Coupling the porous conditional moment closure with the random pore model: applications to gasification and CO₂ capture

Abstract

Gasification of coal or biomass with in situ CO₂ capture simultaneously allows production of clean hydrogen at relatively low cost and reduced emission of CO₂ into the atmosphere. Clearly, this technology has a great potential for a future carbon constrained economy. Therefore, the development of a comprehensive, physically-based gasifier model is important. The sub-models that describe reactive transport processes in coal particles as well as in particles of CO₂ sorbent material are among the key sub-models, which provide a necessary input for an overall gasifier model. Both coal and sorbent are materials that have complicated pore structures. The porous conditional moment closure (PCMC) model proves to be adequate for modeling reactive transport through porous media with fixed pore structure. Consumption of coal in the heterogeneous gasification reaction, however, widens the pores and reduces the surface area available for this reaction. At the same time, formation of a carbonate layer narrows the pores in the sorbent material and reduces the reaction rate of CO₂ sorption. In both cases the pore structures are affected. Such changes are not taken into account in the existing PCMC model. In this study, we obtain the parameters of the diffusive tracer distribution based on the pore size distribution given by the widely applied random pore model (RPM), while coupling PCMC with RPM. Such coupling allows taking into account changes in pore structure caused by heterogeneous reactions and thus improves the accuracy of these key sub-models.

Key words： gasification; CO₂ capture; PCMC; RPM

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism under the Australia-China Joint Coordination Group on Clean Coal Technology grant scheme.

References

1 IEA. World energy outlook, 2009

2 Damm D L, Fedorov A G. Conceptual study of distributed CO₂ capture and the sustainable carbon economy. Energy Conversion and Management, 2008, 49(6): 1674–1683

3 Wall T F. Combustion processes for carbon capture. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2007, 31(1): 31–47

4 Aaron D, Tsouris C. Separation of CO₂ from flue gas: a review. Separation Science and Technology, 2005, 40(1-3): 321–348

5 Yeh J T, Pennline H W, Resnik K P. Study of CO₂ absorption and desorption in a packed column. Energy & Fuels, 2001, 15(2): 274–278

6 Rochelle G T, Seibert F, Closmann F, Cullinane T, Davis J. CO₂ capture by absorption with potassium carbonate. Tech Rep, Texas University, Austin, United States, 2007

7 Versteeg G, van Dijck L, Van Swaaij W. On the kinetics between CO₂ and alkanolamines both in aqueous and non-aqueous solutions: an overview. Chemical Engineering Communications, 1996, 144(1): 133–158

8 Hernandez L O G, Gutierrez D L, Collins-Martinez V, Ortiz A L. Synthesis, characterization and high temperature CO₂ capture evaluation of Li₂ZrO₃-Na₂ZrO₃ mixtures. Journal of New Materials for Electrochemical Systems, 2008, 11(2): 137–142

9 Meratla Z. Combining cryogenic flue gas emission remediation with a CO₂/O₂ combustion cycle. Energy Conversion and Management, 1997, 38(9999): S147–S152

10 da Costa J C D, Lu G Q, Rudolph V. Membrane-based gas separation: Potential energy recovery and greenhouse abatement applications. Developments in chemical engineering and mineral processing, 1997, 5(1-2): 89–100

11 Carapellucci R, Milazzo A. Membrane systems for CO₂ capture and their integration with gas turbine plants. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part A, Journal of Power and Energy, 2003, 217(5 A5): 505–517

12 Bounaceur R, Lape N, Roizard D, Vallieres C, Favre E. Membrane processes for post-combustion carbon dioxide capture: a parametric study. Energy, 2006, 31(14): 2556–2570

13 Smart S, Lin C X C, Ding L, Thambimuthu K, Diniz da Costa J C. Ceramic membranes for gas processing in coal gasification. Energy and Environmental Sciemce, 2010, 3(3): 268–278

14 Maroto-Valer M M, Tang Z, Zhang Y. CO₂ capture by activated and impregnated anthracites. Fuel Processing Technology, 2005, 86(14-15): 1487–1502

15 Song C. Global challenges and strategies for control, conversion and utilization of CO₂ for sustainable development involving energy, catalysis, adsorption and chemical processing. Catalysis Today, 2006, 115(1-4): 2–32

16 Mérel J, Clausse M, Meunier F. Carbon dioxide capture by indirect thermal swing adsorption using 13X zeolite. Environment and Progress, 2006, 25(4): 327–333

17 Zhang J, Webley P A, Xiao P. Effect of process parameters on power requirements of vacuum swing adsorption technology for CO₂ capture from flue gas. Energy Conversion and Management, 2008, 49(2): 346–356

18 An H, Feng B, Su S. CO₂ capture by electrothermal swing adsorption with activated carbon fibre materials. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2011, 5(1): 16–25

19 Feng B, An H, Tan E. Screening of CO₂ adsorbing materials for zero emission power generation systems. Energy & Fuels, 2007, 21(2): 426–434

20 Barker R. Reversibility of the reaction CaCO₃ reversible reaction CaO plus CO₂. Journal of Applied Chemistry and Biotechnology, 1973, 23(10): 733–742

21 Abanades J C. The maximum capture efficiency of CO₂ using a carbonation/calcination cycle of CaO/CaCO₃. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2002, 90(3): 303–306

22 Abanades J C, Alvarez D. Conversion limits in the reaction of CO₂ with lime. Energy & Fuels, 2003, 17(2): 308–315

23 Feng B, Liu W, Li X, An H. Overcoming the problem of loss-in-capacity of calcium oxide in CO₂ capture. Energy & Fuels, 2006, 20(6): 2417–2420

24 Peirano E, Delloume V, Leckner B. Two- or three-dimensional simulations of turbulent gas-solid flows applied to fluidization. Chemical Engineering Science, 2001, 56(16): 4787–4799

25 Gao K, Wu J, Wang Y, Zhang D. Bubble dynamics and its effect on the performance of a jet fluidised bed gasifier simulated using CFD. Fuel, 2006, 85(9): 1221–1231

26 Gräbner M, Ogriseck S, Meyer B. Numerical simulation of coal gasification at circulating fluidised bed conditions. Fuel Processing Technology, 2007, 88(10): 948–958

27 Yu L, Lu J, Zhang X, Zhang S. Numerical simulation of the bubbling fluidized bed coal gasification by the kinetic theory of granular flow (KTGF). Fuel, 2007, 86(5-6): 722–734

28 Almuttahar A, Taghipour F. Computational fluid dynamics of high density circulating fluidized bed riser: study of modeling parameters. Powder Technology, 2008, 185(1): 11–23

29 Hartge E U, Ratschow L, Wischnewski R, Werther J. CFD-simulation of a circulating fluidized bed riser. Particuology, 2009, 7(4): 283–296

30 Armstrong L M, Gu S, Luo K H. Effects of limestone calcination on the gasification processes in a BFB coal gasifier. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2011, 168(2): 848–860

31 Zhou W, Zhao C S, Duan L B, Qu C R, Chen X P. Two-dimensional computational fluid dynamics simulation of coal combustion in a circulating fluidized bed combustor. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2011, 166(1): 306–314

32 Gidaspow D. Multiphase flow and fluidization: continuum and kinetic theory descriptions. London: Academic Press Limited, 1994

33 Klimenko A Y, Abdel-Jawad M M. Conditional methods for continuum reacting flows in porous media. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2007, 31(2): 2107–2115

34 Quintard M, Whitaker S. Transport in ordered and disordered porous media. Transport inPorous Media, 1994, 14: 163–177

35 Vladimirov I G, Klimenko A Y. Tracing diffusion in porous media with fractal properties. Multiscale Modeling and Simulation, 2010, 8(4): 1178–1211

36 Bhatia S K, Perlmutter D D. A random pore model for fluid-solid reactions: I. Isothermal, kinetic control. AIChE Journal. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1980, 26(3): 379–386

37 Bhatia S K, Perlmutter D D. A random pore model for fluid-solid reactions: II. Diffusion and transport effects. AIChE Journal. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1981, 27(2): 247–254

38 Su J L, Perlmutter D D. Effect of pore structure on particle ignition during exothermic gasification reactions. AIChE Journal. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1985, 31(1): 157–160

39 Liu G, Benyon P, Benfell K E, Bryant G W, Tate A G, Boyd R K, Harris D J, Wall T F. The porous structure of bituminous coal chars and its influence on combustion and gasification under chemically controlled Conditions. Fuel, 2000, 79(6): 617–626

40 Ochoa J, Cassanello M C, Bonelli P R, Cukierman A L. CO₂ gasification of Argentinean coal chars: A kinetic characterization. Fuel Processing Technology, 2001, 74(3): 161–176

41 Kajitani S, Hara S, Matsuda H. Gasification rate analysis of coal char with a pressurized drop tube furnace. Fuel, 2002, 81(5): 539–546

42 Feng B, Bhatia S K. Variation of the pore structure of coal chars during gasification. Carbon, 2003, 41(3): 507–523

43 Kajitani S, Suzuki N, Ashizawa M, Hara S. CO₂ gasification rate analysis of coal char in entrained flow coal gasifier. Fuel, 2006, 85(2): 163–169

44 Chodankar C R, Feng B, Ran J, Klimenko A Y. Kinetic study of the gasification of an Australian bituminous coal char in carbon dioxide. Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2010, 5(3): 413–419

45 Klimenko A Y, Bilger R W. Conditional moment closure for turbulent combustion. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 1999, 25(6): 595–687

46 Gray W G, Lee P C Y. On the theorems for local volume averaging of multiphase systems. International Journal of Multiphase Flow, 1977, 3(4): 333–340

47 Adler P. In: Fractal Approach to Heterogeneous Chemistry. Anvir D, ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1989

48 Lenormand R. Applications of fractal concepts in petroleum engineering. Physica D. Nonlinear Phenomena, 1989, 38(1-3): 230–234

49 Barton C C, La Pointe P. R. Fractals in Petroleum Geology and Earth Processes. New York: Plenum Press, 1995

50 Devaud C B, Bilger R W, Liu T. A new method of modeling the conditional scalar dissipation rate. Physics of Fluids, 2004, 16(6): 2004–2111

51 Bhatia S K, Perlmutter D D. Effect of the product layer on the kinetics of the CO₂-lime reaction. AIChE Journal, 1983, 29(1): 79–86