Upload
hartono-prayitno
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
1/15
Energy So urces, Part A, 30:11661178, 2008
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1556-7036 print/1556-7230 online
DOI: 10.1080/15567030701258246
Hydrogen Production from Biomass Wastes byHydrothermal Gasification
L. KONG,1 G. LI,1 B. ZHANG,1 W. HE,1 and H. WANG1
1State Key Lab of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, College of
Environmental Science and Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai,
P. R. China
Abstract Biomass is a useful feed material for energy and chemical resources.
Hydrothermal gasification of biomass wastes has been identified as a possible system
for producing hydrogen. Supercritical and subcritical water has attracted much atten-tion as an environmentally benign reaction medium and reactant. The main objectiveof this study is to assess and introduce the hydrothermal gasification of biomasswastes containing various quantities of the model compounds and real biomass. The
decomposition of biomass, as a basis of hydrothermal treatment of organic wastes,is introduced. To eliminate chars and tars formation and obtain higher yields ofhydrogen, catalyzed hydrothermal gasification of biomass wastes is summarized.
Keywords biomass waste, hydrogen, hydrothermal gasification, subcritical and su-percritical water
1. Introduction
Biomass is a substance made of organic compounds originally produced by absorbing
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere during the process of plant photosynthesis. As long as
the original biomass species are reproduced, cyclic follow of carbon dioxide and other
forms of carbon that we use as energy or materials in the atmosphere can be realized.
Since the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere theoretically remains constant
in this cycle, biomass is expected to become one of the key sources of renewable energy
in the sustainable society of the future. In the past decades, the interest to use biomass as
energy and resource production has increased. Energy and resource from biomass may
contribute in a considerable amount to the growing future energy and resource demand
(Matsumura et al., 2006). Energy and resource from biomass can additionally avoid the
increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and would help to meet the obligations of
the Kyoto Protocol to reduce carbon dioxide release.
In the past, for dry forms of biomass, such as wood and straw, conventional thermo-
chemical gasification processes are applicable. At the same time, combustion of agricul-
ture wastes was the most important method for warming in the Chinese countryside. For
wet forms such as sewage sludge, cattle manure, and food industry waste, biomethanation
has been the only method applied. Biomethanation is a slow reaction taking almost
Address correspondence to Li Gunangming, State Key Lab of Pollution Control and ResourceReuse, College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tongji University, 1239 Siping Road,Shanghai, 200092, P. R. China. E-mail: [email protected]
1166
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
2/15
H2 Production from Biomass Waste HTG 1167
24 weeks, and the treatment of fermentation sludge and wastewater from the reactors
is now a large problem in China.
Nowadays, large amounts of hydrogen gas are used in the petrochemical and chemical
industry. Future developments of fuel cells will also stimulate the need of this gas.
However, hydrogen is a gas that cannot be directly available in nature, and thus mustbe produced from other substances. Most industrial processes for hydrogen production
use reforming techniques, which require hydrocarbons, and stem from the oil industry.
Thus, hydrogen produced in that way cannot any longer be considered a clean gas,
especially because of its bonds with oil production, which is limited by carbon dioxide
formation and by geopolitical aspects. As the reduction of greenhouse effect and economic
dependence on fossil fuels is highly dependent on reduction of fuels from oil and gas,
new ways of hydrogen gas production have been studied all over the world in the last
several years. One of the processes is biomass gasification, which has the advantage of
recovering wastes. This process can be used to synthesize not only hydrogen but also fuels
and a large number of different chemical compounds. Thus, gasification offers flexibility
toward both feedstock and final products. However, this well-studied process, which
usually uses high temperature steam (>973 K) under atmospheric pressure, produces
not only hydrogen but also carbon monoxide. In efforts to surmount these problems,
bioenergy researchers are focusing on a technology called hydrothermal gasification.
The main objective of this study is to assess the decomposition progress of biomass
wastes and model compounds under hydrothermal conditions. At the same time, the
recent advances of biomass gasification under hydrothermal conditions are investigated.
The developments of hydrothermal utilization of biomass wastes are also introduced.
2. The Characters of Hydrothermal Treatment
The interest of hydrothermal treatment, i.e., water with temperature and pressure near
and above its critical point (T > 374C and P > 22 MPa), serves as a reactive medium
due to its specific transportation and solubilization properties. Indeed, in such conditions,
water undergoes significant variations of its physical properties, like a decreasing of thedielectric constant, thermal conductivity, ion product, and viscosity, while the density
only decreases slowly. Thus, water acts as a homogeneous non-polar solvent of high
diffusivity and high transport properties, able to dissolve any organic compounds and
gases (Masaru et al., 2004; Peter and Eckhard, 2001; Phillip, 1999; Marc et al., 2004).
In such a process, hydrogen can be produced at thermodynamic equilibrium because of
the operating conditions. Chemical reactions with high efficiencies can be obtained in
the case of a water organic mixture without interfacial transport limitations. Therefore,
the conversion yields become significant (>99%) with a rather high (up to at least 50%)
percentage of hydrogen in the formed gas when model wastes are treated. Furthermore,
the hydrogen is produced at high pressure directly, which means a smaller reactor volume
and lower energy to pressurize the gas in a storage tank. A large portion of biomass
wastes, e.g., from agriculture and food industries, is wet biomass containing up to 95%
water. This wet biomass causes high drying costs if classical gas-phase gasificationor liquefaction processes are used. This can be advantageously avoided by using a
gasification or liquefaction in near-critical and supercritical water. The use of water in
hydrothermal conditions instead of atmospheric pressure steam could be advantageous
for converting biomass into pure hydrogen. Indeed, in such high pressure and temperature
conditions, it is possible to get high conversion levels of biomass thanks to the specific
properties of supercritical and subcritical water.
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
3/15
1168 L. Kong et al.
Recently, researchers focus on the utilization of biomass wastes in subcritical and
supercritical water. Through hydrothermal treatment, they obtain useful chemical feed-
stock, such as acetic acid and lactic acid. Jin et al. (2001, 2003, 2005) carried out a
series of experiments to research the hydrothermal conversion of biomass water and
control pathways of hydrothermal reaction to improve the acetic acid yield. A two-stephydrothermal progress to increase the yield of acetic acid was discussed. The first step
was to accelerate the formation of HMF, 2-FA, and lactic acid (LA), and the second step
was to further convert the furans (HMF, 2-FA) and LA produced in the first step to acetic
acid by oxidation with newly supplied oxygen. The acetic acid obtained by the two-step
process had not only a high yield but also better purity. The contribution of two pathways
via furans and LA in the two-step process to convert carbohydrates into acetic acid was
roughly estimated as 8590%. At the same time, lactic acid, glucose, and acetic acid
were also produced by others research groups (Armando et al., 2002; Motonobu et al.,
1998, 2004; Lourdes and David, 2002; Shanableh, 2000).
3. Decomposition of Biomass Waste
The proton-catalyzed mechanism, direct nucleophilic attack mechanism, hydroxide ion
catalyzed mechanism, and radical mechanism play important roles in the hydrolysis
of biomass wastes. The most likely source of hydroxide and hydroxide ions is the
high temperature water itself because subcritical and supercritical water have a stronger
tendency to ionize than ambient water, which makes water a Brnsted base acid and acts
as an effective catalyst (Jin et al., 2005). The decomposition of biomass wastes under
hydrothermal conditions including hydrolysis, dissolution, pyrolysis, and all of them
favor decomposition and gasification. At the same time, the process under hydrothermal
conditions shows similarities to other methods as well as significant differences due to the
presence of water as the reactant, reaction medium, and catalyst (Peter, 2004; Noam and
Ronald, 2003; Oka et al., 2002). Usually, detailed chemical reaction pathways with well-
defined single reaction steps cannot describe the degradation of biomass in supercritical
and subcritical water. One reason is that biomass is a combination of cellulose, hemicel-lulose, and lignin. These components interact with each other, leading to a very complex
chemical mechanism. The chemical mechanisms inducing hydrogen formation from raw
biomass and decomposition are very complex and cannot be easily summarized (Minowa
et al., 1998, 1999). It is possible to say that pyrolysis, hydrolysis, steam reforming,
water gas shift, methanation, and other reactions play a role in the gasification chemistry.
Another reason is that it is mainly a heterogeneous process, proceeding inside and,
in particular, on the surface of biomass particles. The heterogeneous reaction cannot be
directly compared with homogeneous reactions of other organic compounds. Here, studies
of a pure component like crystalline cellulose lead to more detailed information. The
biomass wastes can be decomposed through hydrothermal treatment into aqueous phase,
oil, gas, and residue. The procedure of biomass decomposition is shown in Figure 1
(Minowa et al., 1999).
At low temperature regions, the oligomer is the main liquefaction product of biomass,is the most part lower organic compound. At the same time, the conversion rate of
oligomer is much faster than the hydrolysis rate of biomass wastes. Thus, even if the
hydrolysis products such as oligomer or glucose are formed, their further decomposition
rapidly takes place, and thus a high yield of hydrolysis products cannot be obtained.
However, around the critical point, the hydrolysis rate jumps to more than an order of
magnitude higher level and becomes faster than the oligomer decomposition rate. When
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
4/15
H2 Production from Biomass Waste HTG 1169
Figure 1. The procedure of biomass decomposition.
the temperature is higher than 400C, the breakage of interior and intermolecular HH
bonds happen with ease and produce a large number of H2, CO, CH4, and tar (Mitsuru
et al., 2000, 2003; Kim et al., 2004).
To discuss the chemistry passing off, here key compounds such as crystalline,
cellulose, glucose, and organic acids are identified and quantified in studies of biomass
conversion in water. These compounds are formed by different and typical reaction
pathways and are therefore a tool to compare complex chemical processes. The key
compounds make it possible to compare the results of model compound reaction with
those of the reaction of real biomass. A comparison of the changes in the key compound
concentration for different types of biomass should give hints about the influence of
biomass composition on chemistry. For example, through the basic study cellulose model
compounds (crystalline, cellulose, glucose) and their decomposition products and the
comparison with literature data, the main reaction pathway has been elucidated. Figure 2
shows the result of cellulose decomposition (Mitsuru et al., 1998; Jin et al., 2004; Bicker
et al., 2005).
Cellulose hydrolysis produces oligomers and glucose. Glucose epimerizes to fructose
by the Lobry de Bruyn-Alberda van Ekenstein (LBAE) transformation or decomposes
to erythrose plus glycolaldehyde or glyceraldehydes plus dihydroxyacetone. Produced
fructose also decomposes to erythrose plus glyceraldehydes or glyceraldehyde plus dihy-
droxyacetone. Glyceraldehyde converts to dihydroxyacetone and both glyceraldehyde
and dihydroxyacetone dehydrated into pyruvaldehyde. Pyruvaldehyde, erythrose, and
glycolaldehyde further decompose to smaller species, which are mainly acid, aldenydes,and alcohols of 13 carbons.
4. Biomass Gasification
Biomass can be very effectively utilized when converted into gas fuel, particularly
hydrogen gas (Knoef, 2005). To produce hydrogen from water using biomass, the biomass
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
5/15
1170 L. Kong et al.
Figure 2. The main reaction pathway of cellulose decomposition.
is first properly gasified, and then the product gas is reformed into hydrogen via reactions
with water. Biomass gasification technologies are summarized in Figure 3.
Most of the research spurred by this interest has been of economic technology in
nature, based on gasifier performance data acquired during system proof of conceptual
test. Less emphasis has been given to experimental investigation of hydrogen production
via biomass gasification. Until now, all process equipment needed to produce hydrogen
has been well established in commercial use, except for the gasifier. Comparison with
other biomass thermochemical gasification such as air gasification or steam gasification,the hydrothermal gasification can directly deal with the wet biomass without drying and
have high gasification efficiency at lower temperature.
Figure 3. The main methods of biomass gasification.
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
6/15
H2 Production from Biomass Waste HTG 1171
The steam reforming of biomass in steam is proposed as a viable source of hydrogen
by Antal et al. (1994) in the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute (HNEI). Subsequent research
revealed that steam pyrolysis of biomass results in the formation of many gaseous
products, as well as a refractory tar. Hydrogen yields are not high. Consequently, interest
in biomass pyrolysis as a source of hydrogen declined. After a decade of disinterest,work on the steam reforming of biomass in water as a source of hydrogen commenced
again, focusing on hydrothermal gasification. Systematic experimental investigations for
the conversion and gasification of biomass by hydrothermal treatment were carried out
by Elliott and Sealock (1996) in the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) of the United
States, Minowa in the National Institute for Resources and Environment (NIRE) of Japan
(Usui et al., 2000), and Schmieder et al. (2000) in Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Institut
fr Technische Chemie (FKITC) of Germany. Simultaneously, others groups also carry
out much research on the gasification of biomass wastes and their model compound.
4.1. Gasification Progress
Kruse and Gawlik (2003), Kruse and Henningsen (2003), Kruse et al. (2005), and Sinag
et al., (2004) studied the degradation of biomass in the ranges of 330C410C and
3050 MPa and at 15 min of reaction time. Comparing the results from earlier studies
of model compounds, e.g., glucose or cellulose, with biomass degradation is to identify
chemical reaction pathways. The simplified reaction mechanism of cellulose degradation
during hydrothermal gasification is shown in Figure 4. The results show that the key
compounds are phenols (phenol and cresols), furfurals, acids (acetic acid, formic acid,
lactic acids, and levulinic acid), and aldehydes (acetic aldehyde and formic aldehyde).
Through gasifying biomass in a continuously stirred tank reactor (CSTR), they identify
that the results concerning the dependence of the dry matter content on the gas formation,
total organic carbon content, and phenols concentration are very different. In the CSTR
the increase of the dry matter content leads to an increased gas yield, in particular of
CH4, no char/coke and no increased tar formation with increasing dry matter content,
and the phenols yield increases. The reason may be the very fast heating and the back
Figure 4. The schematic representation of the gasification of cellulose.
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
7/15
1172 L. Kong et al.
mixing, which leads to the presence of reactive hydrogen during every step of biomass
degradation. Here the phenol formation is the last hurdle for complete conversion. This
is not found in the batch reactor. Biomass is much more complex because biomass
contains a lot of different substances. Especially, the influence of salts is significant and,
in addition, rather complex. At the same time, the influence of water properties fromsubcritical to supercritical conditions on the biomass degradation is also obvious.
4.2. Model Compound and Real Biomass Gasification
Some researchers chose glucose as a representative biomass model compound to gasifying
under hydrothermal conditions. The main gases that Paul and Jude (2005) found in their
experiments were carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane, and hydrogen, and there
is significant production of oil and char. As the temperature and the concentration of the
oxidant, hydrogen peroxide, are increased, there is an increase in the yield of gas. The
increase in the concentration of the oxidant, hydrogen peroxide, will decrease the amounts
of char, oil, and water-soluble products. The product yield and composition do not
significantly change with the temperature (and pressure) and residence time. The increase
of glucose in the reactor system causes a decrease in the gasification of glucose and results
in significant formation of char and oil. Lee et al. (2002) reports the gasification of glucose
using tubular-flow reactors at 480C750C and 28 MPa. The hydrogen yield increases
sharply with increasing temperature over 660C. It is believed that the water-gas shift
reaction occurred significantly at temperatures over 660C. Methane is identified as a
very stable compound in supercritical water at temperatures as high as 700C. Carbon
gasification efficiency remained 100% at 700C for a wide range of reactor residence
times of 1050 s. Hao et al. (2003) utilized glucose as a model compound of biomass
to form a product gas composed of H2, CO, CH4, CO2, and a small amount of C2H4and C2H6. Glucose at low concentrations (ca. 0.1 M) can be completely gasified in
923.15 K, 25 MPa, and 3.6 min resident time and no char or tar is observed. The raw
biomass feedstock of sawdust with some CMC is also gasified in this system and the
gasification efficiency reaches in excess of 95%. Ayhan (2004) investigated the yieldsof total extraction products from supercritical water extraction, which increased with
increasing temperature for all runs. The yields of hydrogen (YHs) increase with increasing
temperature and pressure for all runs, and the increase of YHs with pressure are higher
than those with temperature. Takuya and Yukihiko (2001) examined the gasification of
cellulose, xylan, and lignin mixtures in supercritical water at 623 K and 25 MPa. Their
results indicate that a decrease of gas production is observed for the mixtures containing
lignin. Thus, they surmise that cellulose or xylan is likely to function as a hydrogen donor
to lignin. The reaction of intermediates from cellulose and xylan with lignin results in
a decrease in H2 production. A set of equations develops to estimate the amount and
composition of the product gas to accurately predict the actual results using only the
lignin fraction as a parameter. This confirms the importance of the lignin fraction effect
on hydrothermal gasification characteristics.
4.3. Catalyst Gasification
However, in the real case, all of the biomass does not react with supercritical and subcrit-
ical water, although its reactivity is higher in this specific medium than in atmospheric
pressure steam. Every organic molecule is not transformed into hydrogen or carbon
dioxide gases. Significant amounts of tars and chars can be formed during the reaction.
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
8/15
H2 Production from Biomass Waste HTG 1173
This shift from thermodynamic expectations has, however, been reduced by the use of
a catalyst. The catalysts that used in the experiments are summarized in Table 1. The
table shows us that base catalyst is the most important catalyst, and through base catalyst
we can enhance the hydrogen yield and rate in the gas. A conversion mechanism is
suggested which consists of decomposition of big molecules to small molecules on themetal surface, steam gasification of small molecules to produce CO and H 2, followed by
CO methanation and CO shift reaction to produce CH4 and CO2. The catalyst is found
to be highly active and stable with no sintering (Tang and Kuniyuki, 2005; Osada et al.,
2006).
4.3.1. Metal Catalyst. Takuya et al. (2004) gasifies lignin, cellulose, and their mixture
with a nickel catalyst under hydrothermal conditions at 673 K and 25 Mpa. When
softwood lignin is included in the feedstock, gasification efficiency is low but increases
with the amount of the catalyst. Sufficient amount of catalyst achieves high gasification
efficiency even for the mixtures of cellulose and softwood lignin. One possible mechanism
is the catalyst being deactivated by tarry products from the reaction between cellulose
and softwood lignin. But the gasification of hardwood and grass lignin is much easier.
Takafumi et al. (2003) conducts gasification of alkylphenols in the presence of various
supported metal catalysts at 673 K. The results show that activity of the catalyst is
in the order of Ru/c-alumina > Ru/carbon, Rh/carbon > Pt/c-alumina, Pd/carbon, andPd/c-alumina. The main gas products are methane, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen. The
analysis of liquid products shows that dehydroxylation occurs easier than dealkylation for
supported ruthenium and rhodium catalysts. The sum of the yield of gases and the ratio
of methane from 4-propylphenol with a Ru/c alumina catalyst increases with increasing
water density, while the yield of liquid products shows a maximum at 0.1 g/cm3. The
gasification of various alkyl-phenols is investigated over a Ru/c-alumina catalyst at 673 K
and 0.3 g/cm3 of water density for 15 min. The yield of gas is above 10% and in the
order of 4-isopropylphenol > 2-isopropylphenol, 2-propylphenol > 4-propylphenol >
3-isopropylphenol. The composition of gas is 5060% methane, 3040% carbon dioxide,
and 10% hydrogen.Takuya and Yoshito (2004) developed a flow reactor system that smoothly gasifies
glucose and glucose-lignin mixture solution at 673 K, 25.7 MPa. The reactor system
consists of three continuous reactors, which are a pyrolysis reactor, an oxidation reactor,
and a catalytic reactor with nickel catalyst. The reactions occur in each reactor as
follows. In the pyrolysis reactor, there are mainly two kinds of reactions: decomposition
and polymerization. The decomposition proceeds in the early stage of the reaction.
However, long residence time in this reactor causes undesirable polymerization of biomass
fragment. Consequently, moderate residence time in the pyrolysis reactor is favorable in
their reactor system. In the oxidation reactor, tar and/or char products are effectively
decomposed via radical reaction led by oxidant to low molecular weight products that
can be decomposed in the catalytic reactor. With residence time in the oxidation reactor
that is too short, high molecular weight compounds such as tarry products decompose
insufficiently. In the catalytic reactor, CO is converted to H2 and CO2 via water-gasshift reaction, and low molecular weight liquid compounds are also decomposed to gas.
However, heavy molecular compounds such as tarry and/or char products are not easily
decomposed via catalytic reaction. They reveal that supercritical condition is suitable
for gasification of biomass because the tar and/or char products are decomposed easily.
By employing an oxidation reactor even at low temperature (around 673 K), they settle
the char plug problem and enhance gasification ratio and content of hydrogen gas in its
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
9/15
Table 1
The state of catalytic hydrothermal gasification of biomass
Feedstock CatalystReactioncondition
Mainproduct gas Reactor
Glucose Ni, K2CO3 500C Hydrogen Tumbling batch
autoclaveOrganic wastewater Ni/carbon 360C, 20 MPa Methane,
hydrogen
Cellulose, softwood,hardwood, and grass lignin
Ni 400C, 25 MPa Microreactor
Sawdust, rice straw,alkylphenols
Ru/carbon, Rh/carbon,Pd/carbon,Ru/c-aluminaPt/c-alumina,
Pd/c-alumina
400C Methane,hydrogen
Tube bombreactors
D-Glucose lignin Ni 400C, 25.7 MPa Hydrogen Continuous flowreactor
Corn- and potato-starch gels,sawdust, cornstarch gel,potato wastes
Carbon 650C, 22 MPa Hydrogen Tubular flowreactors
Glycerol, glucose, cellobiose,bagasse, sewage sludge,DoD wastes
Charcoal activatedcarbon
600C, 34.5 MPa Supercritical floreactor
N-hexadecane NaOH 400C Hydrogen Batch reactor Organosolv-lignin ZrO2 30, 40 MPaGlucose, catechol KOH 600C, 25 MPa Hydrogen Batch autoclave
tubular flowreactors
Vanillin, glycine K2CO3Straw, sewage, sawdust,
sludge, lignin pyrocatecholKOH 600C700C Hydrogen Batch and tubu
reactor
1174
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
10/15
H2 Production from Biomass Waste HTG 1175
production gas. They have succeeded in achieving high gasification efficiency based on
carbon up to 96% at 673 K, 25.7 MPa, with total residence time of about 1 min. The
main gaseous products are H2 and CO2.
4.3.2. C Catalyst. Michael et al. (2000) studied the gasification of biomass feedstocks,
including corn- and potato-starch gels, wood sawdust suspended in a cornstarch gel, and
potato wastes, which are delivered to three different tubular flow reactors by means of
a cement pump. The organic content of these feedstocks is vaporized at temperatures
above 650C and pressures above 22 MPa. A packed bed of carbon within the reactor
catalyzed the gasification of these organic vapors in the water; consequently, the water
effluent of the reactor is clean. The gas is composed of hydrogen, carbon dioxide,
methane, carbon monoxide, and traces of ethane. The gas composition and gas yield
are strongly affected by the reaction temperature. High entrance temperatures favor
the methane steam-reforming reaction and result in the production of a hydrogen-rich
gas (57 mol%) with yields exceeding 2 L/g. Xu et al. (1996) utilized spruce wood
charcoal, macadamia shell charcoal, coal activated carbon, and coconut shell activated
carbon as catalyst to gasify organic compounds. Feedstocks studied in this article includeglycerol, glucose, cellobiose, whole biomass feedstocks (depithed bagasse liquid extract
and sewage sludge), and representative Department of Defense (DoD) wastes (methanol,
methyl ethyl ketone, ethylene glycol, acetic acid, and phenol). Complete conversion
of glucose (22% by weight in water) and the whole biomass feeds to a hydrogen-rich
synthesis gas is realized at a weight hourly space velocity (WHSV) of 22.2 h1 at 600C,
34.5 MPa. In the presence of the carbon catalyst, temperatures above about 600C are
needed to achieve high gasification efficiencies for concentrated organic feeds in water.
The carbon gasification efficiency remained near 100% for more than 6 h when a swirl
generator is employed in the entrance of the reactor.
4.3.3. Base Catalyst. Masaru et al. (2003) studied partial oxidation of n-hexadecane and
organosol-lignin by using a batch type reactor in supercritical water. As the result, theaddition of base catalyst (ZrO2and NaOH) does not increase the conversion of n-C16 and
promotes the formation of 1-alkenes and H2. Since the H2=CO2 ratio is almost or more
than unity, partial oxidation into CO and base catalyst enhances water-gas shift reaction.
The experiments with and without O2 are also conducted for lignin. The yield of H2from lignin with zirconia and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) is 2 and 4 times, respectively,
the same as that without catalyst at the same condition for both with and without O 2.
Thus, a base catalyst has a positive effect on decomposition and partial oxidation of
lignin to gaseous products such as H2. In the case of lignin studies, the enhancement
of decomposition of the carbonyl compounds (aldehyde and ketone) by catalytic effect
of NaOH and ZrO2 inhibit char formation and promote CO and thus H2 formation.
Schmieder et al. (2000) shows that in the presence of KOH or K 2CO3 at 250 bar
and temperatures higher than 550C600C, carbohydrates, aromatic compounds, glycine
as a model compound for proteins, and real biomass are completely gasified to a H2-rich product containing CO2 as the main carbon compound. The addition of potassium
decreases the COX concentration and increases CO2 and H2 in the product gas; carbon
balances for the miniature plant are close to better than 96%. Compared to the traditional
gasification process for the hydrothermal gasification has the following advantages for a
wet biomass: organic waste feedstock can be expected, much higher thermal efficiency,
a hydrogen-rich gas with low CO yield can be produced in one process step, soot and
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
11/15
1176 L. Kong et al.
tar formation can be suppressed, and the heteroatomes (S, N, and halogenes) leave the
process with the aqueous effluent avoiding expensive gas cleaning.
Andrea et al. (2000) uses pyrocatechol as a model compound for lignin in biomass
and for aromatic compounds in wastewaters to research the chemical reactions occurring
during gasification and their dependence on reaction conditions. They carry out theexperiments in two different reactor types, a batch and a tubular reactor, to achieve long
reaction times at low temperatures as well as short reaction times at high temperatures.
More than 99% of the pyrocatechol is gasified at 600C with a 2-min reaction time
or at 700C with a 1-min reaction time. The addition of KOH and other salts increase
the relative yields of hydrogen and carbon dioxide and decrease the relative CO yield
by acceleration of the water-gas shift reaction. Thermodynamic calculations and the
experimental results show that an increase in temperature and time and a decrease of
pressure leads to an increase of hydrogen formation as well as a decrease in the methane
yield. Doubling the concentration of pyrocatechol leads to a decrease in hydrogen yield
and gasification efficiency.
5. Conclusions
Hydrothermal gasification of biomass wastes provides a new idea for the treatment and
utilization of organic waste. Hydrogen can be obtained as the main production under
hydrothermal conditions when water serves as a potential environmentally benign medium
and reactant for industrial chemical reactions. Compared with other biomass thermochem-
ical processes such as pyrolysis, gasification, air gasification, or steam gasification, the
supercritical water gasification can directly deal with wet biomass without drying and
have high gasification efficiency at lower temperature. Catalysis should be the solution to
obtain higher yields of hydrogen and to decrease the amount of chars and tars. Carbon and
base catalyst play an important role in the increase of yields and ratio in produced gas.
Hydrothermal process is also one of the most promising processes for the conversion
of biomass waste into useful materials among several biomass conversion processes.
Through carrying out the basic research and developing catalyst, the industrialization ofthe hydrothermal gasification of biomass wastes will be realized.
Acknowledgment
The work was supported by Fund of Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai
Municipality.
References
Andrea, K., Danny, M., Pia, R., et al. 2000. Gasification of pyrocatechol in supercritical water in
the presence of potassium hydroxide. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39:48424848.
Antal, Jr., M. J., Manarungson, S., and Mok, W. S.-L. 1994. Hydrogen production by steam re-
forming glucose in supercritical water. In: Advances in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion,
Bridyewater A.V. (Ed.). London: Blackie Academic and Professional, pp. 13671377.
Armando, T. Q., Muhammad, F., Kilyoon, K., et al. 2002. Low molecular weight carboxylic acids
produced from hydrothermal treatment of organic wastes. J. Hazard. Mater. B93:209220.
Ayhan, D. 2004. Hydrogen-rich gas from fruit shells via supercritical water extraction. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy29:12371243.
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
12/15
H2 Production from Biomass Waste HTG 1177
Bicker, M., Endres, S., Ott, L., et al. 2005. Catalytical conversion of carbohydrates in sub-critical
water: A new chemical process for lactic acid production. J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 239:151
157.
Elliott, D. C., and Sealock, Jr., L. J. 1996. Chemical processing in high-pressure aqueous environ-
ments: Low-temperature catalytic gasification.Trans. IchemE. 74:563566.Hao, X. H., Guo, L. J., Mao, X., et al. 2003. Hydrogen production from glucose used as a model
compound of biomass gasified in supercritical water. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 28:5564.
Jin, F. M., Ausushi, K., and Heiji, E. 2001. Oxidation of garbage in supercritical water. High
Pressure Res.20:525531.
Jin, F. M., Takehiko, M., and Heiji, E. 2003. Oxidation reaction of high molecular weight carboxylic
acids in supercritical water. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37:32203231.
Jin, F. M., Zhou, Z. Y., and Enomoto, H. 2004. Conversion mechanism of cellulosic biomass to
lactic acid in subcritical water and acid-base catalytic effect of subcritical water. Chem. Lett.
33:126127.
Jin, F. M., Zhou, Z. Y., and Takehiko, M. 2005. Controlling hydrothermal reaction pathways to
improve acetic acid production from carbohydrate biomass. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39:1893
1902.
Kim, I. C., Park, S. D., and Kim, S. 2004. Effects of sulfates on the decomposition of cellobiose
in supercritical water. Chem. Eng. Process. 43:9971005.Knoef, H. 2005.Handbook Biomass Gasification. Netherlands: Biomass Technology Group Press,
2223.
Kruse, A., and Gawlik, A. 2003. Biomass conversion in water at 330C410C and 3050 MPa.
Identification of key compounds for indicating different chemical reaction pathways.Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 42:267279.
Kruse, A., and Henningsen, T. 2003. Biomass gasification in supercritical water: influence of the
dry matter content and the formation of phenols. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42:37113717.
Kruse, A., Krupka, A., and Schwarzkopf, V. 2005. Influence of proteins on the hydrothermal
gasification and liquefaction of biomass. 1. Comparison of different feedstocks. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 44:30133020.
Lee, I. G., Kim, M. S., and Ihm, S. K. 2002. Gasification of glucose in supercritical water. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 41:11821188.
Lourdes, C., and David, V. 2002. Formation of organic acids during the hydrolysis and oxidation
of several wastes in sub- and supercritical water. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 41:65036509.Marc, H., Philip, A. M., Glenn, T. H., et al. 2004. Salt precipitation and scale control in supercritical
water oxidationPart A: Fundamentals and research. J. Supercrit. Fluids 29:265288.
Masaru, W., Hiroshi, I., Mitsumasa, O., et al. 2003. Catalytic effects of NaOH and ZrO2 for partial
oxidative gasification of n-hexadecane and lignin in supercritical water. Fuel 82:545552.
Masaru, W., Takafumi, S., Hiroshi, I., et al. 2004. Chemical reactions of C1 compounds in near-
critical and supercritical water.Chem. Rev. 104:58035820.
Matsumura, Y., Sasaki, M., Okuda, K., et al. 2006. Supercritical water treatment of biomass for
energy and material recovery.Combust. Sci. Technol. 178:509536.
Michael, Jr., J. A., Stephen, G. A., et al. 2000. Biomass gasification in supercritical water. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 39:40404053.
Minowa, T., Zhen, F., and Ogi, T. 1998. Cellulose decomposition in hot-compressed water with
alkali or nickel catalyst. J. Supercrit. Fluids 13:253259.
Minowa, T., Zhen, F., and Ogi, T. 1999. Liquefaction of cellulose in hot-compressed water using
sodium carbonate: production distribution at different reaction temperature. J. Chem. Eng.Jpn.30:186190.
Mitsuru, S., Bernard, K., Roberto, M., et al. 1998. Cellulose hydrolysis in sub-critical and super-
critical water. J. Supercrit. Fluids 13:261268.
Mitsuru, S., Tadafumi, A., and Kunio, A. 2003. Fractionation of sugarcane bagasse by hydrothermal
treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 86:301304.
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
13/15
1178 L. Kong et al.
Mitsuru, S., Zhen, F., Yoshiko, F., et al. 2000. Dissolution and hydrolysis of cellulose in sub-critical
and supercritical water. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39:28832890.
Motonobu, G., Ryusaku, O., Tsutomu, H., et al. 2004. Hydrothermal conversion of municipal
organic waste into resources. Bioresour. Technol. 93:279284.
Motonobu, G., Takatsygu, N., Akane, O., et al. 1998. Supercritical water oxidation for the destruc-tion of municipal excess sludge and alcohol distillery wastewater of molasses. J. Supercrit.
Fluids 13:277282.
Noam, E., and Ronald, M. L. 2003. Review of materials issues in supercritical water oxidation
systems and the need for corrosion control. Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 56:110.
Oka, H., Yamago, S., Yoshida, J., et al. 2002. Evidence for a hydroxide ion catalyzed pathway in
ester hydrolysis in supercritical water.Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 41:623625.
Osada, M., Sato, T., Watanabe, M., et al. 2006. Catalytic gasification of wood biomass in subcritical
and supercritical water. Combust. Sci. Technol. 178:537552.
Paul, T. W., and Jude, O. 2005. Composition of products from the supercritical water gasification
of glucose: A model biomass compound. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44:87398749.
Peter, K. 2004. Corrosion in high-temperature and supercritical water and aqueous solutions: A
review. J. Supercrit. Fluids 29:129.
Peter, K., and Eckhard, D. 2001. An assessment of supercritical water oxidation (SCWO): Existing
problems, possible solutions and new reactor concepts. Chem. Eng. J. 83:207214.Phillip, E. S. 1999. Organic chemical reactions in supercritical water. Chem. Rev. 99:603621.
Schmieder, H., Abeln, J., Boukis, N., et al. 2000. Hydrothermal gasification of biomass and organic
wastes. J. Supercrit. Fluids 17:145153.
Shanableh, A. 2000. Production of useful organic matter from sludge using hydrothermal treatment.
Water Res. 34:945951.
Sharma, A., Nakagawa, H., and Miura, K. 2006. A novel nickel/carbon catalyst for CH4 and
H2 production from organic compounds dissolved in wastewater by catalytic hydrothermal
gasification. Fuel 85:179184.
Sinag, A., Kruse, A., Rathert, J. 2004. Influence of the heating rate and the type of catalyst on
the formation of key intermediates and on the generation of gases during hydropyrolysis of
glucose in supercritical water in a batch reactor. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43:502508.
Takafumi, S., Mitsumasa, O., Masaru, W., et al. 2003. Gasification of alkylphenols with supported
noble metal catalysts in supercritical water. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42:42774282.
Takuya, Y., and Yoshito, O. 2004. Partial oxidative and catalytic biomass gasification in supercriticalwater: A promising flow reactor system. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43:40974104.
Takuya, Y., and Yukihiko, M. 2001. Gasification of cellulose, xylan, and lignin mixtures in
supercritical water. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 40:54695474.
Takuya, Y., Yoshito, O., and Yukihiko M. 2004. Gasification of biomass model compounds and
real biomass in supercritical water. Biomass Bioenergy 26:7178.
Tang, H. Q., and Kuniyuki, K. 2005. Supercritical water gasification of biomass: thermodynamic
analysis with direct Gibbs free energy minimization. Chem. Eng. J. 106:261267.
Usui, Y., Minowa, T., Inoue, S., and Ogi, T. 2000. Selective hydrogen production from cellulose
at low temperature catalyzed by supported group 10 metal. Chem. Lett. 346:11661167.
Xu, X. D., Yukihiko, M., Jonny, S., et al. 1996. Carbon-catalyzed gasification of organic feedstocks
in supercritical water. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 35:25222530.
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
14/15
8/14/2019 1_WTE_ART_25
15/15