Dear Dr. Pannirselvam ----- Original Message ----- From: Pannirselvam P.V To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:53 PM Subject: Re: [Gasification] Syngas on Wiki_
Helo KEVIN Well done your words making all the points , yet need refinement at the end with final conclusion.Some point Is N2 and co2 free need only to be syngas , or this is pure syngas which Greg do not agree Syngas can be any gas , can include producer gas , water gas .Historically Syngas the latest , process independent as Tom correctly conclude that syngas is general one where as the other are more specific # The fundamental issue here is: What is "Syngas"? If it is "Synthesis Gas" then its composition and method of manufacture can be anything and any way, as long as the end use is to synthesize a final product. On the other hand, if "syngas" is "synthetic gas", then it must have a definite composition that reasonably approximates the gas which it is attempting to duplicate. # "Synthesis Gas" can thus have any amount of N2, CO2, and other dilutants or contaminants, so long as the level of these extraneous components do not prevent the "synthesis gas" from being used for synthesizing a final product, or products. Equally, if what is produced is "synthetic gas", then the same guideline holds.... dilutants and extraneous materials must be at an adequately low level such that the "syngas" analysis meets the specifications for the gas that it is intended to replace. # Thus, it would appear that what comes out of the device producing the gas is "producer gas", and its gas analysis and end use determines if it is reasonable to call it "fuel gas, "engine grade gas", "synthesis gas", synthetic gas", etc. # Note that the GEK could indeed produce a range of such defined gases. For example, it now has been shown as being able to producde "Engine Grade Gas" (EGG). This is not "Synthesis Gas" that could be used for FT feed, or "Synthetic gas" of a grade that could replace natural gas or propane. However, it might very well be able to produce a "Synthesis Gas" that was suitable for a FT feedstock, if it was blown with oxygen rather than air, and if water spray, saturated steam, or superheated steam was added to the oxygen blast to maintain the thermal balance and to move the reactions to an area where the right ratio of CO and H2 were generated. Best wishes, Kevin Chisholm your truely Dr.Pannirselvam.P.V On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Kevin <[email protected]> wrote: We seem to be going around in great big circles!! Can we first define "Syngas"? I believe the term refers to "Synthesis Gas", and not "Synthetic Gas." "Synthesis Gas" can be gas of any composition which is used to synthesize a subsequent product. If "Synthesis Gas" is used as a fuel, it is not being used to synthesize a product, and is therefore not "Synthesis Gas", but rather is simply "Fuel Gas." "Producer Gas" is any gas produced by a "Gas Producer." GEK's Larosifiers, and Wellman-Galushas are all "gas producers. A Coke Oven is a "Gas Producer, producing "Coke Oven Gas." "Water Gas"is another "Producer Gas" produced by introducing steam to incandescent carbon (charcoal or coke) A "Stratified Downdraft Gasifier" produces "Producer Gas", and if the feedstock was wood, this "producer gas" would be "Wood Gas." They produce a gas that is high in tars, and while it is an excellent "Fuel Grade Gas", for direct burning, it has far too much tar content to be used as an "Engine Grade Gas." (EGG). Imbert style Gasifiers, when properly configured, as is the GEK, can produce a wood gas, or a producer gas, that is adequately low in tar content, such that it can be used for fuel in a burner, or it can be used as feed to an engine. If the GEK output gas was used for processing further to yield a different product, then it would be producing a "synthesis gas", and it would indeed be proper to state that it was producing "syngas." Thats how I see things.... am I missing something? Kevin Chisholm ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 1:12 PM Subject: Re: [Gasification] Syngas on Wiki_ I believe we are all ardent admirers of Jim's Gek, the continual improvements made to the design and automatic control for the production of clean flammable gas is the objects of our admiration. However, there are many among us, who believe the term "Syngas" describes a synthetic version of a naturally occurring organic compound (methane).which has far more energy content than the production of a GEK. If the GEK really produces "Syngas" there are obviously no improvements to be made to the QUALITY of the gas produced. The GEK has most certainly "arrived". If we believe this then we can all pack up and go home. What is the object of this site if some one has found the Holy Grail which we all seek. On the other hand, there are rules for successfully marketing a product and Jim has not broken any of these. He needs to describe his product in the best possible light in order to fuel the continued research and development he has shared with us. Syngas is an excellent descriptive word, are we to have a referendum on its application? GF For me synthesis gas should have the capability of being used to synthesis some product. On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Toby Seiler <[email protected]> wrote: Tom, Jim was right, I'm working on a machine that is intended to some degree to integrate principles of making synthesis gas, so I have a vested interest in his use of terminology used in marketing his product that, I believe, contributes to a public misunderstanding. I've asked Jim nice many times in the past to consider the differences that Doug, Bill Klein, Greg and many other professionals on this list have explained to Jim and myself years ago. GF (and others) recognize that there is commercial value in marketing the "syngas" claim in addition to the technical correctness issue. Unfortunately with a mushrooming interest in energy issues, many un or under-educated persons have now become part of our various governments and making public policy. Continued use of wrong terminology, now even amongst government officials making policy decisions, eventually affects enterprise large and small. I'm impressed by Jim and his crew's ability to appeal to a large audience of interested, computer literate folks. I wish him success. I don't want this to be harsh or attacking to Jim, but feel that continued effort to make alternative energy progress will require even greater technical distinctions, rather than blending terms together as "generic" terms. Please help to clear up our "english" language version of Wiki defining these gases and their respective machinery. Have a good new years. Toby Seiler Seilertechco _______________________________________________ The Gasification list has moved to [email protected] - please update your email contacts to reflect the change. Please visit http://info.bioenergylists.org for more news on the list move. Thank you, Gasification Administrator _______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site: http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site: http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3346 - Release Date: 12/29/10 _______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site: http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/ -- ************************************************ P.V.PANNIRSELVAM ASSOCIATE . PROF. Research Group ,GPEC, Coordinator Computer aided Cost engineering DEQ – Departamento de Engenharia Química CT – Centro de Tecnologia / UFRN, Lagoa Nova – Natal/RN Campus Universitário. CEP: 59.072-970 North East,Brazil ******************************************* https://sites.google.com/a/biomassa.eq.ufrn.br/sites/ and http://ecosyseng.wetpaint.com/ Fone ;Office 84 3215-3769 , Ramal 210 Home : 84 3217-1557 Mobile :558488145083 Email: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site: http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3346 - Release Date: 12/29/10
_______________________________________________ Gasification mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site: http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
