment of the feedstock to reduce the alkali metals [82,83], and (4) modification of the boiler (e.g., modification of the re-heater and super-heater in order to allow for larger spacing, more soot-blowing and a decrease in the live steam temperature to less than 500 °C, etc.) [60]. The first two ash-deposition tackling technologies as mentioned above (which are the most widely studied) are reviewed and discussed in the following sections.

6.1. Addition of Combustion Additives

Use of additives to tackle the ash-related issues is mainly based on the idea of converting the vaporized inorganic species to less volatile forms, thus enhancing the melting temperature of ash residues via chemical reactions and physical interactions (i.e., absorption/dilution) [41,62,67,68] and reducing the formation of fine particles or water-soluble alkalis [84,85,86]. So far, dozens of different additives have been tested and used to increase the melting points of the alkali compounds (e.g., KCl, K2O, KSiO3, etc.) in biomass combustion/co-combustion. Among these, the four major classes are: Al-Si-based, S-based, Ca-based, and P-rich substances [73]. Some key reactions are listed in Equations (1–12) that could take place between the additives and the alkali-containing species, mainly K-species from biomass fuels [35,73].
Al 2 O 3 x SiO 2 + 2 KCl + H 2 O K 2 O Al 2 O 3 x SiO 2 + 2 HCl ( g )
2 KCl + H 2 O + Al 2 O 3 2 KAlO 2 + HCl ( g )
2 KCl + SiO 2 + H 2 O K 2 O SiO 2 + 2 HCl ( g )
SO 2 ( g ) + 1 2 O 2 ( g ) SO 3 ( g )
( NH 4 ) 2 SO 4 ( l ) 2 NH 3 ( g ) + SO 3 ( g ) + H 2 O
Fe 2 ( SO 4 ) 3 ( l ) 3 SO 3 ( g ) + Fe 2 O 3
Al 2 ( SO 4 ) 3 ( l ) 3 SO 3 ( g ) + Al 2 O 3
SO 3 ( g ) + 2 KCl ( g ) + H 2 O ( g ) 2 HCl ( g ) + K 2 SO 4
KCl ( l ) + CaHPO 4 2 H 2 O CaKPO 4 + 2 H 2 O + HCl ( g )
K 2 O SiO 2 + 2 CaCO 3 2 CaO K 2 O SiO 2 + 2 CO 2
For better effectiveness of the additive, it is generally required that the additive have a smaller pariticle size and more surface area to facilitate the physical adsorption and chemical reactions. Al-Si-type additives are mostly the first choice in the literatures [61,62,67,68,69,72] due to their strong ability for converting vapor/liquid-phase KCl and KSiO3 to potassium aluminum silicates (e.g., KAlSiO4, KAlSi2O6, KAlSi3O8, etc.) with high melting-points (>1100 °C) by the reactions indicated in Equation (3).
Moreover, an excess of S in the flue gas could facilitate the sulphation [Equations (1) and (2)] of alkali chlorides and make the ash less sticky, as well as increase the melting point of the deposits, thus preventing the slagging/fouling of the heat transfer surface [37,45]. Therefore, the sulphur-to-chlorine atomic ratio (S/Cl) in the feedstock was adopted as a useful indicator for the deposition and corrosion propensity of chlorine-containing ash, and it was suggested that if the S/Cl ratio of fuel is less than two, there is a high risk of superheater corrosion in combustion [37,45]. If the S/Cl ratio is at least four, the fuel blend could be regarded as non-corrosive [7,66], while Theis et al. [15] recently reported the deposition could not be reduced unless the S/Cl ratio reached at or above 6.7 due to the presence of Ca compounds that could capture sulfur and thus restrained the sulphation. Moreover, Ferrer et al. [34] suggested that the molar ratio of S (in flue gas)-to-Cl (in the fuel) molar ratio (Sfg/Cl) would be a better indicator of Cl deposition than the S/Cl molar ratio in the fuel when limestone is added to reduce SO2 emissions. Theoretically, a minimum value of 0.5 of Sfg/Cl would be required to complete the sulphation of all alkali chlorides, but the least Sfg/Cl could be reduced with the amounts of available aluminosilicates in fuel-ash. Furthermore, Kassman et al. [74,75,76] applied ammonium sulphate as a combustion additive in full-scale biomass combustion. They found that gaseous SO3 decomposed from (NH4)2SO4 during combustion was more efficient than gaseous SO2 to react with KCl, even at a low S/Cl molar ratio (~1.0).
Additionally, Ca-based additives such as lime and limestone are likely effective via dilution of the ash or adsoption of alkali salts on their porous surfaces when they are calcinated rather than chemically reacted with alkali metals or alkali containing compounds. The calcination process usually occurs at a high temperature and prolonged time [34,68]. However, calcium additives containing CaO, CaCO3 and Ca(OH)2 are more active in biomass combustion, in particluar for P&K-rich biomass fuels, to help convert vapor K species into high-melting-point potassium silicates/phosphates [63,65,69,70,71]. Correspondingly, when biomass fuels containing high contents of K, Si and Ca, P-based additives could be used to reduce ash sintering and bed agglomeration [64,65].

6.2. Co-Firing Biomass with Low Fouling-Tendency Fuels

Although addition of combustion additives would solve ash-related problems to some extent during biomass combustion/co-firing, selection of the most optimal additive to achieve the best efficiency while keeping a low extra cost and avoiding materials handling risks and possible environmental issues is still challenging. Co-firing biomass with low fouling-tendency fuels would be an effectively alternative measure for preventing ash deposition by utilizing fuels of either low ash-content or abundant ash-deposition-retarding compounds [55,61]. For instance, co-combustion of straw with coal was proved to be an effective way to avoid the sintering problems associated with the problematic straw combustion. As kaolinite and other aluminosilicates are abundantly present in most coals [87], it is likely that an alkali absorption mechanism is active during the co-combustion. Moreover, some biofuels such as sewage sludge contain different aluminum silicates, silica and alumina, which could increase biomass ashes sintering temperatures and reduce their fouling deposition in various studies [77,78,79,80].
Because of the potential in reduction of ash-related issues as discussed above and reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases and other toxic gases such as SOx and maybe NOx [8,16,81,88,89,90], biomass co-combustion (co-firing) technology has found broad applications in the energy production field, particularly in the USA, many EU countries (Finland, Denmark, Germany, Austria, Spain, and Sweden, The Netherlands, Poland) and a number of other countries [91]. To date, more than 150 coal-fired power plants (mainly 50–700 MWe) around the World have adopted or tested co-firing of coals with woody biomass or waste materials [92]. Biomass co-firing systems can also be used for agricultural applications such as electricity and steam generation in the sugar cane industry [32], and in utility-scale (e.g., 150 MW) electricity generation [93]. Owing to the capability to meet diversified needs, biomass-based power generating systems are so far the only non-hydro renewable source of electricity that can be used for base-load electricity generation.
Co-firing has been successfully demonstrated in almost all types of coal boiler, including pulverized fuel combustor (PFC), fixed bed and fluidized beds combustors, as well as grate boilers [94]. For example, a very large-scale biomass co-firing plant, the Alholmens Kraft Combined Heat and Power plant in Pietarsaari (Finland), has been in operation since 2001. This plant employs a circulating fluidized bed (CFB) boiler with an electricity output of 240 MWe [7]. Although fluidized bed combustors, bubbling fluidized beds (BFBs) and circulating fluidized beds (CFBs) are advantageous in terms of their fuel flexibility, being able to handle different types of fuels, solid, semi-solid, or liquid fuels, PFC is the most common technology used for co-firing biomass with coal. This is because less equipment modification is required for co-firing biomass and coal in an existing large PFC plant. There has been rapid progress worldwide over the past decade in development of the biomass co-firing technology for pulverized coal-fired boiler plants, particularly in Europe, North America and Australia [91]. According to the report by Baxter and Koppejan [95], worldwide approximately 41.5% of 135 coal-fired power plants that have experience co-firing biomass use PFC boilers. However, biomass co-firing in PFCs has encountered both technical and non-technical problems. For example, the co-firing ratio of biomass in most PFC boilers is no more than 10%–15% on a thermal input basis due to the issues of increased ash deposition or accelerated corrosion rates for the boiler components. On the other hand, for grate boilers that have been traditionally used for solid fuel combustion on a relatively small-to-medium scale (15 kW up to 150 MW), co-firing of recycled fuels, packaging derived fuels, refuse derived fuels, recovered fuels and plastics with wood fuels or other by-products of forest industry was successfully demonstrated [56]. Co-firing of recycled fuels in small power plants is relatively less challenging as the steam temperature is usually lower than 400 °C and there is no risk of high-temperature corrosion. Nevertheless, special attention must be paid to flue gas cleaning. For biomass firing on grate boilers, the following key issues need to be addressed: homogeneity of the feedstock (particle size), proper sizing of the combustion chamber and efficient mixing of the feedstock with the combustion air.
In a recent study by the authors [20], the ash deposition behaviors of co-combustion of three-fuel blends of white pine pellets (WPP), peat pellets (PP) and crushed lignite (CL) coal were studied on a pilot-scale bubbling fluidized bed combustor operated at 40% excess air ratio. Reference tests with individual fuel (pine, peat or lignite) and two-fuel blends of lignite and pine or peat were also performed and discussed in this study. As a very interesting finding from this work, co-combustion of three-fuel blend at 50% lignite-25% peat-25% pine resulted in a higher ash deposition rate than co-combustion of two-fuel blend of either 50% lignite-50% peat or 50% lignite-50% pine. In contrast, co-combustion of three-fuel blend at 20% lignite-40% peat-40% pine resulted in the lowest deposition rate and the least deposition tendency among all the combustion tests with various mixed fuels or individual fuels, as shown in Figure 5. The greatly decreased ash deposition tendency of co-firing three-fuel blend of 20% lignite-40% peat-40% pine might be accounted for by the formation of more minerals containing CaO, MgO, Al2O3 and SiO2 with high ash melting points and high crystallinity. The chemical compositions of deposits obtained from the co-combustions of three-fuel blends were found to be enriched with the elements of Si and Al and depleted in the elements of P, S and K.
Although co-firing technologies have been well developed and relatively widely applied in industries worldwide, co-firing processes are not yet completely understood. Due to the inferior properties of biomass (e.g., higher moisture contents, low bulk densities, etc.), direct co-firing processes are normally limited to low co-firing ratios. The major technical challenges associated with the biomass co-firing technology are summarized as follows:
(1) More research is needed to better understand and find cost-effective measures to tackle the ash-related issues in combustion and co-firing biomass due to the strong dependency of these issues on the properties of selected fuels, configuration of co-firing system, and the operation conditions;
(2) Biomass materials are generally moist and strongly hydrophilic as well as non-friable, which poses difficulties in fuel preparation, storage, and delivery;
(3) Depending on the quality of the biomass feedstock, co-firing might result in reduced thermal efficiency and increased NOx emission;
(4) Economic utilization of the fly ash from co-firing biomass and coal shall be explored. It herewith shall be noted that the fly ashes from biomass co-firing processes are currently unacceptable for cement manufacture as biomass fly ashes do not conform to the ASTM standards.
Figure 5. Comparison of relative ash deposition rates RDA obtained from the combustions of 100% lignite and three-fuel blends FB1 (25% WPP + 25% PP + 50% CL) and FB2 (40% WPP + 40% PP + 20% CL), in comparison with those from combustion of 50% WPP + 50% CL, 50% PP + 50% CL, 80% WPP + 20% CL, 80% PP + 20% CL as well as 100% WPP, and 100% PP (modified from [20]).
Figure 5. Comparison of relative ash deposition rates RDA obtained from the combustions of 100% lignite and three-fuel blends FB1 (25% WPP + 25% PP + 50% CL) and FB2 (40% WPP + 40% PP + 20% CL), in comparison with those from combustion of 50% WPP + 50% CL, 50% PP + 50% CL, 80% WPP + 20% CL, 80% PP + 20% CL as well as 100% WPP, and 100% PP (modified from [20]).
Energies 05 05171 g005

7. Conclusions

Water soluble potassium along with the Cl in biomass fuels are the most problematic elements during biomass combustion/co-firing in a combustor/boiler, which could result in issues of severe ash deposition/fouling/slagging and high-temperature corrosion. With air-cooled ash deposition probes, the ash deposition in the combustion/co-combustion can be monitored and analyzed, which helps understanding of the mechanisms and chemistry of ash deposition/corrosion. Addition of combustion additives and co-firing high-risk biomass with low fouling-tendency fuel(s) are effective measures to tackle the ash deposition issues for biomass combustion/co-firing. However, selecting an optimal combustion additive is very difficult and it is hard to achieve the maximum performance without greatly increasing the operating costs, introducing some side-issues related to material handling/emissions. Co-firing high-risk biomass with low fouling-tendency fuel(s) seems to be a more cost-effective measure for reduction of ash deposition.
Despite many researches contributing to the ash-related studies for biomass thermo-utilization that have covered different types of boilers and a large number of biomass species, the fates and detailed reactions of the alkali elements during the combustion processes are yet to be elucidated. Some questions remain unanswered: e.g., do the reactions occur before the fly ash contacting with the heater exchange surface, or on the surface? What are the practical and cost-effective means to retard these reactions? Answers to these questions would be very helpful to address the ash-related problems in biomass combustion/co-firing for heat/power generation.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the financial support from the Ontario Ministry of Energy, Ontario Centers of Excellence, Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), through the Atikokan Bio-energy Research Center (ABRC) program and the Discovery Grant awarded to C.X.

References

  1. Jenkins, B.M. Biomass Handbook; Gordon and Breach: New York, NY, USA, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  2. Jenkins, B.M.; Baxter, L.L.; Miles, T.R., Jr.; Miles, T.R. Combustion properties of biomass. Fuel Proc. Technol. 1998, 54, 17–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. McKendry, P. Energy production from biomass (part 1): Overview of biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 2002, 83, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Fryda, L.; Sobrino, C.; Cieplik, C.; van de Kamp, W.L. Study on ash deposition under oxyfuel combustion of coal/biomass blends. Fuel 2010, 89, 1889–1902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chao, C.Y.H.; Kwong, P.C.W.; Wang, J.H.; Cheung, C.W.; Kenall, G. Co-firing coal with rice husk and bamboo and the impact on particulate matters and associated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon emissions. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Hansen, L.A.; Nielsen, H.P.; Frandsen, F.J.; Dam-Johansen, K.; Hørlyck, S.; Karlsson, A. Influence of deposit formation on corrosion at a straw-fired boiler. Fuel Process. Technol. 2000, 64, 189–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Veijonen, K.; Vainikka, P.; Järvinen, T.; Alakangas, E.; Processes, V. Biomass Co-Firing: An Efficient Way to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions; European Bioenergy Networks: Espoo, Finland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  8. Armesto, L.; Bahillo, A.; Cabanillas, A.; Veijonen, K.; Otero, J.; Plumed, A.; Salvador, L. Co-combustion of coal and olive oil industry residues in fluidized bed. Fuel 2003, 82, 993–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Arvelakis, S.; Vourliotis, P.; Kakaras, E.; Koukios, E.G. Effect of leaching on the ash behavior of wheat straw and olive residue during fluidized bed combustion. Biomass Bioenergy 2001, 20, 459–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Aho, M.; Silvennoinen, J. Preventing chlorine deposition on heat transfer surfaces with aluminium-silicon rich biomass residue and additive. Fuel 2004, 83, 1299–1305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Baxter, L.L.; Miles, T.R.; Miles, T.R., Jr.; Jenkins, B.M.; Milne, T.; Dayton, D.; Bryers, R.W.; Oden, L.L. The behavior of inorganic material in biomass-fired power boilers: Field and laboratory experiences. Fuel Process. Technol. 1998, 54, 47–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Shao, Y.; Xu, C.C.; Zhu, J.; Preto, F.; Wang, J.; Tourigny, G.; Badour, C.; Li, H. Ash and chlorine deposition during co-combustion of lignite and a chlorine-rich Canadian peat in a fluidized bed-effects of blending ratio, moisture content and sulfur addition. Fuel 2012, 95, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Baxter, L. Biomass-Coal Cofiring: An Overview of Technical Issues. In Solid Biofuel for Energy: A Lower Greenhouse Gas Alternative; Grammedlis, P., Ed.; Springer-Verlag London Limited: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 43–73. [Google Scholar]
  14. Sami, M.; Annamalai, K.; Wooldridge, M. Co-firing of coal and biomass fuel blends. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2001, 27, 171–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Theis, M.; Skrifvars, B.-J.; Zevenhoven, M.; Hupa, M.; Tran, H. Fouling tendency of ash resulting from burning mixtures of biofuels. Part 2: Deposit chemistry. Fuel 2006, 85, 1992–2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Baxter, L. Biomass-coal co-combustion: Opportunity for affordable renewable energy. Fuel 2005, 84, 1295–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Nielsen, H.P.; Baxter, L.L.; Sclippab, G.; Morey, C.; Frandsen, F.J.; Dam-Johansen, K. Deposition of potassium salts on heat transfer surfaces in straw-fired boilers: A pilot-scale study. Fuel 2000, 79, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bryers, R.W. Fireside slagging, fouling, and high-temperature corrosion of heat-transfer surface due to impurities in steam-raising fuels. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 1996, 22, 29–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Baxter, L.L. Ash deposition during biomass and coal combustion: A mechanistic appproach. Biomass Bioenergy 1993, 4, 85–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Arvelakis, S.; Gehrmann, H.; Beckmann, M.; Koukios, E.G. Preliminary results on the ash behaviour of peach stones during fluidized bed gasification: Evaluation of fractionation and leaching as pre-treatments. Biomass Bioenergy 2005, 28, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Grammelis, P.; Skodras, G.; Kakaras, E. Effects of biomass co-firing with coal on ash properties. Part I: Characterisation and PSD. Fuel 2006, 85, 2310–2315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Grammelis, P.; Skodras, G.; Kakaras, E. Effects of biomass co-firing with coal on ash properties. Part II: Leaching, toxicity and radiological behaviour. Fuel 2006, 85, 2316–2322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Obernberger, I.; Biedermann, F.; Widmann, W.; Riedl, R. Concentrations of inorganic elements in biomass fuels and recovery in the different ash fractions. Biomass Bioenergy 1997, 12, 211–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Obernberger, I.; Biedermann, F. Fractionated Heavy Metal Separation in Biomass Combustion Plants—Possibilities, Technological Approach, Experiences. In Proceedings of the International Conference “The Impact of Mineral Impurities in Solid Fule Combustion”, Kona, HI, USA, 1997.
  25. Loo, S.V.; Koppejan, J. Biomass Ash Characteristics and Behaviour in Combustion Systems. In The Handbook of Biomass Combustion & Co-Firing; Loo, S.V., Koppejan, J., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2008; pp. 249–288. [Google Scholar]
  26. Korbee, R.; Kiel, J.H.A.; Zevenhoven, M.; Skrifvars, B.-J.; Jensen, P.A.; Frandsen, F.J. Investigation of Biomass Inorganic Matter by Advance Fuel Analysis and Conversion Experiments. In Power Production in the 21st Century: Imparts of Fuel and Operations; United Engineering Foundation Advanced Combustion Engineering Research Center: Snowbird, UT, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  27. Clarkson, D.T. The mineral nutrition of higher plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1980, 31, 239–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Marschner, H. Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants; Academic Press: London, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  29. Yuntenwi, E.A.T.; MacCarty, N.; Still, D.; Jürgen, E. Laboratory study of the effects of moisture content on heat transfer and combustionefficiency of three biomass cook stoves. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2008, XII, 66–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Shao, Y.; Xu, C.C.; Zhu, J.; Preto, F.; Wang, J.; Tourigny, G.; Badour, C.; Li, H. Ash deposition during co-firing biomass and coal in a fluidized-bed combustor. Energy Fuels 2010, 24, 4681–4688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Shao, Y.; Xu, C.C.; Zhu, J.; Preto, F.; Wang, J.; Li, H.; Badour, C. Ash deposition in co-firing three-fuel blends consisting of woody biomass, peat, and lignite in a pilot-scale fluidized-bed reactor. Energy Fuels 2011, 25, 2841–2849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Turn, S.Q.; Jenkins, B.M.; Jakeway, L.A.; Blevins, L.G.; Williams, R.B.; Rubenstein, G.; Kinoshita, C.M. Test results from sugar cane bagasse and high fiber cane co-fired with fossil fuels. Biomass Bioenergy 2006, 30, 565–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hupa, M. Interaction of fuels in co-firing in FBC. Fuel 2005, 84, 1312–1319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ferrer, E.; Aho, M.; Silvennoinen, J.; Nurminen, R.-V. Fluidized bed combustion of refuse-derived fuel in presence of protective coal ash. Fuel Process. Technol. 2005, 87, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Nielsen, H.P.; Frandsen, F.J.; Dam-Johansen, K.; Baxter, L.L. The implications of chlorine-associated corrosion on the operation of biomass-fired boilers. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2000, 26, 283–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Loo, S.V.; Koppejan, J. Combustion Technologies for Industrial and District Heating Systems. In The Handbook of Biomass Combustion & Co-Firing; Loo, S.V., Koppejan, J., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2008; pp. 134–154. [Google Scholar]
  37. Robinson, A.L.; Junker, H.; Baxter, L.L. Pilot-scale investigation of the influence of coal-biomass cofiring on ash deposition. Energy Fuels 2002, 16, 343–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Robinson, A.L.; Junker, H.; Buckley, S.G.; Sclippa, G.; Baxter, L.L. Interactions between Coal and Biomass When Cofiring. In Twenty-Seventh Symposium (International) on Combustion Volume One; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Nethelands, 1998; pp. 1351–1359. [Google Scholar]
  39. Wieck-Hansen, K.; Overgaard, P.; Larsen, O.H. Cofiring coal and straw in a 150 MWe power boiler experiences. Biomass Bioenergy 2000, 19, 395–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Vuthaluru, H.B.; Linjewile, T.M.; Zhang, D.K.; Manzoori, A.R. Investigations into the control of agglomeration and defluidisation during fluidised-bed combustion of low-rank coals. Fuel 1999, 78, 419–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Tobiasen, L.; Skytte, R.; Pedersen, L.S.; Pedersen, S.T.; Lindberg, M.A. Deposit characteristic after injection of additives to a Danish straw-fired suspension boiler. Fule Process. Technol. 2007, 88, 1108–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Shao, Y.; Wang, J.; Xu, C.C.; Zhu, J.; Preto, F.; Tourigny, G.; Badour, C.; Li, H. An experimental and modeling study of ash deposition behaviour for co-firing peat with lignite. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 2635–2640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Xu, X.G.; Li, S.Q.; Li, G.D.; Yao, Q. Effect of co-firing straw with two coals on the ash deposition behavior in a down-fired pulverized coal combustor. Energy Fuels 2010, 24, 241–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Theis, M.; Skrifvars, B.-J.; Zevenhoven, M.; Hupa, M.; Tran, H. Fouling tendency of ash resulting from burning mixtures of biofuels. Part 3: Influence of probe surface temperature. Fuel 2006, 85, 2002–2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Skrifvars, B.-J.; Laurén, T.; Hupa, M.; Korbee, R.; Ljung, P. Ash behaviour in a pulverized wood fired boiler-a case study. Fuel 2004, 83, 1371–1379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Liu, K.; Xie, W.; Li, D.; Pan, W.-P.; Riley, J.T.; Riga, A. The effect of chlorine and sulfur on the composition of ash deposits in a fluidized bed combustion system. Energy Fuels 2000, 14, 963–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gogebakan, Z.; Gogebakan, Y.; Selçuk, N.; Selçuk, E. Investigation of ash deposition in a pilot-scale fluidized bed combustor co-firing biomass with lignite. Bioresour. Technol. 2009, 100, 1033–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Aho, M.; Gil, A.; Taipale, R.; Vainikka, P.; Vesala, H. A pilot-scale fireside deposit study of co-firing Cynara with two coals in a fluidsed bed. Fuel 2008, 87, 58–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ninomiya, Y.; Zhang, L.; Sakano, T.; Kanaoka, C.; Masui, M. Transformation of mineral and emission of particulate matters during co-combustion of coal with sewage sludge. Fuel 2004, 83, 751–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wigley, F.; Williamson, J.; Malmgren, A.; Riley, G. Ash deposition at higher levels of coal replacement by biomass. Fuel Process. Technol. 2007, 88, 1148–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Frandsen, F.J. Utilizing biomass and waste for power production—A decade of contributing to the understanding, interpretation and analysis of deposits and corrosion products. Fuel 2005, 84, 1277–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Skrifvars, B.-J.; Yrjas, P.; Laurén, T.; Kinni, J.; Tran, H.; Hupa, M. The fouling behavior of rice husk ash in fluidized-bed combustion. 2. Pilot-scale and full-scale measurements. Energy Fuels 2005, 19, 1512–1519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Xiong, S.; Burvall, J.; Örberg, H.; Kalen, G.; Thyrel, M.; Öhman, M.; Boström, D. Slagging characteristics during combustion of corn stovers with and without Kaolin and Calcite. Energy Fuels 2008, 22, 3465–3470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Vamvuka, D.; Zografos, D. Predicting the behaviour of ash from agricultural wastes during combustion. Fuel 2004, 83, 2051–2057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Theis, M.; Skrifvars, B.-J.; Hupa, M.; Tran, H. Fouling tendency of ash resulting from burning mixtures of biofuels. Part1: Deposition rate. Fuel 2006, 85, 1125–1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kupka, T.; Mancini, M.; Irmer, M.; Weber, R. Investigation of ash deposit formation during co-firing of coal with sewage sludge, saw-dust and refuse derived fuel. Fuel 2008, 87, 2824–2837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Obernberger, I.; Dahl, J.; Brunner, T. Formation, Composition and Particle Size Distribution of Fly Ashes from Biomass Combustion Plants. In Proceedings of the 4th Biomass Conference of the Americas, Oxford, UK; Elsevier Science Ltd.: Oakland, CA, USA, 1999; pp. 1377–1385. [Google Scholar]
  58. Christensen, K.A. The Formation of Submicron Particles from the Combustion of Straw; Technical University of Denmark: Lyngby, Denmark, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  59. Kaufmann, H.; Nussbaumer, T.; Baxter, L.; Yang, N. Deposit formation on a single sylinder during combustion of herbaceous biomass. Fuel 2000, 79, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Overgaard, P.; Larsen, E.; Friborg, K.; Jensen, P.A.; Kaer, S.K. Full-scale tests on co-firing of straw in a natural gas-fired boiler. Available online: http://www.dongenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/NEW%20Corporate/PDF/Engineering/42.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2008).
  61. Aho, M. Reduction of chlorine deposition in FB boilers with aluminium-containing additives. Fuel 2001, 80, 1943–1951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Pettersson, A.; Åmand, L.-E.; Steenari, B.-M. Chemical fractionation for the characterisation of fly ashes from co-combustion of biofuels using different methods for alkali reduction. Fuel 2009, 88, 1758–1772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Gilbe, C.; Öhman, M.; Lindström, E.; Boström, D.; Backman, R.; Samuelsson, R.; Burvall, J. Slagging characteristics during residential combustion of biomass pellets. Energy Fuels 2008, 22, 3536–3543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Grimm, A.; Skoglund, N.; Boström, D.; Öhman, M. Bed agglomeration characteristics in fluidized quartz bed combustion of phosphorus-rich biomass fuels. Energy Fuels 2011, 25, 937–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Lindström, E.; Sström, M.; Boström, D.; Öhman, M. Slagging characteristics during combustion of cereal grains rich in phosphorus. Energy Fuels 2007, 21, 710–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Salmenoja, K. Field and Laboratory Studies on Chlorine-Included Superheater Corrosion in Boilers Fired with Biofuels. Ph.D. Thesis, Uiveristy of Åbo Akademi, Turku, Finland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  67. Shadman, F.; Punjak, W.A. Thermochemistry of alkali interactions with refractory adsorbents. Thermochim. Acta 1988, 131, 141–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Steenari, B.-M.; Lindqvist, O. High-temperature reactions of straw ash and the anti-sintering additives kaolin and dolomite. Biomass Bioenergy 1997, 14, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Steenari, B.-M.; Lundberg, A.; Pettersson, H.; Wilewska-Bien, M.; Andersson, D. Investigation of ash sintering during combustion of agricultural residues and the effect of additives. Energy Fuels 2009, 23, 5655–5662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Thy, P.; Jenkins, B.M.; Grundvig, S.; Shiraki, R.; Lesher, C.E. High temperature elemental losses and mineralogical changes in common biomass ashes. Fuel 2006, 85, 783–7955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Thy, P.; Lesher, C.E.; Jenkins, B.M. Experimental determination of high-temperature elemental losses from biomass slag. Fuel 2000, 79, 693–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Uberoi, M.; Punjak, W.A.; Shadman, F. The kinetics and mechanism of alkali removal from flue gases by solid sorbents. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 1990, 16, 205–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wang, L.; Hustad, J.E.; Skreiberg, Ø.; Skjevrak, G.; Grønli, M. A critical review on additives to reduce ash related operation problems in biomass combustion applications. Energy Procedia 2012, 20, 20–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Kassman, H.; Bäfver, L.; Åmand, L.-E. The importance of SO2 and SO3 for sulphation of gaseous KCl—An experimental investigation in a biomass fired CFB boiler. Combust. Flame 2010, 157, 1649–1657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Kassman, H.; Broström, M.; Berg, M.; Åmand, L.-E. Measures to reduce chlorine in deposits: Application in a large-scale circulating fluidised bed boiler firing biomass. Fuel 2011, 90, 1325–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Kassman, H.; Pettersson, J.; Steenari, B.-M.; Åmand, L.-E. Two strategies to reduce gaseous KCl and chlorine in deposits during biomass combustion—Injection of ammonium sulphate and co-combustion with peat. Fuel Process. Technol. 2011, in press. [Google Scholar]
  77. Aho, M.; Yrjas, P.; Taipale, R.; Hupa, M. Reduction of superheater corrosion by co-firing risky biomass with sewage sludge. Fuel 2010, 89, 2376–2386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Åmand, L.-E.; Leckner, B.; Eskilsson, D.; Tullin, C. Deposits on heat transfer tubes during co-combustion of biofuels and sewage sludge. Fuel 2006, 85, 1313–1322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Elled, A.L.; Davidsson, K.O.; Åmand, L.-E. Sewage sludge as a deposit inhibitor when co-fired with high potassium fuels. Biomass Bioenergy 2010, 34, 1546–1554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, L.; Skjevrak, G.; Hustad, J.E.; Grønli, M.G. Effects of sewage sludge and marble sludge addition on slag characteristics during wood waste pellets combustion. Energy Fuels 2011, 25, 5775–5785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Tsai, M.Y.; Wu, K.T.; Huang, C.C.; Lee, H.T. Co-firing of paper mill sludge and coal in an industrial circulating fluidized bed boiler. Waste Manag. 2002, 22, 439–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Jensen, P.A.; Sander, B.; Dam-Johansen, K. Removal of K and Cl by leaching of staw char. Biomass Bioenergy 2001, 20, 447–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Jensen, P.A.; Sander, B.; Dam-Johansen, K. Pretreatment of staw for power production by pyrolysis and char wash. Biomass Bioenergy 2001, 20, 431–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Wu, H.; Glarborg, P.; Frandsen, F.J.; Dam-Johansen, K.; Jensen, P.A. Dust-firing of straw and additives: Ash cehmistry and deposition behavior. Energy Fuels 2011, 25, 2862–2873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Boström, D.; Grimm, A.; Boman, C.; Björnbom, E.; Öhman, M. Influence of kaolin and calcite additives on ash transformations in small-scle combustion of oat. Energy Fuels 2009, 23, 5184–5190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Bäfver, L.S.; Rönnbäck, M.; Leckner, B.; Claesson, F.; Tullin, C. Particle emiision from combustion of oat grain and its potential reduction by addition of limestone or kalin. Fuel Process. Technol. 2009, 90, 353–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Singer, J.G. Combustion. In Fossil Power Systems; Singer, J.G., Ed.; Combustion Engineering Inc.: Windsor, Canada, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  88. McIlveen-Wright, D.R.; Huang, Y.; Rezvani, S.; Wang, Y. A technical and environmental analysis of co-combustion of coal and biomass in fluidised bed technologies. Fuel 2007, 86, 2032–2042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Demirbaş, A. Sustainable cofiring of biomass with coal. Energy Convers. Manag. 2003, 44, 1465–1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Demirbaş, A. Biomass co-firing for boilers associated with environmental impacts. Energy Sources 2005, 27, 1385–1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Loo, S.V.; Koppejan, J. Co-Combustion. In The Handbook of Biomass Combustion & Co-Firing; Loo, S.V., Koppejan, J., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2008; pp. 203–245. [Google Scholar]
  92. International Energy Agency (IEA). Bioenergy Project Development & Biomass Supply. 2007. Available online: http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/biomass.pdf (accessed on 28 August 2009).
  93. Hansen, P.F.B.; Andersson, K.H.; Wieck-Hansen, K.; Overgaard, P.; Rasmussen, I.; Frandsen, F.J.; Hansen, L.A.; Dam-Johansen, K. Co-firing straw and coal in a 150-MWe utility boiler: In situ measurements. Fuel Process. Technol. 1998, 54, 207–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Winslow, J.C.; Smous, S.M.; Ekmann, J.M. Co-Firing of Coal and Waste; International Energy Agency Coal Research: London, UK, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  95. Baxter, L.; Koppejan, J. Co-combution of biomass and coal. Euroheat Power 2004, 1, 34–39. [Google Scholar]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shao, Y.; Wang, J.; Preto, F.; Zhu, J.; Xu, C. Ash Deposition in Biomass Combustion or Co-Firing for Power/Heat Generation. Energies 2012, 5, 5171-5189. https://doi.org/10.3390/en5125171

AMA Style

Shao Y, Wang J, Preto F, Zhu J, Xu C. Ash Deposition in Biomass Combustion or Co-Firing for Power/Heat Generation. Energies. 2012; 5(12):5171-5189. https://doi.org/10.3390/en5125171

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shao, Yuanyuan, Jinsheng Wang, Fernando Preto, Jesse Zhu, and Chunbao Xu. 2012. "Ash Deposition in Biomass Combustion or Co-Firing for Power/Heat Generation" Energies 5, no. 12: 5171-5189. https://doi.org/10.3390/en5125171

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop