Combustion reactivity estimation parameters of biomass compared with lignite based on thermogravimetric analysis.

Bilkic B., Haykiri-Acma H. , Yaman S.

Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization and Environmental Effects, 2020 (Journal Indexed in SCI Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Publication Date: 2020
  • Doi Number: 10.1080/15567036.2020.1851326
  • Title of Journal : Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization and Environmental Effects
  • Keywords: Combustionreactivity, biomass, lignite, thermogravimetry, MUNICIPAL SOLID-WASTE, CO-GASIFICATION, BITUMINOUS COAL, PULVERIZED COAL, SEWAGE-SLUDGE, KINETICS, BEHAVIOR, COCOMBUSTION, PYROLYSIS, SYNERGY

Abstract

© 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.Combustion reactivity of biomass (Robinia Pseudoacacia) was compared with lignite’s reactivity using various parameters (group A) based on thermal analysis data including ignition temperature (Ti), burning rate (dw/dt), burnout temperature (Tb), heat-flow (H), weights/temperatures/times, etc., and some calculated parameters (Group B) such as conversions or indices of reactivity/combustion performance [mean combustion reactivity (Rm), time-based reactivity (Rt), reactivity normalized to initial sample weight (Rw), ignition index (Di), comprehensive combustion index (S), burnout performance index (Db), combustion index (Hf), and combustion stability indices (Dcs, Dw)]. Although the conversion yields as well as Rt or Rw pointed out that biomass was more reactive than lignite, some reactivity parameters such as the Ti, temperature/time at 5% conversion, the temperature of maximum heat flow implied that lignite’s reactivity was higher probably due to catalytic effects of minerals. Therefore, a comparison of reactivity considering only the Group A parameters especially for low temperatures can lead to misconception.