Hi Toby and Colleagues,

You ask a couple of curly questions:

>We seem to have moved on from the direct heating (drying) of fuel without 
>really answering the original question of water content in IC exhaust. I 
>understand the indirect heating, like Doug's >nearly horizontal heat 
>exchanger, but what about the direct introduction of engine exhaust gas for 
>drying incoming fuel? Of course not all H2 is converted into H2O in an IC 
>engine, but one >would hope a significant portion is. Same with CO and CO2. If 
>15% is H2, is 15% of the exhaust water vapor? 

I am sure there are equations that will confirm a "perfect" answer, other than 
mine, which is more H2, more water vapour. So long as the gas is hotter than 
100C, wood can be dried down without any problems by direct contact.

>Has anyone tried putting a producer gas fired engine exhaust directly into a 
>stock of wood fuel?

You have possibly missed the exchanges of discussing direct exhaust heat into a 
fuel pile to make torrified wood.  Ken Calvert specifically used this to 
overcome the problems of gasification in the tropics, and I had to use it in 
Papua New Guinea just to get enough dry fuel to start a gasification project 
for the first time. We also used it on our first project back in 1978 in New 
Zealand, resulting in the wood blocks catching fire as we learnt the hard way, 
gaining experience. It's as simple as a drum with a gas space in the bottom, 
connected to the exhaust as close to the engine as possible to reduce heat 
loss. It's best to try it and learn by experience if it is for you, but, I 
would not want to promote this type of direct drying, for anything commercial.

>One final thought on greenhouse. Engine exhaust would presumably make most of 
>the CO into CO2 (but not all) and H2 into H2O, benefiting the plants.

Without question, it has been already established, that using producer gas 
through an engine without first scrubbing the gas, could place the crop at 
risk. I do however see a lot of potential to used scrubbed and compressed CO2, 
used in a system of micro-porous support tubing to control white fly and aphids.

 >This would seem to be an argument for having not only a gasifier, but an 
 >engine or combustor in greenhouse application.

That is how it might appear, but there is very little demonstrated and tested 
using producer gas to support any argument.

>But is there any way to assure a safe level of CO for direct exhaust into a 
>greenhouse? Does it rise or fall in a collum or can one assure a complete 
>reaction in some way?

Issues of CO and human safety usually resort to badge monitoring for the 
individual. Plants however only thrive, I have been advised, in a 10% CO2 
atmosphere.  I cannot imagine it piling up as layered slug of inert gas, as the 
greenhouse should have a circulation capability if heated. Not sure what you 
mean by a complete reaction.

Does this help or hinder?

Doug Williams,
Fluidyne.

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to