Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico

*José Antonio Mayoral Chavando, Valter Silva, Danielle Regina Da Silva Guerra, Daniela Eusébio, João Sousa Cardoso and Luís A.C. Tarelho*

## **Abstract**

Millions of tons of forest residues, agricultural residues, and municipal solid waste are generated in Latin America (LATAM) each year. Regularly, municipal solid waste is diverted to landfills or dumpsites. Meanwhile, forest and agricultural residues end up decomposing in the open air or burnt, releasing greenhouse gases. Those residues can be transformed into a set of energy vectors and organic/chemical products through thermochemical conversion processes, such as pyrolysis and gasification. This book chapter provides information on current examples of gasification on large scale in the world, which typically operate at 700°C, atmospheric pressure, and in a fluidized bed reactor. The produced gas is used for heat and energy generation. Whereas pyrolysis at a large scale operates around 500°C, atmospheric pressure, and in an inert atmosphere, using a fluidized bed reactor. The produced combustible liquid is used for heat and energy generation. The decision of using any of these technologies will depend on the nature and availability of residues, energy carries, techno-socio-economic aspects, and the local interest. In this regard, the particular situation of Brazil and Mexico is analyzed to implement these technologies. Its implementation could reduce the utilization of fossil fuels, generate extra income for small farmers or regions, and reduce the problem derived from the accumulation of residues. However, it is concluded that it is more convenient to use decentralized gasification and pyrolysis stations than full-scale processes, which could be an intermediate step to a large-scale process. The capabilities of numerical models to describe these processes are also provided to assess the potential composition of a gas produced from some biomass species available in these countries.

**Keywords:** Gasification, Pyrolysis, biomass, MSW, RDF

## **1. Introduction**

LATAM has a rising renewable energy market, where more than a quarter of its primary energy is generated from renewable sources, twice the world average [1]. Across the continent, hydropower plays a pivotal role in the energy sector. However, LATAM has also access to biomass resources, which may enable the production of bioenergy, providing the opportunity to exploit a domestic, low carbon, and


**Table 1.** *RenewableEnergy*

 *in LATAM [2].* sustainable energy source, strengthening the renewable energy sector, and generating profits in rural areas. **Table 1** shows the renewable power capacity, considering the maximum net generating capacity of power plants and other installations that use renewable energy sources to produce electricity in LATAM. This information is also available for the European Union (EU), and the world to highlight where LATAM is in terms of renewable energy. It is interesting to notice Brazil

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

power represents 36%, and bioenergy 18%. On the other hand, Mexico's renew-

for biomass and wind energy [4]. While renewable energy production in Mexico is around 16.92% [3]. Without a doubt, Mexico has lagged in the development of

Although LATAM has been a remarkable positive development in renewable energies, the energy demand is increasing at the time, similarly to the impacts of climate change derived from the overconsumption of fossil fuels. Thus, it makes

> **Prod. (GWh) 2018**

MX 811 2368 0 0 791 e 1770 21 598 VE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 336 1711 0 0 336 e 1711 0 0 AR 254 1701 0 0 56 o 351 198 1350 CL 442 6059 0 0 0 0 442 6059 PY 20 700 0 0 20 e 700 0 0 PE 175 402 0 0 175 402 0 0 EC 144 382 0 0 144 o 382 o 0 0 UY 423 2482 0 0 10 e 18 413 2464 BO 149 168 0 0 149 o 168 o 0 0 CAM\* 2620 5937 6 23 2509 5599 10 315 Latam\*\* 20,044 75,274 6 23 15,596 46,536 4279 28,714 EU 26,051 122,078 4664 22,969 155 318 21,228 98,680 W\*\*\* 101,426 426,830 14,518 62,148 19,070 55,355 67,702 309,214

**Cap. (MW) 2019**

55%, from which

10% from bioenergy. In contrast with the EU, whose hydro-

renewable energy production in LATAM is

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

Renewable energy production in Brazil accounts for

renewable energy, comparing with other LATAM countries.

on hydroelectricity for 65% of its electricity, and it plans to expand the

**Renewable Municipal Solid Waste**

**Cap. (MW) 2019**

BR 14,670 53,364 0 0 11,462 o 35,435

able energy in LATAM share is 6%.

**Region Total Solid Biofuels and Renewable Waste**

> **Prod. (GWh) 2018**

**Cap. (MW) 2019**

*Note: Numbers followed by the letter*

*are presented without any indicator. \**

*Solid Biofuels and Renewable Waste [2].*

*\*\*World. \*\*\*From Martinique.*

**Table 2.**

**5**

*In refers to central America and the Caribbean area.*

*"o*

*statistical offices, government departments, regulators, and power companies. The letter*

*been obtained from unofficial sources, such as industry associations and news articles. The letter*

*have been estimated by IRENA from a variety of different data sources. All figures from the IRENA questionnaire*

hydropower and

's share of

6% share

**Prod. (GWh) 2018**

78% comes from

82.63% [3]. Brazil relies

**Bagasse Other Solid Biofuels**

**Cap. (MW) 2019**

<sup>o</sup> 3195 17,928

**Prod. (GWh) 2018**

*" are figures that have been obtained from official sources such as national*

*"u*

*"e*

*" follows figures that have*

*" follows figures that*

 *refers to central America and the Caribbean area.*

*\*\*World.*

## *Gasification*

**4**

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

sustainable energy source, strengthening the renewable energy sector, and generating profits in rural areas. **Table 1** shows the renewable power capacity, considering the maximum net generating capacity of power plants and other installations that use renewable energy sources to produce electricity in LATAM. This information is also available for the European Union (EU), and the world to highlight where LATAM is in terms of renewable energy. It is interesting to notice Brazil's share of renewable energy production in LATAM is 55%, from which 78% comes from hydropower and 10% from bioenergy. In contrast with the EU, whose hydropower represents 36%, and bioenergy 18%. On the other hand, Mexico's renewable energy in LATAM share is 6%.

Renewable energy production in Brazil accounts for 82.63% [3]. Brazil relies on hydroelectricity for 65% of its electricity, and it plans to expand the 6% share for biomass and wind energy [4]. While renewable energy production in Mexico is around 16.92% [3]. Without a doubt, Mexico has lagged in the development of renewable energy, comparing with other LATAM countries.

Although LATAM has been a remarkable positive development in renewable energies, the energy demand is increasing at the time, similarly to the impacts of climate change derived from the overconsumption of fossil fuels. Thus, it makes


*Note: Numbers followed by the letter "o" are figures that have been obtained from official sources such as national statistical offices, government departments, regulators, and power companies. The letter "u" follows figures that have been obtained from unofficial sources, such as industry associations and news articles. The letter "e" follows figures that have been estimated by IRENA from a variety of different data sources. All figures from the IRENA questionnaire are presented without any indicator.*

*\* In refers to central America and the Caribbean area.*

*\*\*World.*

*\*\*\*From Martinique.*

#### **Table 2.** *Solid Biofuels and Renewable Waste [2].*

**Region**

**4**

 **Total Renewable**

**Cap.(MW)**

**Prod.**

**Cap.(MW)**

**Prod.**

**Cap. (MW)**

**Prod.**

**Cap.(MW)**

**Prod.**

**Cap.(MW)**

**Prod.**

**Cap.(MW)**

**Prod.**

*Gasification*

**2019**

**(GWh) 2018**

**2019**

**(GWh) 2018**

**2019**

**(GWh) 2018**

**2019**

**(GWh) 2018**

**2019**

**(GWh) 2018**

**2019**

BR

MX

VE

CO

AR

CL

PY

PE

EC

UY

BO

CAM\*

Lat

EU

W

*Note: Numbers followed by the letter "o" are figures that have been obtained from official sources such as national statistical offices, government*

*follows figures that have been obtained from unofficial sources, such as industry associations*

*sources. All figures from the IRENA* 

*\*In refers to central America and the Caribbean area.*

*\*\*World.*

**Table 1.** *Renewable*

 *Energy in LATAM [2].*

*questionnaire*

 *are presented without any indicator.*

2,532,866

 6,586,124

 1,307,994

 4,267,085

 622,408

 1,262,914

 *and news articles. The letter "e" follows figures that have been estimated by IRENA from a variety of different data*

 584,842

 562,033

 13,909

 *departments,*

 *regulators, and power companies. The letter "u"*

 88,408

 124,026

 522,552

\*\*

 497,267

 1,052,187

 156,412

 379,820

 191,277

 377,494

 132,500

 128,358

 916

 6765

 41,179

 188,053

 262,058

 894,920

 198,229

 715,614

 29,156

 78,709

 13,059

 14,698

 1698

 9558

 20,744

 77,160

15,691

 47,658

 8147

 29,160

 1942

 5838

 2218

 2625

 722

 3969

 2663

 6066

 1036

 2967

 736

 2612

 3772

 14,234

 1538

 6557

 1521

27

59

120

 127

0

0

154

 169

 4732

 258

 415

0

0

425

 2529

 5279

 21,224

 5079

 20,678

 21

80

28

38

0

0

152

 428

 6640

 33,483

 5715

 30,731

 372

 1502

 326

 797

0

0

186

 452

 8822

 59,912

 8810

 59,211

 0

0

0

0

0

0

22

701

 11,488

 38,515

 6679

 23,367

 1620

 3588

 2648

 5218

 12,776

 42,501

 11,314

 39,957

 1609

 1413

 441

 108

 40 o

0

0

502

 6128

 214

 298

 1846

 12,375

 58,433

 11,927

 56,661

 18

43

90

14

0

0

340

 1715

 16,598

 25,278

 16,521

 25,183

 71

88

5

6

0

0

0

0

 25,648

 54,770

 12,671

 32,526

 6591

 12,877

 4440

 1363

 936 o

 5375

 1010

 2628

 141,933

 495,945

 109,092

 388,971

 15,364

 48,489

 2485

 3987

0

0

 14,992

 54,498

**(GWh) 2018**

 **energy**

**Hydropower**

**Wind Energy**

**Solar Energy**

**Geothermal**

 **Energy**

**Bioenergy**

sense today more than ever to take advantage of LATAM's potential for producing bioenergy. **Table 2** shows the production and capacity of the different solid biofuels and renewable waste to produce bioenergy, where bagasse is the main solid biofuel source to produce bioenergy. Brazil is a key player having a 70% share of the total bioenergy production from solid biofuels and renewable waste, occupying first place in LATAM. Regarding renewable municipal waste as a source to produce bioenergy, Martinique is the only one that utilizes them. This situation can be seen as a wise and potential solution to deal with the problems that municipal solid waste (MSW) in landfills and open dumps areas bring out. Therefore, it could be produced a refusederived fuel (RDF) to produce bioenergy through gasification or pyrolysis as some developed countries are already doing it at a large-scale, adding value to a material that has no other valorization option and is disposed of in landfills.

These three technologies have not only different operating conditions but also

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

The oldest thermochemical conversion process to produce energy is certainly biomass combustion. Besides, it is the most dominant process in the thermochemical conversion field. However, pyrolysis and gasification are two promising technologies since their products can be transformed into multiple energy vectors and some chemicals. In fact, some companies already commercialize these technologies on a large-scale to produce power and heat mainly. The following section presents some of those companies and their general process to transform different kinds of

The main objective of fast pyrolysis is to produce bio-oil, which can be utilized as a replacement for fossil fuels in energy production, and transport. Bio-oil is a complex mixture of organic fuels containing some water and a small amount of fine carbon [10]. It aims to mobilize biomass into the energy sectors (heat, power, and transport). It is more manageable to transport and handle, and more cost-effective than solid wood-based fuels or biomass, to be successfully commercialized, its characteristics should follow the ASTM D7544–09 and EN16900/2017 standards. **Table 3** presents the main physical and chemical requirements for bio-oils pro-

Bio-oil production on a large-scale involves multiple processes, working together to set up a functional bio-oil refinery. The heart of bio-oil production is in the fast pyrolysis process, where pre-treated biomass is converted into bio-oil. Pre-treated biomass has basically (1) appropriate particle size (<5 mm) and (2) proper moisture content (<10% w) [13]. Then it is fed into the reactor (approximately 500°C), causing the biomass to become a gas. This process occurs in nearly oxygen-free conditions to prevent combustion. The resulting gas enters a cyclone, where carbon

different products, as is described in **Figure 1**.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

biomass into power and heat.

**2.1 Large-scale fast pyrolysis**

duced from biomass [12].

**Figure 1.**

**7**

*Biomass thermal conversion adapted from [8, 9].*

Other materials that need better valorization are the biomass residues from agricultural and forestry activities (agroforestry residues) since they are sometimes burnt in the field, causing a range of health issues and significantly raise pollution levels [5]. Similar to Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), agroforestry residues can turn into alternative products. For example, briquettes and pellets made from those residues can partially replace coal in thermal power plants.

Together, RDF and agroforestry residues can be used to generate a set of energy vectors and organic products in LATAM, implementing pyrolysis and gasification at a large-scale, like some countries in the world are already doing. Those products can be used in distinct applications to partially replace fossil fuels. This strategy can add value to the solid waste management sector and the agriculture sector. In this regard, Section 2 presents how some companies in the world utilize pyrolysis and gasification on a large-scale, and Section 3 shows the feedstock availability in Brazil and Mexico, as well as a brief analysis of the current situation in bioenergy in these countries. Section 4 shows an Experimental and Numerical Analysis of two important biomasses in Brazil and Mexico (Wood and coffee husk). Section 5 analyzes the viability of these technologies in Brazil and Mexico. Finally, the conclusion will present, highlighting the main remarks.

## **2. Large-scale pyrolysis and gasification process**

Pyrolysis and gasification are thermochemical conversion processes like combustion, where biomass is broken down into smaller hydrocarbon chains by applying heat and chemical interactions. Unlike combustion that only produces heat, pyrolysis and gasification produce components that can be turned into higher-value commercial products, for example, transportation fuels, chemicals, and fertilizers [6]. Below is a brief description of each technology.


## *Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

These three technologies have not only different operating conditions but also different products, as is described in **Figure 1**.

The oldest thermochemical conversion process to produce energy is certainly biomass combustion. Besides, it is the most dominant process in the thermochemical conversion field. However, pyrolysis and gasification are two promising technologies since their products can be transformed into multiple energy vectors and some chemicals. In fact, some companies already commercialize these technologies on a large-scale to produce power and heat mainly. The following section presents some of those companies and their general process to transform different kinds of biomass into power and heat.

## **2.1 Large-scale fast pyrolysis**

sense today more than ever to take advantage of LATAM's potential for producing bioenergy. **Table 2** shows the production and capacity of the different solid biofuels and renewable waste to produce bioenergy, where bagasse is the main solid biofuel source to produce bioenergy. Brazil is a key player having a 70% share of the total bioenergy production from solid biofuels and renewable waste, occupying first place in LATAM. Regarding renewable municipal waste as a source to produce bioenergy, Martinique is the only one that utilizes them. This situation can be seen as a wise and potential solution to deal with the problems that municipal solid waste (MSW) in landfills and open dumps areas bring out. Therefore, it could be produced a refusederived fuel (RDF) to produce bioenergy through gasification or pyrolysis as some developed countries are already doing it at a large-scale, adding value to a material

Other materials that need better valorization are the biomass residues from agricultural and forestry activities (agroforestry residues) since they are sometimes burnt in the field, causing a range of health issues and significantly raise pollution levels [5]. Similar to Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), agroforestry residues can turn into alternative products. For example, briquettes and pellets made from those

Together, RDF and agroforestry residues can be used to generate a set of energy vectors and organic products in LATAM, implementing pyrolysis and gasification at a large-scale, like some countries in the world are already doing. Those products can be used in distinct applications to partially replace fossil fuels. This strategy can add value to the solid waste management sector and the agriculture sector. In this regard, Section 2 presents how some companies in the world utilize pyrolysis and gasification on a large-scale, and Section 3 shows the feedstock availability in Brazil and Mexico, as well as a brief analysis of the current situation in bioenergy in these countries. Section 4 shows an Experimental and Numerical Analysis of two important biomasses in Brazil and Mexico (Wood and coffee husk). Section 5 analyzes the viability of these technologies in Brazil and Mexico. Finally, the conclusion will

Pyrolysis and gasification are thermochemical conversion processes like combustion, where biomass is broken down into smaller hydrocarbon chains by applying heat and chemical interactions. Unlike combustion that only produces heat, pyrolysis and gasification produce components that can be turned into higher-value commercial products, for example, transportation fuels, chemicals, and fertilizers

• Combustion: it burns biomass directly with excess oxygen at 800 to 1000°C. It generates heat to be transformed into mechanical power and produce electricity. It is already a well-known commercial technology and broadly

• Gasification: it transforms biomass into a combustible gas mixture throughout partial biomass oxidation. It operates normally at temperatures from 700 to

• Pyrolysis: it is the thermal destruction of biomass in the absence of air/oxygen. Pyrolysis of biomass starts at 350 to 500°C and can go to 700 °C, producing

that has no other valorization option and is disposed of in landfills.

residues can partially replace coal in thermal power plants.

present, highlighting the main remarks.

*Gasification*

**2. Large-scale pyrolysis and gasification process**

[6]. Below is a brief description of each technology.

accessible at domestic and industrial scales [7].

900°C [7].

**6**

bio-oil, gases, and char [7].

The main objective of fast pyrolysis is to produce bio-oil, which can be utilized as a replacement for fossil fuels in energy production, and transport. Bio-oil is a complex mixture of organic fuels containing some water and a small amount of fine carbon [10]. It aims to mobilize biomass into the energy sectors (heat, power, and transport). It is more manageable to transport and handle, and more cost-effective than solid wood-based fuels or biomass, to be successfully commercialized, its characteristics should follow the ASTM D7544–09 and EN16900/2017 standards. **Table 3** presents the main physical and chemical requirements for bio-oils produced from biomass [12].

Bio-oil production on a large-scale involves multiple processes, working together to set up a functional bio-oil refinery. The heart of bio-oil production is in the fast pyrolysis process, where pre-treated biomass is converted into bio-oil. Pre-treated biomass has basically (1) appropriate particle size (<5 mm) and (2) proper moisture content (<10% w) [13]. Then it is fed into the reactor (approximately 500°C), causing the biomass to become a gas. This process occurs in nearly oxygen-free conditions to prevent combustion. The resulting gas enters a cyclone, where carbon

**Figure 1.** *Biomass thermal conversion adapted from [8, 9].*


**Table 3.**

*Main physical and chemical requirements for bio-oils produced from biomass [11].*

and other solids are mechanically separated from the gas flow. Then, the gas passes through a condenser system, where it cools down and condenses into bio-oil, then it is filtered. Finally, non-condensable gases are used to produce heat [13].

According to The Green Fuel Nordic company, Bio-oil can be used as a replacement for fossil fuels in the energy production, and transport sector [11]. Furthermore, bio-oil can be transformed into high value-added products like chemical compounds, food ingredients, cosmetics compounds, etc. **Table 4** presents largescale fast pyrolysis examples in different countries, where the produced bio-oil is used to produce transport fuels, electricity, and heat or to be refined, as appropriate in each case.

A successful example of a bio-oil refinery is Green Fuel Nordic company, whose business model is based on utilizing pyrolysis technology to produce an advanced bio-oil. Then this bio-oil is commercialized and send to its customers like the Savon Voima heating plant to produce heat [16]. Another successful and profitable example is Fortum company, which is a Finnish company that invested €30 million in its bio-oil plant in Joensuu, receiving about €8 million in government investment subsidies for new technology demonstration [13]. This company signed a contract to supply bio-oil produced in Joensuu to Savon Voima, which uses bio-oil to replace the use of heavy and light fuel oil in its district heat production in Iisalmi [13]. In December 2019, Fortum signed an agreement to sell its district heating business in Joensuu Finland to Savon Voima Oyj. The contract concluded in January 2020, registering a tax-exempt capital gain of €430 million in the City Solutions segment's first-quarter 2020 results [28].

The integrated Coal handling plant (CHP) in Joensuu was constructed in 2012 and began full operation in 2015, producing heat, electricity, and 50,000 tons of bio-oil (maximum planned capacity per year). The process consists of a fluidized bed boiler that supplies heat for the pyrolysis reactor and burns the coke, biochar, and non-condensed gases produced during the pyrolysis process to produce electricity and heat (See **Figure 2**). In such a way, high efficiency can be reached for the pyrolyzed fuel production process. Additionally, when a fluidized bed boiler is integrated, pyrolysis is a cost-efficient way of producing bio-oil to replace fossil oils.

It is also interesting to notice that Brazil has already taken a leading role in LATAM with the partnership 50/50 between Ensyn and Suzano to produce 2 million gallons/year of Ensyn biocrude. The project is located at Suzano's pulp facilities at Aracruz city, in the State of Espirito Santo, Brazil. The company derivated from this partnership (NYSE: SUZ) is now the world's largest eucalyptus pulp company in America Latina [25].

**Country**

**9**

SE

FI

CA

NL

USA

USA

IE

DE

FI

 [23]

Fortum - Valment

[24]

BZ

CH

IN

*d: dry.* **Table 4.** *Large-scale*

 *Fast Pyrolysis Examples.*

 [27]

 MASH Energy

 [26]

 Shanxi Yingjiliang Biomass

circulating fluidized bed

Bio-oil

 Rice Husk

—

2–6 ML

reactor

—

Bio-oil

 Waste materials

——

 —

Company

 [25]

 Ensyn, Suzano S.A

circulating fluidized

 Bio-oil

 Eucalyptus

 forest residues

—

83 ML/y

Detailed

engineering

underway

Operational

 [22]

 KIT

 [21]

 Kerry Group PLC

RTP (Ensyn)

Twin-screw

reactor

Fluid bed (VTT)

Bio-oil

 Wood residues

 mixing

Biosyncrude

 Wheat Straw

Intermediate

500 kg/hr. of biomass

 Operational

fuel

Electricity and

50,000 ton/y bio-oil

 Operational

heat

Biocrude

 Wood residues

 [20]

 Biogas Energy

 [19]

 Ensyn and Renova Capita

 [18]

 Twence / Twence / EMPYRO

 BTG-BTL

Bio-oil

 Wood

Electricity


Operational

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

450 GWh

To refinery

 76 ML/y

To Start-up

Rotating cone

 circulating fluidized bed

Bio-oil

 Wood residues

reactor

Ablative reactor

Bio-oil

 Wood and agricultural

Intermediate

500 kg /h of biomass

 Operational

fuels

Food ingredients

 30–40 tons/d of

Operational

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

biomass

residues

 [17]

 Ensyn

 [15, 16] Green Fuel Nordic

 [14]

Pyrocell-Setra

 **REF**

**Company/entity**

**Technology/Information**

BTG-BTL

Rotating cone

BTG-BTL

Bio-oil

 Wood

> Rotating cone

Ensyn Fluid bed/riser

 Biocrude

 Wood

 **Product**

Bio-oil

 Sawdust

 **Biomass**

**For Producing** Transportation

40,000d ton/year of

biomass

fuels

Electricity and

24,000 ton/y of bio-oil

 Operational

2020

Operational

heat

Heat & refinery

 65,000d ton/y of

biomass

 **Feed** 

**rate/Production**

 **Status** Construction

Start:2021


### *Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

**Table 4.** *Large-scaleFast*

 *Pyrolysis Examples.*

and other solids are mechanically separated from the gas flow. Then, the gas passes through a condenser system, where it cools down and condenses into bio-oil, then it

**Property Unit Test Method Requirement** LHV MJ/kg ASTM D240 15 minimums Solid content Mass % ASTM D7544 2.5 maximum Water content Mass % ASTM E202 30 maximums Acidity pH ASTM E70 4.1 Kinematic viscosity cSt (40 °C) ASTM D445 125 maximums Density kg/dm<sup>3</sup> (20 °C) ASTM 4052 1.1–1.3 Sulfur Mass % ASTM 4294 0.05 Ash content Mass % ASTM 482 0.25

According to The Green Fuel Nordic company, Bio-oil can be used as a replacement for fossil fuels in the energy production, and transport sector [11]. Furthermore, bio-oil can be transformed into high value-added products like chemical compounds, food ingredients, cosmetics compounds, etc. **Table 4** presents largescale fast pyrolysis examples in different countries, where the produced bio-oil is used to produce transport fuels, electricity, and heat or to be refined, as appropriate

A successful example of a bio-oil refinery is Green Fuel Nordic company, whose business model is based on utilizing pyrolysis technology to produce an advanced bio-oil. Then this bio-oil is commercialized and send to its customers like the Savon Voima heating plant to produce heat [16]. Another successful and profitable example is Fortum company, which is a Finnish company that invested €30 million in its bio-oil plant in Joensuu, receiving about €8 million in government investment subsidies for new technology demonstration [13]. This company signed a contract to supply bio-oil produced in Joensuu to Savon Voima, which uses bio-oil to replace the use of heavy and light fuel oil in its district heat production in Iisalmi [13]. In December 2019, Fortum signed an agreement to sell its district heating business in Joensuu Finland to Savon Voima Oyj. The contract concluded in January 2020, registering a tax-exempt capital gain of €430 million in the City Solutions segment's

The integrated Coal handling plant (CHP) in Joensuu was constructed in 2012 and began full operation in 2015, producing heat, electricity, and 50,000 tons of bio-oil (maximum planned capacity per year). The process consists of a fluidized bed boiler that supplies heat for the pyrolysis reactor and burns the coke, biochar, and non-condensed gases produced during the pyrolysis process to produce electricity and heat (See **Figure 2**). In such a way, high efficiency can be reached for the pyrolyzed fuel production process. Additionally, when a fluidized bed boiler is integrated, pyrolysis is a cost-efficient way of producing bio-oil to replace fossil oils. It is also interesting to notice that Brazil has already taken a leading role in LATAM with the partnership 50/50 between Ensyn and Suzano to produce 2 million gallons/year of Ensyn biocrude. The project is located at Suzano's pulp facilities at Aracruz city, in the State of Espirito Santo, Brazil. The company derivated from this partnership (NYSE: SUZ) is now the world's largest eucalyptus pulp company in

is filtered. Finally, non-condensable gases are used to produce heat [13].

*Main physical and chemical requirements for bio-oils produced from biomass [11].*

in each case.

**Table 3.**

*Gasification*

first-quarter 2020 results [28].

America Latina [25].

**8**

Eq. (1) is the general pyrolysis reaction. The other reactions represent the ther-

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

Pyrolysis temperature ranges from 350 to 600°C and it plays a critical role in the cracking process since, at higher temperatures, molecules move violently, which causes the breaking of shorter chains from the main C-C chain. Therefore, shorter hydrocarbon products are favored as in fast pyrolysis or gasification. While biochar is boosted under low temperatures and large residence times as in slow pyrolysis [29]. General measures of performance are often quoted as measures of how effective

Some parameters can affect the product yield of pyrolysis, such as temperature, particle size, heating rate, etc. If the desired product is liquid, then producing more liquids will indicate a more effective process. While, if the desired product is solid, then producing more solids will indicate a more effective process. Eqs. (5)-(8)

a given pyrolysis scheme may be. These parameters can be oriented to a mass

*Ysolid* <sup>¼</sup> *msolid mF*

*Ygas* <sup>¼</sup> *mgas mF*

*Yliquid* <sup>¼</sup> *mliquid*

*mF*

where *mF* represents the feedstock mass, *msolid* is the solid mass, *mgas* is the gas mass, *mliquid* is the liquid mass, *mF* is the feedstock mass, *Ysolid* is the solid yield, *Ygas*

The lower heating value of the products is determined by the contribution of each of the compounds contained in a specific phase. This parameter is important because it indicates the amount of energy contained in the products. The LHV of the

> P*yigas* ∗ *mi* ∗ *LHVi mgas*

<sup>P</sup>*yiliquid* <sup>∗</sup> *mi* <sup>∗</sup> *LHVi mliquid*

P*yisolid* ∗ *mi* ∗ *LHVi msolid*

where *yigas* is the mass fraction of the component "i" in the gas, *yiliquid* is the mass fraction of the component "i" in the liquid, *yisolid* is the Mass fraction of the component "i" in the solid, *mi* is the mass of the component "i", *msolid* is the solid mass, *mgas* is the gas mass, *mliquid* is the liquid mass, *LHVi* is the LHV of the component "i",

gas, liquid, and solid yield is calculated as the following equations describe.

*LHVgas* ¼

*LHVliquid* ¼

*LHVsolid* ¼

*<sup>n</sup>* is a free radical with a chain length n. *O <sup>j</sup>* is an

*mF* ¼ *msolid* þ *mgas* þ *mliquid* (5)

∗ 100 (6)

∗ 100 (7)

∗ 100 (8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

mal cracking process, where *R*<sup>∗</sup>

balance and an energy balance.

describe the pyrolysis yield calculations.

is the gas yield, and *Yliquid* is the liquid yield.

*2.1.1.2 Lower heating value (LHV)*

**11**

*2.1.1.1 Product yields*

alkene from olefins with a chain length j [29].

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

**Figure 2.** *Large-Scale Fast Pyrolysis Process (Valmet) adapted from [13].*

These success cases seem to support the pyrolysis of biomass as a wise way to reduce the use of fossil fuels, adding value to biomass and contributing to mitigate the impact of greenhouse gases without losing sight of profitability. Applying technologies might make sense to countries with a bast biomass availability. However, as in any process, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of the process to look for continuous improvements. The following section contains some of these performance parameters.

#### *2.1.1 Pyrolysis performance*

Pyrolysis is a thermochemical cracking process in which organic material is transformed into a carbon-rich solid and volatile matter (gas and liquids) by heating in the absence of oxygen as Eqs. (1)-(4) describe [29].

*Biomass* ! *Char* þ *Ash* þ *Moisture* þ *Volatile C*ð Þ 0,*CO*2,*CH*4,*C*2*H*4, *H*2*O* (1)

*BiomassMolecule* ! <sup>2</sup>*R*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ Initiation (2)

*R*∗ *<sup>n</sup>* ! *<sup>O</sup> <sup>j</sup>* <sup>þ</sup> *<sup>R</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> *n*�*j* ð Þ Propagation (3)

$$\text{'}\text{'}\text{'}\text{''} \rightarrow \text{Products}\left(\text{Termination}\right) \tag{4}$$

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

Eq. (1) is the general pyrolysis reaction. The other reactions represent the thermal cracking process, where *R*<sup>∗</sup> *<sup>n</sup>* is a free radical with a chain length n. *O <sup>j</sup>* is an alkene from olefins with a chain length j [29].

Pyrolysis temperature ranges from 350 to 600°C and it plays a critical role in the cracking process since, at higher temperatures, molecules move violently, which causes the breaking of shorter chains from the main C-C chain. Therefore, shorter hydrocarbon products are favored as in fast pyrolysis or gasification. While biochar is boosted under low temperatures and large residence times as in slow pyrolysis [29].

General measures of performance are often quoted as measures of how effective a given pyrolysis scheme may be. These parameters can be oriented to a mass balance and an energy balance.

#### *2.1.1.1 Product yields*

Some parameters can affect the product yield of pyrolysis, such as temperature, particle size, heating rate, etc. If the desired product is liquid, then producing more liquids will indicate a more effective process. While, if the desired product is solid, then producing more solids will indicate a more effective process. Eqs. (5)-(8) describe the pyrolysis yield calculations.

$$m\_F = m\_{solid} + m\_{gas} + m\_{liquid} \tag{5}$$

$$Y\_{solid} = \frac{m\_{solid}}{m\_F} \ast 100\tag{6}$$

$$Y\_{gas} = \frac{m\_{gas}}{m\_F} \ast 100\tag{7}$$

$$Y\_{liquid} = \frac{m\_{liquid}}{m\_F} \ast \mathbf{100} \tag{8}$$

where *mF* represents the feedstock mass, *msolid* is the solid mass, *mgas* is the gas mass, *mliquid* is the liquid mass, *mF* is the feedstock mass, *Ysolid* is the solid yield, *Ygas* is the gas yield, and *Yliquid* is the liquid yield.

#### *2.1.1.2 Lower heating value (LHV)*

The lower heating value of the products is determined by the contribution of each of the compounds contained in a specific phase. This parameter is important because it indicates the amount of energy contained in the products. The LHV of the gas, liquid, and solid yield is calculated as the following equations describe.

$$LHV\_{gas} = \frac{\sum \mathcal{Y}\_{gas} \* m\_i \* LHV\_i}{m\_{gas}} \tag{9}$$

$$\text{LHV}\_{liquid} = \frac{\sum \mathcal{y}\_{liquid} \* m\_i \* LHV\_i}{m\_{liquid}} \tag{10}$$

$$LHV\_{solid} = \frac{\sum y\_{isold} \ast m\_i \ast LHV\_i}{m\_{solid}} \tag{11}$$

where *yigas* is the mass fraction of the component "i" in the gas, *yiliquid* is the mass fraction of the component "i" in the liquid, *yisolid* is the Mass fraction of the component "i" in the solid, *mi* is the mass of the component "i", *msolid* is the solid mass, *mgas* is the gas mass, *mliquid* is the liquid mass, *LHVi* is the LHV of the component "i",

These success cases seem to support the pyrolysis of biomass as a wise way to reduce the use of fossil fuels, adding value to biomass and contributing to mitigate the impact of greenhouse gases without losing sight of profitability. Applying technologies might make sense to countries with a bast biomass availability. However, as in any process, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of the process to look for continuous improvements. The following section contains some of these

Pyrolysis is a thermochemical cracking process in which organic material is transformed into a carbon-rich solid and volatile matter (gas and liquids) by heating

*Biomass* ! *Char* þ *Ash* þ *Moisture* þ *Volatile C*ð Þ 0,*CO*2,*CH*4,*C*2*H*4, *H*2*O* (1)

*n*�*j*

*BiomassMolecule* ! <sup>2</sup>*R*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ Initiation (2)

<sup>2</sup>*R*<sup>∗</sup> ! *Products* ð Þ Termination (4)

ð Þ Propagation (3)

in the absence of oxygen as Eqs. (1)-(4) describe [29].

*Large-Scale Fast Pyrolysis Process (Valmet) adapted from [13].*

*R*∗

*<sup>n</sup>* ! *<sup>O</sup> <sup>j</sup>* <sup>þ</sup> *<sup>R</sup>*<sup>∗</sup>

performance parameters.

**Figure 2.**

*Gasification*

**10**

*2.1.1 Pyrolysis performance*

*LHVgas* is the LHV of the gas, *LHVliquid* is the LHV of the liquid and *LHVsolid* is the LHV of the solid.

**Country REF Company/**

USA [33] Energy

FI [36] [37]

DE [34] HTW-Plant

**entity**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

Products of Idaho\*

Berrenrath / Germany

NSE Biofuels Oy Ltd.

BE [39] Electrabe Sumitomo

Voima Oy

FI [42] RENUGAS ANDRITZ

SE [43] GoBiGas Valmet

Paper

Taylor Biomass Energy

Amec Foster Wheeler

ID [44] OKI Pulp &

[46]

[48]

*Large-Scale Gasification Examples.*

USA [45]

UK [47]

*It was bought by Outotec.*

*\**

**13**

**Table 5.**

FI [38] Corenso United Ltd.

FI [41] Lahti Energia Oy,

FI [31] Vaskiluodon

**Technology/ Information**

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

ThyssenKrupp Fluidized-Bed

Sumitomo heavy industries ltd CFB

Sumitomo heavy industries ltd

heavy industries ltd

Valmet CFB

Valmet CFB

Carbona Bubbling Fluidized Bed (BFB)

CFB

Valmet CFB

VESTA patented technology **Biomass For**

High-ash coal

Wood residues

Plastic Waste

Wood residues

Wood, peat, and straw

Wood pellets, or chip

Wood residues

Bark and wood residues

Coal, biomass, waste

JP [40] HTW-Precon ThyssenKrupp MSW — 48 ton/day Start-

FI [35] Kemira Oy ThyssenKrupp Peat NH3 30 ton/h Peat Shut

**Producing**

Bubbling bed — — 1040 —

Heat 12 MWth

Heat 50 MWth

230 MW electricity 170 MW heating

110 MW X2

Dual bed MSW — 300–400 ton/

**Feed rate/ Production (ton/day)**

methanol 25 ton/h Shut

50 MWth — Start-

SRF 160 MW 250,000 ton/y Start-

— 100–150 ton/ day

20 MW — Start-

day

— 250,000 Nm3/h of Sin gas

**Status**

down 1986– 1997

down 1988– 1991

up 2009

up 2000

up 2002

up 1999

up 2012

up 2012

Startup 2013

up 2013

up 2017

2021

—

— Start-

— Start-

— Start-

— Start-

## **2.2 Large-scale gasification**

Similar to pyrolysis on large-scale, gasification on a large-scale involves other processes working together. The main product of gasification is combustible gas. But unlike pyrolysis, the main product is not stored and then transported to be used somewhere else but used in the same facilities where it was produced. Even so, gasification offers great benefits, namely reducing CO2 emissions for replacing fossil fuels and avoiding their extraction. Another benefit is that gasification can use materials that currently have no other valorization option but to be disposed of in landfills. Waste gasification provides much better electrical efficiency compared with the direct combustion of waste [30].

A perfect successful gasification example is its integration with an existed coalfired plant in Vaskiluodon Voima Oy, Vaasa, Finland. This integration of gasification into the coal-fired facilities had several advantages, such as the investment cost was kept to about one-third of a similar-sized new biomass plant, it was also kept the full original coal capacity, and the use of coal was cut off by 40% by using local biomasses like wood, peat, and straw [31]. The Plant generates 230 MW electricity and 170 MW district heating.

Another example is ThyssenKrupp, whose main product is syngas, which can be used in multiple processes. While its byproducts are slags, ash, and sulfur components. These byproducts can be employed in road building, cement industry, or recovered [32]. The typical gas composition is CO + H2 > 85 (vol.%), CO2 2–4 (vol.%), and CH4 0.1 (vol.%) [32].

More examples of large-scale gasification in the world are provided in **Table 5**, where one can notice several examples are using materials like MSW, plastics, and solid recovered fuels (SRF). The resulting gas is being used to produce heat and electricity.

ThyssenKrupp facilities have a feed dust system, so the biomass must be smaller than 0.1 mm. Then, biomass is gasified using oxygen and steam as gasification agents. The operational temperature is higher than the ash melting temperature to remove ash as slag. While the pressure is around 40 bar. The technology has multiple, horizontally arranged burners to provide heat to the gasifier and produce steam in a drum boiler (see **Figure 3**) [32].

On the other hand, **Figure 4** presents the Valmet equipment that has a screw feeder system, so it allows biomass with higher particle size, it also has a cyclone, which separates solids from the gas. After the cyclone, the gas goes through a gas cleaning system, delivering a clean gas, which enables the production of high pressure and temperature steam for the turbine without risk of boiler corrosion. In Lahti, the electrical efficiency is over 30% (540°C and 120 bar). Furthermore, this plant operates with RDF (250,000 ton/y) and wood, producing 2 x 80 MW hot gas cleaning [50]. VASKILUODON VOIMA OY (formerly Fortum) produces 230 MW electricity and 170 MW district heating, by integrating the gasification capability with the original coal-fired plant. The biomass gasification plant contributes 140 MW and a woodchip dryer. The gas produced in the gasifier and coal enters a circulating fluidized bed boiler, where hot water is transformed into steam, that goes to high-pressure superheaters and then continues to the high-pressure turbine (HPT). From HPT, the steam returns to the boiler's preheaters and ends in the intermediate-pressure turbine (IPT). Here the steam is divided into different streams (1) district heat exchangers, (2) storage water tank to preheat it, and (3)


*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

#### **Table 5.**

*Large-Scale Gasification Examples.*

*LHVgas* is the LHV of the gas, *LHVliquid* is the LHV of the liquid and *LHVsolid* is the

Similar to pyrolysis on large-scale, gasification on a large-scale involves other processes working together. The main product of gasification is combustible gas. But unlike pyrolysis, the main product is not stored and then transported to be used somewhere else but used in the same facilities where it was produced. Even so, gasification offers great benefits, namely reducing CO2 emissions for replacing fossil fuels and avoiding their extraction. Another benefit is that gasification can use materials that currently have no other valorization option but to be disposed of in landfills. Waste gasification provides much better electrical efficiency compared

A perfect successful gasification example is its integration with an existed coalfired plant in Vaskiluodon Voima Oy, Vaasa, Finland. This integration of gasification into the coal-fired facilities had several advantages, such as the investment cost was kept to about one-third of a similar-sized new biomass plant, it was also kept the full original coal capacity, and the use of coal was cut off by 40% by using local biomasses like wood, peat, and straw [31]. The Plant generates 230 MW electricity

Another example is ThyssenKrupp, whose main product is syngas, which can be used in multiple processes. While its byproducts are slags, ash, and sulfur components. These byproducts can be employed in road building, cement industry, or recovered [32]. The typical gas composition is CO + H2 > 85 (vol.%), CO2 2–4

More examples of large-scale gasification in the world are provided in **Table 5**, where one can notice several examples are using materials like MSW, plastics, and solid recovered fuels (SRF). The resulting gas is being used to produce heat and

ThyssenKrupp facilities have a feed dust system, so the biomass must be smaller

On the other hand, **Figure 4** presents the Valmet equipment that has a screw feeder system, so it allows biomass with higher particle size, it also has a cyclone, which separates solids from the gas. After the cyclone, the gas goes through a gas cleaning system, delivering a clean gas, which enables the production of high pressure and temperature steam for the turbine without risk of boiler corrosion. In Lahti, the electrical efficiency is over 30% (540°C and 120 bar). Furthermore, this plant operates with RDF (250,000 ton/y) and wood, producing 2 x 80 MW hot gas cleaning [50]. VASKILUODON VOIMA OY (formerly Fortum) produces 230 MW electricity and 170 MW district heating, by integrating the gasification capability with the original coal-fired plant. The biomass gasification plant contributes 140 MW and a woodchip dryer. The gas produced in the gasifier and coal enters a circulating fluidized bed boiler, where hot water is transformed into steam, that goes to high-pressure superheaters and then continues to the high-pressure turbine (HPT). From HPT, the steam returns to the boiler's preheaters and ends in the intermediate-pressure turbine (IPT). Here the steam is divided into different streams (1) district heat exchangers, (2) storage water tank to preheat it, and (3)

than 0.1 mm. Then, biomass is gasified using oxygen and steam as gasification agents. The operational temperature is higher than the ash melting temperature to remove ash as slag. While the pressure is around 40 bar. The technology has multiple, horizontally arranged burners to provide heat to the gasifier and produce

LHV of the solid.

*Gasification*

**2.2 Large-scale gasification**

and 170 MW district heating.

(vol.%), and CH4 0.1 (vol.%) [32].

steam in a drum boiler (see **Figure 3**) [32].

electricity.

**12**

with the direct combustion of waste [30].

**Figure 3.**

*Large Scale Gasification Process (Thyssenkrup PRENFLO), adapted from [32].*

the low-pressure turbine (LPT), where steam rotates the turbine's rotor, and a generator produces electricity for the electrical network. Finally, the gas resulting from the combustion goes to the flue-gas desulphurization, the cleaning process creates gypsum.

The gasification process is a potential solution to deal with problems linked to MSW, plastics, and other residues, producing energy vectors at the same time. This could be a massive opportunity for LATAM countries that are dealing with exorbitant amounts of waste. Similar to pyrolysis, the gasification performance can be evaluated for a continuous improvement process.

#### *2.2.1 Gasification performance*

Gasification is a partial oxidation process in which organic material is transformed mainly into gases through heterogeneous (Eqs. (12)-(16)) and homogeneous r**eactions** (Eqs. (17)-(21)), as the following reactions describe.

$$\text{C} + \text{O}\_2 \rightarrow \text{CO}\_2 \tag{12}$$

*CO* þ 0*:*5*O*<sup>2</sup> ! *CO*<sup>2</sup> (17) *H*<sup>2</sup> þ 0*:*5*O*<sup>2</sup> ! *H*2*O* (18) *CH*<sup>4</sup> þ 2*O*<sup>2</sup> ! *CO*<sup>2</sup> þ 2*H*2*O* (19) *C*2*H*<sup>4</sup> þ *O*<sup>2</sup> ! 2*CO* þ 2*H*<sup>2</sup> (20) *CH*<sup>4</sup> þ 2*H*2*O* ! *CO* þ 3*H*<sup>2</sup> (21)

∗ 100% (22)

The temperature in the gasification ranges between 600 and 700°C and plays an important role in the product yields and gas composition [51]. Besides, the product yields and LHV of the products exist another parameter to evaluate the performance of the gasification process like Cold Gas Efficiency (CGE) and Gas Efficiency

Cold gas efficiency is the output energy by input energy [52], and it can be

where *CGE* is the cold gas efficiency, *LHVF* is the lower heating value of the feed stream, *LHVgas* is the lower heating value of the gas mixture, *mgas* is the mass of the

*CGE* <sup>¼</sup> *LHVgas* <sup>∗</sup> *mgas LHVF* ∗ *mF*

(Ygas).

**15**

**Figure 4.**

*2.2.1.1 Cold gas efficiency (CGE)*

described mathematically with the following equation:

*Pioneer of Biofuel Plants, Producer of Combined Heat and Power adapted from [49].*

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

gas mixture, and *mF* is the mass of the feed stream.

$$\text{C} + \text{CO}\_2 \rightarrow \text{2CO} \tag{13}$$

$$\text{C} + \text{CO}\_2 \rightarrow \text{2CO} \tag{14}$$

$$\text{C} + \text{H}\_2\text{O} \rightarrow \text{CO} + \text{H}\_2\tag{15}$$

$$\text{C} + 2\text{H}\_2 \rightarrow \text{CH}\_4 \tag{16}$$

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

**Figure 4.** *Pioneer of Biofuel Plants, Producer of Combined Heat and Power adapted from [49].*

$$\text{CO} + \text{0.5O}\_2 \rightarrow \text{CO}\_2\tag{17}$$

$$H\_2 + 0.5O\_2 \to H\_2O\tag{18}$$

$$\text{CH}\_4 + \text{2O}\_2 \rightarrow \text{CO}\_2 + \text{2H}\_2\text{O} \tag{19}$$

$$\rm C\_2H\_4 + O\_2 \rightarrow 2CO + 2H\_2 \tag{20}$$

$$\text{CH}\_4 + 2\text{H}\_2\text{O} \rightarrow \text{CO} + \text{3H}\_2\tag{21}$$

The temperature in the gasification ranges between 600 and 700°C and plays an important role in the product yields and gas composition [51]. Besides, the product yields and LHV of the products exist another parameter to evaluate the performance of the gasification process like Cold Gas Efficiency (CGE) and Gas Efficiency (Ygas).

### *2.2.1.1 Cold gas efficiency (CGE)*

Cold gas efficiency is the output energy by input energy [52], and it can be described mathematically with the following equation:

$$\text{CGE} = \frac{LHV\_{gas} \ast m\_{gas}}{LHV\_{F} \ast m\_{F}} \ast 100\text{\%} \tag{22}$$

where *CGE* is the cold gas efficiency, *LHVF* is the lower heating value of the feed stream, *LHVgas* is the lower heating value of the gas mixture, *mgas* is the mass of the gas mixture, and *mF* is the mass of the feed stream.

the low-pressure turbine (LPT), where steam rotates the turbine's rotor, and a generator produces electricity for the electrical network. Finally, the gas resulting from the combustion goes to the flue-gas desulphurization, the cleaning process

*Large Scale Gasification Process (Thyssenkrup PRENFLO), adapted from [32].*

Gasification is a partial oxidation process in which organic material is transformed mainly into gases through heterogeneous (Eqs. (12)-(16)) and homo-

> *C* þ *O*<sup>2</sup> ! *CO*<sup>2</sup> (12) *C* þ *CO*<sup>2</sup> ! 2*CO* (13) *C* þ *CO*<sup>2</sup> ! 2*CO* (14) *C* þ *H*2*O* ! *CO* þ *H*<sup>2</sup> (15) *C* þ 2*H*<sup>2</sup> ! *CH*<sup>4</sup> (16)

geneous r**eactions** (Eqs. (17)-(21)), as the following reactions describe.

evaluated for a continuous improvement process.

The gasification process is a potential solution to deal with problems linked to MSW, plastics, and other residues, producing energy vectors at the same time. This could be a massive opportunity for LATAM countries that are dealing with exorbitant amounts of waste. Similar to pyrolysis, the gasification performance can be

creates gypsum.

**Figure 3.**

*Gasification*

**14**

*2.2.1 Gasification performance*

#### *2.2.1.2 Gas efficiency (ygas)*

Y gas can be also described as the ratio of the produced gas volume by the feedstock mass as the following equation expresses:

$$\mathcal{V}\_{gas} = \frac{V\_{gas}}{m\_F} \tag{23}$$

plantations amount to 1.2% of Brazil's area, and 2.0% of the total forest areas. The

**Description Production (ktoe) Increase or retraction % Production (%)**

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

Non-renewable **157,972 158,395 0.3 54.5 53.9** Petroleum and derivatives 99,627 101,051 1.4 34.4 34.4 Natural gas 35,905 35,909 0 12.4 12.2 Mineral coal and derivatives 16,418 15,480 5.7 5.7 5.3 Uranium (u3o8) and derivatives 4174 4174 0 1.4 1.4 Other non-renewable<sup>a</sup> 1848 1780 3.7 0.6 0.6 Renewable **131,898 135,642 2.8 45.5 46.1** Hydraulics and electricity 36,460 36,364 0.3 12.6 12.4 Firewood and charcoal 25,511 25,725 0.8 8.8 8.7 Sugar cane derivatives 50,090 52,841 5.5 17.3 18 Other renewables<sup>b</sup> 19,837 20,712 4.4 6.8 7 TOTAL **289,870 294,036 1.4 100 100**

**2018 2019 2018 2019**

2,030,419 ha of Pinus, and 407,933 ha of other species [56] including rubber, acacia,

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO, in 2019 the generated wood residues in Brazil were 19,140,000 m<sup>3</sup> [58]. Concerning the management of industrial and forest waste, the Brazilian planted tree sector has adopted sustainable practices to dispose of various types of domestic

As shown in **Table 8**, in 2019 most of the waste from factories and forest companies was directed toward energy generation, approximately 67%. In the second place, 12% of waste was directed to other industrial sectors for reuse as a raw material. Of the total waste generated before consumption, 7.4% was kept in the field to protect

Agricultural occupation in Brazil is estimated at 65.91 million hectares, equivalent to 7.8% of the national territory [59], the numbers show that Brazil uses 7.57% of its territory for crops. This area also corresponds to only 3.41% of the cultivated

Agroindustry waste generation in Brazil is spread off in all the country states from North to South regions, is from various crops, varies with seasonality, and

and enrich the soil, 4.2% was sent to landfills, and 3.4% was recycled [57].

and urban waste generated during its production processes.

The industrial sector of forest plantations is based on the cultivation of trees for industrial purposes, generating a variety of products numbering nearly five thousand, including lumber, pulp, paper, flooring, wood panels, and charcoal [57]. **Figure 5** presents the area of planted trees in 2019, by state and by genus (in

composition of forest plantations in 2018 was 7,401,334 ha of Eucalyptus,

of which fossils 153,798 154,221 0.3 53.1

*Black liquor, biodiesel, wind, solar, rice husk, biogas, wood waste, charcoal gas, and elephant grass.*

teak, and parica.

*Blast furnace, melt shop, and sulfur gas.*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

*Internal Energy Supply (OIE) [54].*

*a*

*b*

**Table 6.**

millions) [57].

*3.1.2 Agricultural residues*

area worldwide.

**17**

where *mF* is the mass of the feed stream and *Vgas* the volume of the gas mixture.

## **3. Biomass availability in Brazil and Mexico and potential analysis**

Biomass is a renewable organic material that serves as a sustainable source of energy to produce electricity or other forms of power. Some of the drivers to utilize it are lowering fossil-fuel utilization, decreasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and promote economic development and agricultural development. The following sections briefly describe the potential of Brazil and Mexico for bioenergy production using agroforestry residues and MSW.

#### **3.1 Brazil**

Brazil has an electrical matrix of predominantly renewable origin with an emphasis on the water source. Renewable sources account for 82.9% of the domestic supply of electricity in Brazil, which is the result of the sum of the amounts referring to domestic production plus imports distributed as 64.9% hydro, 8.6% wind, 8.4% biomass, and 1% solar [49]. The energy production from fossil fuels accounted for 17.1% of the national total, which 2.0% oil products, 2.5% nuclear, 9.3% natural gas, and 3.3% charcoal. This distribution represents the structure of the domestic supply of electricity in Brazil in 2019 [53].

The energy needed to move the economy of a region in a period, Internal Energy Supply in 2019, was 294 million toe (tons of oil equivalent) or Mtoe. Looking specifically the renewable sources, they increased by 2.8% in 2019 compared to 2018, that was supported by a strong increase in the production of sugarcane products with 5.5% in ethanol, adding the increase of wind, solar, and biodiesel with 4.4% [54], as shown in **Table 6**.

The choice for the energy matrix also relates to the system costs and regional conditions. For agro-industrial regions, biomass can be a viable raw material to produce clean and renewable energy, at the same time is a form to minimize the environmental impacts of agro-industrial production. In the Brazilian energy matrix, the types of biomass most used are from sugar cane and its products, firewood, black liquor, and rice husks. Considering the energy matrix in Brazil, a general view of the installed potency is shown in **Table 7**, the installed capacity of electricity generation by source in MW, and the evolution from 2015 to 2019 [53].

#### *3.1.1 Forestry residues*

Brazil is a forest country with hectares (59% of its territory) of natural and planted nearly 500 million forests [55], representing the second largest forest area in the world with 502,082.1 (1000 ha) [55], only surpassed by Russia [56]. The distribution area is 57.31% in natural forests and 1.16% in planted ones [56].

Brazil has around 10 million hectares of forest plantations, mainly with species of Eucalyptus and Pinus genera, which represent 96% of the total area. Forest


*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

*a Blast furnace, melt shop, and sulfur gas.*

*b Black liquor, biodiesel, wind, solar, rice husk, biogas, wood waste, charcoal gas, and elephant grass.*

#### **Table 6.**

*2.2.1.2 Gas efficiency (ygas)*

*Gasification*

feedstock mass as the following equation expresses:

tion using agroforestry residues and MSW.

supply of electricity in Brazil in 2019 [53].

4.4% [54], as shown in **Table 6**.

*3.1.1 Forestry residues*

**16**

**3.1 Brazil**

Y gas can be also described as the ratio of the produced gas volume by the

*ygas* <sup>¼</sup> *Vgas mF*

**3. Biomass availability in Brazil and Mexico and potential analysis**

where *mF* is the mass of the feed stream and *Vgas* the volume of the gas mixture.

Biomass is a renewable organic material that serves as a sustainable source of energy to produce electricity or other forms of power. Some of the drivers to utilize it are lowering fossil-fuel utilization, decreasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and promote economic development and agricultural development. The following sections briefly describe the potential of Brazil and Mexico for bioenergy produc-

Brazil has an electrical matrix of predominantly renewable origin with an emphasis on the water source. Renewable sources account for 82.9% of the domestic supply of electricity in Brazil, which is the result of the sum of the amounts referring to domestic production plus imports distributed as 64.9% hydro, 8.6% wind, 8.4% biomass, and 1% solar [49]. The energy production from fossil fuels accounted for 17.1% of the national total, which 2.0% oil products, 2.5% nuclear, 9.3% natural gas, and 3.3% charcoal. This distribution represents the structure of the domestic

The energy needed to move the economy of a region in a period, Internal Energy

The choice for the energy matrix also relates to the system costs and regional conditions. For agro-industrial regions, biomass can be a viable raw material to produce clean and renewable energy, at the same time is a form to minimize the environmental impacts of agro-industrial production. In the Brazilian energy matrix, the types of biomass most used are from sugar cane and its products, firewood, black liquor, and rice husks. Considering the energy matrix in Brazil, a general view of the installed potency is shown in **Table 7**, the installed capacity of electricity generation by source in MW, and the evolution from 2015 to 2019 [53].

Brazil is a forest country with hectares (59% of its territory) of natural and planted nearly 500 million forests [55], representing the second largest forest area in the world with 502,082.1 (1000 ha) [55], only surpassed by Russia [56]. The distribution area is 57.31% in natural forests and 1.16% in planted ones [56].

Brazil has around 10 million hectares of forest plantations, mainly with species

of Eucalyptus and Pinus genera, which represent 96% of the total area. Forest

Supply in 2019, was 294 million toe (tons of oil equivalent) or Mtoe. Looking specifically the renewable sources, they increased by 2.8% in 2019 compared to 2018, that was supported by a strong increase in the production of sugarcane products with 5.5% in ethanol, adding the increase of wind, solar, and biodiesel with

(23)

*Internal Energy Supply (OIE) [54].*

plantations amount to 1.2% of Brazil's area, and 2.0% of the total forest areas. The composition of forest plantations in 2018 was 7,401,334 ha of Eucalyptus, 2,030,419 ha of Pinus, and 407,933 ha of other species [56] including rubber, acacia, teak, and parica.

The industrial sector of forest plantations is based on the cultivation of trees for industrial purposes, generating a variety of products numbering nearly five thousand, including lumber, pulp, paper, flooring, wood panels, and charcoal [57]. **Figure 5** presents the area of planted trees in 2019, by state and by genus (in millions) [57].

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO, in 2019 the generated wood residues in Brazil were 19,140,000 m<sup>3</sup> [58]. Concerning the management of industrial and forest waste, the Brazilian planted tree sector has adopted sustainable practices to dispose of various types of domestic and urban waste generated during its production processes.

As shown in **Table 8**, in 2019 most of the waste from factories and forest companies was directed toward energy generation, approximately 67%. In the second place, 12% of waste was directed to other industrial sectors for reuse as a raw material. Of the total waste generated before consumption, 7.4% was kept in the field to protect and enrich the soil, 4.2% was sent to landfills, and 3.4% was recycled [57].

#### *3.1.2 Agricultural residues*

Agricultural occupation in Brazil is estimated at 65.91 million hectares, equivalent to 7.8% of the national territory [59], the numbers show that Brazil uses 7.57% of its territory for crops. This area also corresponds to only 3.41% of the cultivated area worldwide.

Agroindustry waste generation in Brazil is spread off in all the country states from North to South regions, is from various crops, varies with seasonality, and


**Waste generated during the production**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

*Area of Planted Trees in Brazil in 2019, by state and by genus (in millions) [56].*

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

Bark, branches, leaves, lime sludge, boiler

Drags and grits, sludge, ash, metal scrap,

Bark, branches, leaves, woodchips, sawdust,

Sawdust, paper scraps, lime sludge, and boiler

Sawdust, paper scraps, lime sludge, and boiler

Paper scraps, lime sludge, non-hazardous

Bark, sawdust, sludge/filtrate from water treatment plants, knots, and rejects from fiber

Various types of waste already described above and other non-specified

*Solid Waste Generated by Type, According to Final Destination, in % of Total Waste [57].*

**% of tons by type of waste, by destination**

**Final destination**

fertilize the soil, composted

companies in the planted tree sector

other industrial sectors

companies

co-processing

7.4% kept in the fields to protect and

3.4% recycling

66.6% energy generation

0.7% reused as raw materials by

11.7% reused as raw materials by

0.7% sold or shipped to various

5.3% other destinations, including

4.2% sent to landfills

**process**

**Figure 5.**

ash, others

black liquor

wastes, others

ash

ash

lines

**Table 8.**

**19**

plastic, cardboard, etc.

*1 Includes TAR.*

*2 Includes heat of the process (Table in MW).*

#### **Table 7.**

*Installed Capacity of Electricity Generation by Source [53].*

represents a huge amount. The availability of the main selected products from agricultural residues, animal waste, and its respective analyses as to generation potential was determined [60]. The main selected products are analyzed from the *Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

**Figure 5.**

*Area of Planted Trees in Brazil in 2019, by state and by genus (in millions) [56].*


#### **Table 8.**

*Solid Waste Generated by Type, According to Final Destination, in % of Total Waste [57].*

represents a huge amount. The availability of the main selected products from agricultural residues, animal waste, and its respective analyses as to generation potential was determined [60]. The main selected products are analyzed from the

*1*

*2*

**18**

**Table 7.**

*Includes TAR.*

*Gasification*

*Includes heat of the process (Table in MW).*

*Installed Capacity of Electricity Generation by Source [53].*

Nuclear 1.990 1.990 1.990 1.990 1.990 Total 140.858 150.338 157.112 162.840 170.118

**Plants in operation 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019** UHE / Hydro 86.366 91.499 94.662 98.287 102.999 PCH / Hydro 4.886 4.941 5.020 5.157 5.291 CGH / Hydro 398 484 594 695 768 EOL / Wind 7.633 10.124 12.283 14.390 15.378 SOL / Solar 21 24 935 1.798 2.473 Termo Total 39.564 41.275 41.537 40.523 41.219

> **Biomass** 13.257 14.147 14.505 14.790 14.978 Bagasse 10.573 10.979 11.158 11.368 11.438 Others 2.684 3.168 3.347 3.422 3.540 Biogas 84 119 135 140 186 Elephant Grass 32 66 32 32 32 Charcoal 51 54 43 43 48 Rice Peels 45 45 45 45 53 Charcoal Gas 112 115 114 128 128 Black-Liquor 1.923 2.333 2.543 2.556 2.544 Vegetal Oil 27 4 4 4 4 Wood Residue 409 432 431 474 544 **Fossil** 24.961 25.550 25.453 24.127 24.642 Steam Coal 3.389 3.389 3.324 2.858 3.228 Refinery Gas 316 316 316 320 320 Natural Gas 12.428 12.965 12.980 13.359 13.385 Fuel Oil 3.197 4.020 4.056 3.363 3.316 Diesel Oil 5.632 4.825 4.737 4.186 4.353 Viscous Oil — ——— **Others**<sup>1</sup> 35 41 41 40 Industrial Effluent 1.346 1.578 1.579 1.606 1.599 Gaseous Effluent<sup>2</sup> 160 176 172 172 66 Sulfur 71 71 71 71 79 Blast Furnace Gas 216 422 422 417 512 Process Gas 674 654 658 721 715 Steel Gas 225 255 255 225 226 Unknown sources 92 — —

point of view of Brazil's economy and about the necessary conditions for the rural producer to keep up with sustainable growth. **Table 9** presents the most common and produced agricultural residues [60].

accounted for 56.3% of bioenergy and 18% of the matrix. Firewood, with 25.7 Mtoe,

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

Other bioenergy (black liquor, biogas, wood residues, residues from agribusiness, and biodiesel), with 15.3 Mtoe, accounted for 16.3% of bioenergy and 5.2% of the matrix [49]. **Tables 11** and **12** show the energy supply and consumption by sugarcane products: sugarcane bagasse as input for electricity generation and sug-

Between 2010 and 2019, the generation of MSW in Brazil registered a considerable increase, going from 67 million to 79 million tons per year (in 2020). In Brazil, most of the collected MSW goes to disposal in landfills, having registered an increase of 10 million tons in a decade, going from 33 million tons per year to 43 million tons. On the other hand, the amount of waste that goes to inadequate units (dumps and controlled landfills) has also grown, from 25 million tons per year to

It should be noted, in **Figure 6**, that the organic fraction remains the main component of MSW, with 45.3%. Dry recyclable waste, on the other hand, adds up to 35% being mainly composed of plastics (16.8%), paper and cardboard (10.4%), in addition to glass (2.7%), metals (2.3%), and multilayer packaging (1.4%) [58].

**Flow 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019** Production 162.6 168.6 165.6 157.8 162.2 Total consumption 162.6 168.6 165.6 157.8 162.2 Transformation\* 28.0 28.7 28.9 28.5 29.3 Final consumption 134.6 139.9 136.8 129.3 132.9 Final energy Consumption 134.6 139.9 136.8 129.3 132.9 Energy sector 61.8 57.5 56.0 67.1 71.1 Industrial 72.8 82.4 80.8 62.1 61.9 Chemical 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Foods and beverages 72.7 82.3 80.6 62.0 61.7 Paper and pulp 128.0 141.0 146.0 157.0 147.0 Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

**Flow 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019** Production 209.3 183.7 179.9 243.1 260.5 Total Consumption 209.3 183.7 179.9 243.1 260.5 Transformation\* 209.3 183.7 179.9 243.1 260.5

accounted for 27.4% of bioenergy and 8.7% of the matrix.

arcane juice for alcohol production [50].

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

*3.1.3 Municipal solid waste residues*

just over 29 million tons per year [62].

*Input for alcohol production (Table in 10<sup>3</sup> ton).*

*Input for alcohol production (Table in 10<sup>3</sup> ton).*

*\**

*\**

**21**

**Table 12.**

*Sugar Cane Juice [53].*

**Table 11.**

*Sugar Cane Bagasse [53].*

Brazil stands out as a major biomass generator, the mass supply of biomass in 2005 was 558 million tons, with a projected growth to 1402 million tons in 2030 [53]. **Table 10** shows the evolution of mass supply per agricultural residue, agroindustrial, and forestry residues.

Biomass availability is a key aspect of bioenergy. The total bioenergy supply in 2019 was 93.9 Mtoe (1824 thousand bop/day), corresponding to 31.9% of the Brazilian energy matrix. Sugarcane products as bagasse and ethanol with 52.8 Mtoe,


*Generating potential index GP (Tons/culture).*

*b GP Index abbreviation: TR= Total Residue: TW= Total waste.*

#### **Table 9.**

*Estimates of generating potential index (GP) for agricultural residues and animal waste in Brazil [60].*


#### **Table 10.**

*Mass supply of biomass by agro-industrial agricultural waste and forestry (millions of tons) [61].*

### *Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

accounted for 56.3% of bioenergy and 18% of the matrix. Firewood, with 25.7 Mtoe, accounted for 27.4% of bioenergy and 8.7% of the matrix.

Other bioenergy (black liquor, biogas, wood residues, residues from agribusiness, and biodiesel), with 15.3 Mtoe, accounted for 16.3% of bioenergy and 5.2% of the matrix [49]. **Tables 11** and **12** show the energy supply and consumption by sugarcane products: sugarcane bagasse as input for electricity generation and sugarcane juice for alcohol production [50].

## *3.1.3 Municipal solid waste residues*

point of view of Brazil's economy and about the necessary conditions for the rural producer to keep up with sustainable growth. **Table 9** presents the most common

Brazil stands out as a major biomass generator, the mass supply of biomass in 2005 was 558 million tons, with a projected growth to 1402 million tons in 2030 [53]. **Table 10** shows the evolution of mass supply per agricultural residue, agro-

Biomass availability is a key aspect of bioenergy. The total bioenergy supply in 2019 was 93.9 Mtoe (1824 thousand bop/day), corresponding to 31.9% of the Brazilian energy matrix. Sugarcane products as bagasse and ethanol with 52.8 Mtoe,

**Feedstock Abbreviation Generating potential index -GP<sup>a</sup> (tons/total residues - tons/total**

CO 2.95 t TR/CO

*Estimates of generating potential index (GP) for agricultural residues and animal waste in Brazil [60].*

**Residue 2005 2010 2015 2020 2030** Total 558 731 898 1058 1402 Agricultural Residues 478 633 768 904 1196 Soybean 185 251 302 359 482 Maize (corn) 176 251 304 361 485 Rice (straw) 57 59 62 66 69 sugar cane 60 73 100 119 160 Agro industrial waste 80 98 130 154 207 Bagasse sugar cane 58 70 97 115 154 Rice (Husk) 2 2 3 3 3 Black Liquor 13 17 21 25 34 Wood 6 8 10 12 16 Energy Forests 13 30 31 43 46 Super plus Wood 13 30 31 43 46

*Mass supply of biomass by agro-industrial agricultural waste and forestry (millions of tons) [61].*

Sugar cane SC 0.22 t TR/SC Soybean SO 2.05 t TR/SO Maize (corn) MI 1.42 t TR/MI Rice (straw) RI 1.49 t TR/RI

Orange - 100 OG 0.50 t TR/OG Wheat 70 WH 1.42 t TR/WH Cassava - 100 CA 0.20 t TR/CA Tobacco TO 0.75 t TR/TO

**waste<sup>b</sup> )**

and produced agricultural residues [60].

industrial, and forestry residues.

*Generating potential index GP (Tons/culture).*

*GP Index abbreviation: TR= Total Residue: TW= Total waste.*

Cotton (Perennial)

*Gasification*

*a*

*b*

**Table 9.**

**Table 10.**

**20**

Between 2010 and 2019, the generation of MSW in Brazil registered a considerable increase, going from 67 million to 79 million tons per year (in 2020). In Brazil, most of the collected MSW goes to disposal in landfills, having registered an increase of 10 million tons in a decade, going from 33 million tons per year to 43 million tons. On the other hand, the amount of waste that goes to inadequate units (dumps and controlled landfills) has also grown, from 25 million tons per year to just over 29 million tons per year [62].

It should be noted, in **Figure 6**, that the organic fraction remains the main component of MSW, with 45.3%. Dry recyclable waste, on the other hand, adds up to 35% being mainly composed of plastics (16.8%), paper and cardboard (10.4%), in addition to glass (2.7%), metals (2.3%), and multilayer packaging (1.4%) [58].


#### **Table 11.**

*Sugar Cane Bagasse [53].*


**Table 12.** *Sugar Cane Juice [53].*

The tailings, in turn, correspond to 14.1% of the total and mainly contemplate the sanitary materials. As for the other fractions, we have textile waste, leather, and rubber, with 5.6%, and other waste, also with 1.4%, which contemplate various materials theoretically reverse logistics objects [62].

feasible the production and use of biodiesel in the country, with a focus on competitiveness, the quality of the biofuel produced, the guarantee of security of its supply, the diversification of raw materials, the social inclusion of family farmers and in strengthening the regional potential for the production of raw materials [66]. RenovaBio is the new National Biofuel Policy, instituted by Law 13,576/ 2017 [67], whose objective is to expand the production of biofuels in Brazil, based on predictability, environmental, economic, and social sustainability, and compatible with the growth of the market. Based on this expansion, the aim is to make an important contribution by biofuels in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the country. The program will seek its performance based on four strategic axes: discussing the role of biofuels in the energy matrix; development based on environmental, economic, and financial sustainability; marketing rules and attention to

*Physical composition of MSW from towns in different regions of Brazil [63].*

Regarding MSW and its destination to the bioenergy sector, in 2020, an association of four important sectorial entities - ABCP (portland cement), Abetre (waste and effluent treatment), Abiogás (production and use of biogas), and Abrelpe (public cleaning) - launched the FBRER (Brazil Front for Energy Recovery of Waste), which aims to boost energy capture from waste deposited in landfills. The signing of the Cooperation Agreement for Energy Recovery of Waste was signed by the entities and the Ministry of the Environment of the federal government [69]. The cooperation agreement will seek to coordinate efforts to remove regulatory

barriers that hinder the more intense use of waste. Besides, it intends to make feasible projects for the energy recovery of solid waste and promote its integration

*3.1.5 Limitations for implementing pyrolysis and gasification of biomass in Brazil*

was not possible managed to show viability on a large scale. The lack of

In Brazil, one of the challenges faced by biomass gasification projects is that the facilities are constructed and operated in the laboratory, and on a small scale, it

into the clean and renewable energy market [69].

new biofuels [68].

**23**

**Regions North<sup>a</sup>**

*Prefeitura Municipal de Araguaína (2013).*

*Prefeitura de Paranaíba (2014).*

*Prefeitura de Porto Alegre (2013).*

*Ministério do Meio Ambiente (2012).*

*Contrato Prefeitura Municipal de Cubatí (2013).*

*Prefeitura da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro (2015).*

MSW

Paper and cardboard

*a*

*b*

*c*

*d*

*e*

*f*

**Table 13.**

**(%)**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

**North-eastb (%)**

**Mid-westc (%)**

10.87 3.7 7.48 15.39 11.62 13.1

Organic matter 54.68 57.00 54.02 52.00 57.27 51.4 Recyclables 27.46 10.31 29.72 41.70 26.87 31.9 Metal 1.09 1.74 3.64 1.66 1.46 2.9

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

Plastic 14.67 3.86 16.73 21.15 11.23 13.5 Glass 0.83 1.01 1.87 3.50 2.56 2.4 Others 17.86 32.69 16.26 6.30 15.86 16.7 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100

**South-east<sup>d</sup> (%)**

**Southe (%)**

**Brazil<sup>f</sup> (%)**

The national gravimetry, in **Figure 6**, was estimated based on the weighted average of the total generation of MSW by income bracket of the municipalities and their respective gravimetry, considering the population and generation per capita.

It is possible to estimate the economic development of a country by analyzing the physical composition of its MSW. In general, the greater the income of a country the higher the consumption and, therefore, the amount of waste generated [63]. The physical compositions of MSW from towns in different regions of Brazil are shown in **Table 13** [63].

The National Solid Waste Policy (NSWP) was established by Federal Law n. 12,305 in August 2010, and it can be a milestone for waste management in Brazil [64]. The goals of this law are the reduction, reuse, recycling, treatment, and appropriate disposal of MSW, including energy recovery systems, to avoid damage to the environment and public health. This law prohibits the open dump disposal of MSW, and it is stipulated that all states and cities must have closed their open dumps by 2014. Nevertheless, the situation about MSW in Brazil has changed very little since the introduction of the NSWP [63].

#### *3.1.4 Brazilian politics related to the bioenergy sector*

In Brazil, the bioenergy sector is promoted by programs instituted by the federal government. In 2002 the Brazilian government launched the Incentive Program for Alternative Sources of Electric Energy (PROINFA), of the Ministry of Mines and Energy in response to the scarcity of energy in the country, in search of renewable sources [63].

As part of the incentive to biodiesel, the National Biodiesel Production and Use Program (PNPB) was launched in 2004 [65]. The PNPB's strategy is to make

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*


*a Prefeitura Municipal de Araguaína (2013).*

*b Contrato Prefeitura Municipal de Cubatí (2013).*

*c Prefeitura de Paranaíba (2014).*

*d Prefeitura da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro (2015).*

*e Prefeitura de Porto Alegre (2013).*

*f Ministério do Meio Ambiente (2012).*

#### **Table 13.**

The tailings, in turn, correspond to 14.1% of the total and mainly contemplate the sanitary materials. As for the other fractions, we have textile waste, leather, and rubber, with 5.6%, and other waste, also with 1.4%, which contemplate various

The national gravimetry, in **Figure 6**, was estimated based on the weighted average of the total generation of MSW by income bracket of the municipalities and their respective gravimetry, considering the population and generation per capita. It is possible to estimate the economic development of a country by analyzing

The National Solid Waste Policy (NSWP) was established by Federal Law n. 12,305 in August 2010, and it can be a milestone for waste management in Brazil [64]. The goals of this law are the reduction, reuse, recycling, treatment, and appropriate disposal of MSW, including energy recovery systems, to avoid damage to the environment and public health. This law prohibits the open dump disposal of MSW, and it is stipulated that all states and cities must have closed their open dumps by 2014. Nevertheless, the situation about MSW in Brazil has changed very

In Brazil, the bioenergy sector is promoted by programs instituted by the federal government. In 2002 the Brazilian government launched the Incentive Program for Alternative Sources of Electric Energy (PROINFA), of the Ministry of Mines and Energy in response to the scarcity of energy in the country, in search of renewable

As part of the incentive to biodiesel, the National Biodiesel Production and Use

Program (PNPB) was launched in 2004 [65]. The PNPB's strategy is to make

the physical composition of its MSW. In general, the greater the income of a country the higher the consumption and, therefore, the amount of waste generated [63]. The physical compositions of MSW from towns in different regions of Brazil

materials theoretically reverse logistics objects [62].

little since the introduction of the NSWP [63].

*3.1.4 Brazilian politics related to the bioenergy sector*

are shown in **Table 13** [63].

*Gravimetry of MSW in Brazil [62].*

**Figure 6.**

*Gasification*

sources [63].

**22**

*Physical composition of MSW from towns in different regions of Brazil [63].*

feasible the production and use of biodiesel in the country, with a focus on competitiveness, the quality of the biofuel produced, the guarantee of security of its supply, the diversification of raw materials, the social inclusion of family farmers and in strengthening the regional potential for the production of raw materials [66].

RenovaBio is the new National Biofuel Policy, instituted by Law 13,576/ 2017 [67], whose objective is to expand the production of biofuels in Brazil, based on predictability, environmental, economic, and social sustainability, and compatible with the growth of the market. Based on this expansion, the aim is to make an important contribution by biofuels in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the country. The program will seek its performance based on four strategic axes: discussing the role of biofuels in the energy matrix; development based on environmental, economic, and financial sustainability; marketing rules and attention to new biofuels [68].

Regarding MSW and its destination to the bioenergy sector, in 2020, an association of four important sectorial entities - ABCP (portland cement), Abetre (waste and effluent treatment), Abiogás (production and use of biogas), and Abrelpe (public cleaning) - launched the FBRER (Brazil Front for Energy Recovery of Waste), which aims to boost energy capture from waste deposited in landfills. The signing of the Cooperation Agreement for Energy Recovery of Waste was signed by the entities and the Ministry of the Environment of the federal government [69].

The cooperation agreement will seek to coordinate efforts to remove regulatory barriers that hinder the more intense use of waste. Besides, it intends to make feasible projects for the energy recovery of solid waste and promote its integration into the clean and renewable energy market [69].

#### *3.1.5 Limitations for implementing pyrolysis and gasification of biomass in Brazil*

In Brazil, one of the challenges faced by biomass gasification projects is that the facilities are constructed and operated in the laboratory, and on a small scale, it was not possible managed to show viability on a large scale. The lack of

gasification plants in operation leads to the unreliability of the business, which alienates investors.

Forest management, extraction, and industrialization activities generate a significant amount of residual forest biomass annually. Some studies have been carried out on the use of forest residues in the production of bioenergy, and the results

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

unbarked round timber) tons of dry base biomass, which come from forest residues

and 104,465.5 tons to oak. In terms of energy, this forest biomass represents a renewable energy resource of 12,827.8 TJ of which 11,425.4 TJ corresponds to pine and 1402.4 TJ to oak. [72]. In Mexico, the main industry supply forest basins have been identified (**Figure 7**), where a remarkable amount of sawmill waste is concentrated, which can be used as feedstock for integrated energy generation systems (thermal and electrical) [72]. The fact of integrating forest residues into energy generation is an opportunity for community forest companies, ejidos, and communities, to generate income that comes from forest biomass that is now used for waste

According to the production of forest biomass, 598,858.1 tons correspond to pine

Several studies have pointed out and assessed the potential of biomass energy production in Mexico, considering three main categories: wood & forestry residues, crop, and agro residues, and MSW [72]. Some estimates range from 3035 to 4550 PJ/y, where wood forestry residues share is 27–54%, crop and agro residues 26, and 0.6% from MSW. Other estimates more conservative said 626 PJ/y and 2228 PJ/y. **Table 14** shows the main agricultural residues produced in Mexico, which considers the residue index (RI) of each crop. Maize primary residue has a 44% share of the main crop residues producing in Mexico. While sorghum primary

r, cubic meters of

indicate that Mexico generates around 703,323.6 (1,774,994.0 m<sup>3</sup>

of mainly pine, and oak. [72].

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

*3.2.2 Agricultural residues*

**Figure 7.**

**25**

*Main Industrial supply forest basin in Mexico adapted from [72].*

or that has a minimal economic recovery.

Another factor observed is the comparison between the technologies used to reduce MSW. Considering gasification, pyrolysis, and incineration, it is observed that for the gasification process, solid waste generally needs to have humidity lower than 30%, an average granulometry of 50 mm, and an average calorific value of 3500 kcal/kg [70], the solid waste must be prepared as fuels derived from municipal waste. Such treatment of waste to transform it into a good fuel requires an increase in the costs of production.

Likewise, in the pyrolysis process, waste also needs to be pre-treated. This pretreatment raises the costs of the MSW energy plant. The pyrolysis process produces gases, oils, and solid waste (metals, oxides, and inert material), which need to be of high quality to identify markets for their absorption. Given these characteristics of gasification and pyrolysis process, energy reuse projects for solid waste end up using incineration technology.

There are several challenges for Brazil to achieve high levels of sustainability in the management of MSW as waste to energy through gasification or pyrolysis technologies. The biggest of these is related to the sale of energy that will be generated by plants using MSW, as it is the largest revenue of this enterprise since this market is not yet regulated.

#### **3.2 México**

In contrast with Brazil, around 88.70% of the energy production in Mexico comes from fossil fuels, 3.17% charcoal, 1.16% Nuclear, and 6.97% renewable (3.79% biomass, 1.62% geothermal, hydropower 1.42%, solar and wind 0.14%). Regarding energy contribution to power generation, 78% comes from fossil fuels, 2.8% nuclear, biomass 9.30%, hydropower 3.70%, and 6% from others. As one may infer, energy production in Mexico relies mostly on fossil fuels [71]. Therefore, the potential of other resources such as biomass is not being exploited, preventing the strengthening of the agricultural sector and the reduction of GHG.

Mexico occupies 3rd place in LATAM and the Caribbean in terms of cropland area, after Brazil and Argentina. The cultivated area in 2007 was 21.7 million ha, producing 270 million tons. The residuals from these crops are currently used for animal feed and bedding, mulch, and burning to produce energy and compost. In fact, in 2012 bioenergy has an operational capacity of 645 MW installed, of which 598 MW are from bagasse and the rest from biogas. However, in 2019, it is registered that Mexico increased its capacity of bagasse to 791 MW, which means 32% more, or a 4.28% increase per year [71]. Although the production of energy from biomass has increased, the full potential is not being exploited. The following section presents the biomass availability in Mexico.

#### *3.2.1 Forestry residues*

Mexico has 138 million hectares of forest, equivalent to 70% of the national territory. The forests and jungles are an important part of these lands and cover 64.9 million hectares, of which it is estimated that 15 million hectares have the potential for commercial use. The available forest biomass is distributed in different areas of the country. However, the greatest potential is in the mountain ranges of and the Yucatan peninsula [72].

Forest biomass contributes 8% of primary energy demand, being used in residential firewood and small industries. However, it can be considered as an alternative source for renewable energy generation and provide multiple benefits [72].

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

Forest management, extraction, and industrialization activities generate a significant amount of residual forest biomass annually. Some studies have been carried out on the use of forest residues in the production of bioenergy, and the results indicate that Mexico generates around 703,323.6 (1,774,994.0 m<sup>3</sup> r, cubic meters of unbarked round timber) tons of dry base biomass, which come from forest residues of mainly pine, and oak. [72].

According to the production of forest biomass, 598,858.1 tons correspond to pine and 104,465.5 tons to oak. In terms of energy, this forest biomass represents a renewable energy resource of 12,827.8 TJ of which 11,425.4 TJ corresponds to pine and 1402.4 TJ to oak. [72]. In Mexico, the main industry supply forest basins have been identified (**Figure 7**), where a remarkable amount of sawmill waste is concentrated, which can be used as feedstock for integrated energy generation systems (thermal and electrical) [72]. The fact of integrating forest residues into energy generation is an opportunity for community forest companies, ejidos, and communities, to generate income that comes from forest biomass that is now used for waste or that has a minimal economic recovery.

### *3.2.2 Agricultural residues*

gasification plants in operation leads to the unreliability of the business, which

Another factor observed is the comparison between the technologies used to reduce MSW. Considering gasification, pyrolysis, and incineration, it is observed that for the gasification process, solid waste generally needs to have humidity lower than 30%, an average granulometry of 50 mm, and an average calorific value of 3500 kcal/kg [70], the solid waste must be prepared as fuels derived from municipal waste. Such treatment of waste to transform it into a good fuel requires an increase

Likewise, in the pyrolysis process, waste also needs to be pre-treated. This pretreatment raises the costs of the MSW energy plant. The pyrolysis process produces gases, oils, and solid waste (metals, oxides, and inert material), which need to be of high quality to identify markets for their absorption. Given these characteristics of gasification and pyrolysis process, energy reuse projects for solid waste end up

There are several challenges for Brazil to achieve high levels of sustainability in

the management of MSW as waste to energy through gasification or pyrolysis technologies. The biggest of these is related to the sale of energy that will be generated by plants using MSW, as it is the largest revenue of this enterprise since

In contrast with Brazil, around 88.70% of the energy production in Mexico comes from fossil fuels, 3.17% charcoal, 1.16% Nuclear, and 6.97% renewable (3.79% biomass, 1.62% geothermal, hydropower 1.42%, solar and wind 0.14%). Regarding energy contribution to power generation, 78% comes from fossil fuels, 2.8% nuclear, biomass 9.30%, hydropower 3.70%, and 6% from others. As one may infer, energy production in Mexico relies mostly on fossil fuels [71]. Therefore, the potential of other resources such as biomass is not being exploited, preventing the

Mexico occupies 3rd place in LATAM and the Caribbean in terms of cropland area, after Brazil and Argentina. The cultivated area in 2007 was 21.7 million ha, producing 270 million tons. The residuals from these crops are currently used for animal feed and bedding, mulch, and burning to produce energy and compost. In fact, in 2012 bioenergy has an operational capacity of 645 MW installed, of which 598 MW are from bagasse and the rest from biogas. However, in 2019, it is registered that Mexico increased its capacity of bagasse to 791 MW, which means 32% more, or a 4.28% increase per year [71]. Although the production of energy from biomass has increased, the full potential is not being exploited. The following

Mexico has 138 million hectares of forest, equivalent to 70% of the national territory. The forests and jungles are an important part of these lands and cover 64.9 million hectares, of which it is estimated that 15 million hectares have the potential for commercial use. The available forest biomass is distributed in different areas of the country. However, the greatest potential is in the mountain ranges of and the

Forest biomass contributes 8% of primary energy demand, being used in residential firewood and small industries. However, it can be considered as an alternative source for renewable energy generation and provide multiple benefits [72].

strengthening of the agricultural sector and the reduction of GHG.

section presents the biomass availability in Mexico.

alienates investors.

*Gasification*

in the costs of production.

using incineration technology.

this market is not yet regulated.

**3.2 México**

*3.2.1 Forestry residues*

Yucatan peninsula [72].

**24**

Several studies have pointed out and assessed the potential of biomass energy production in Mexico, considering three main categories: wood & forestry residues, crop, and agro residues, and MSW [72]. Some estimates range from 3035 to 4550 PJ/y, where wood forestry residues share is 27–54%, crop and agro residues 26, and 0.6% from MSW. Other estimates more conservative said 626 PJ/y and 2228 PJ/y.

**Table 14** shows the main agricultural residues produced in Mexico, which considers the residue index (RI) of each crop. Maize primary residue has a 44% share of the main crop residues producing in Mexico. While sorghum primary

**Figure 7.** *Main Industrial supply forest basin in Mexico adapted from [72].*


**Crop Information**

**27**

**Crop**

 **Crop**

**C.V.**

**Residues**

**Residue Residue**

**Production**

**Available**

**HHV**

**Energy**

**Residue Residue**

**Recovery**

**Production**

**Available**

**HHV**

**Energy**

**Production**

**(%)**

**Energy**

**Index**

**(kt/y)**

**Material \***

**(MJ/**

**Potential**

**Index**

**Factor**

**(kt/yr)**

**Material \***

**(MJ/**

**Potential**

**(kt/yr)**

**kg)**

**(PJ/yr)**

**(kt/y)**

**kg)**

**(PJ/y)**

**Potential**

**(PJ/yr)**

**(kt/yr)**

Sunflower

Agave

1369.95

 23.52

 3.98

 Leaves

 0.20

 273.99

 109.60

 17.50

 1.92

 Bagasse

 0.12

 0.80

 164.39

 131.52

 16.35

 2.15

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

(tequila)

Agave

279.59

 26.71

 0.88

 Leaves

 0.20

 55.92

 22.37

 18.84

 0.42

542.53

 Bagasse

 0.12

 0.80

 33.55

 26.84

 16.09

 0.43

127.81

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

(mescal)

Total

*\* Recovery factor 0.4.*

**Table 14.** *Agricultural*

 *Residues in Mexico [73].*

 94,905.9

670.34

 7.83

 6.68

 0.16

—

3.00

 23.49

 9.40

 17.50

 0.16

——

 —

 —

 ——

**Primary Residue**

**Secondary Residue**

#### *Gasification*


**Table 14.** *Agricultural ResiduesinMexico*

 *[73].*

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

**Crop Information**

**26**

**Crop**

 **Crop**

**C.V.**

**Residues**

**Residue Residue**

**Production**

**Available**

**HHV**

**Energy**

**Residue Residue**

**Recovery**

**Production**

**Available**

**HHV**

**Energy**

*Gasification*

**Production**

**(%)**

**Energy**

**Index**

**(kt/y)**

**Material \***

**(MJ/**

**Potential**

**Index**

**Factor**

**(kt/yr)**

**Material \***

**(MJ/**

**Potential**

**(kt/yr)**

**kg)**

**(PJ/yr)**

**(kt/y)**

**kg)**

**(PJ/y)**

**Potential**

**(PJ/yr)**

**(kt/yr)**

Sugarcane

Maize

Sorghum

Wheat

Coffee

Coffee

Beans

Barley

Cotton

Soybean

Rice Chickpea

Safflower

Oat Groundnut

Sesame

Fava bean

Tobacco

Lentil

 6.18

 46.71

 0.09

—

2.10

 12.98

 5.19

 17.08

 0.09

——

 —

 —

 ——

 12.97

 25.64

 0.48

—

5.00

 64.85

 25.94

 18.52

 0.48

——

 —

 —

 ——

 27.72

 30.69

 0.26

—

1.43

 39.64

 15.86

 16.31

 0.26

——

 —

 —

 ——

 45.10

 21.29

 1.20

—

3.80

 171.38

 68.55

 17.47

 1.20

——

 —

 —

 ——

 92.91

 12.39

 1.92

—

2.12

 196.97

 78.79

 19.01

 1.50

 Shells

 0.30

 0.80

 27.87

 22.30

 18.73

 0.42

96.73

 29.36

 1.70

—

2.52

 243.76

 97.50

 17.48

 1.70

——

 —

 —

 ——

 120.56

 42.24

 2.11

—

2.28

 274.88

 109.95

 19.23

 2.11

——

 —

 —

 ——

 159.22

 32.86

 1.96

—

1.70

 270.67

 108.27

 18.10

 1.96

——

 —

 —

 ——

233.53

 14.43

 2.67

—

1.61

 375.98

 150.39

 15.37

 2.31

 Husk

 0.20

 0.50

 46.71

 23.35

 15.36

 0.36

 268.04

 49.09

 3.01

—

1.60

 428.86

 171.55

 17.52

 3.01

——

 —

 —

 ——

 631.66

 23.37

 5.66

—

1.28

 808.52

 323.41

 17.50

 5.66

——

 —

 —

 ——

 776.21

 25.44

 10.70

—

1.75

 1358.37

 543.35

 18.45

 10.02

 Husk

 0.10

 0.50

 77.62

 38.81

 17.50

 0.68

 1079.82

 17.62

 7.12

—

0.88

 950.24

 380.10

 18.74

 7.12

——

 —

 —

 ——

 1186.38

—

0.84

—

 —

 —

———

Hull

 0.04

 0.90

 47.46

 42.71

 19.59

 0.84

 1186.38

—

2.04

—

 —

 —

———

Pulp

 0.10

 0.90

 118.64

 106.77

 19.10

 2.04

 3622.61

 9.64

 45.45

—

1.62

 5868.63

 2347.45

 19.36

 45.45

——

 —

 —

 ——

 6127.56

 17.85

 174.93

 Straw/

3.90

 23,897.48

 9558.99

 18.30

 174.93

——

 —

 —

 ——

stalk

 23,740.53

 12.97

 278.92

 Stover

 1.41

 33,474.15

 13,389.66

 17.18

 230.03

 Cob

 0.15

 0.80

 3561.08

 2848.86

 17.16

 48.89

 53,834.44

 7.10

 124.19

 Tops &

0.14

 7536.82

 3014.73

 17.31

 52.18

 Bagasse

 0.14

 0.50

 7536.82

 3768.41

 19.11

 72.01

leaves

**Primary Residue**

**Secondary Residue**

residue is 31%. As forestry residues, the use of agro residues is an opportunity for agro communities and industries to generate income by a better valorization of residues.

utilized to produce a refuse-derived fuel, which can be used as feedstock for gasification or pyrolysis processes, generating energy vectors and adding value to mate-

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

The law for the promotion and development of bioenergetics published in 2008 aims to promote and develop bioenergetics to contribute to energy diversification and sustainable development as conditions that allow guaranteeing the develop-

Another low that is related to the bioenergy sector is the Mexican General Law on Climate Change published in 2012 and modified in 2018, which sets the rights and responsibilities of state governments to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Since then, state governments have made progress in developing specific policy instruments, provided in both the Law and the National Climate Change Strategy. However, little clarity regarding the current level of progress of these state efforts exists at the national level. In this sense, seventeen policy instruments (laws, regulations, plans, programs, among others) of the 32 states of Mexico were set [78]. Four of them are related to MSW management, which is potential biomass to

*3.2.5 Limitations for implementing pyrolysis and gasification of biomass in Mexico*

Even though Mexico has a high potential for Renewable Energy Sources (RES) development, only a small amount of this energy has been utilized. This may be due

• The lack of an energy plan that evaluates the RES feasibility in short term.

• Consume the cheapest energy source, usually fossil fuels, rather than sustainable and eco-friendly resources. This situation is preventing RES

• Complex supply-chains and vulnerable to fossil carbon inputs mainly

established in the law for the promotion and development of bioenergetics published in 2008. Another noteworthy point is the palletization of agroforestry residues or MSW to produce fuel pellets, also known as RDF, which is a more uniform fuel than MSW regarding particle size and heating value, and it is easy to

• Higher abatement CO2 costs compared to actions in other sectors. For liquid biofuels, the estimated cost ranges from 7 to 12 US\$/tCO2e, while for biogas and upgraded wastewater treatment plants the cost is around 60 US\$/tCO2e.

Whether forestry agricultural residues or municipal solid waste, it exists a great potential to produce energy vectors in Mexico. However, socio-political factors have delayed their use. To overcome such limitations is vital to have a national plan for renewable energy in Mexico by the explicit establishment of RES participation, considering financial schemes that help small renewable energy producers as it was

Another important factor is to know beforehand the composition and yields of each technology's products, considering the available feedstocks in each country. Unfortunately, this would require major investments to produce experiential data.

rials that did not have any other purpose than to be disposed of.

*3.2.4 Mexican politics related to the bioenergy sector*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

ment of the agricultural sector [77].

produce bioenergy.

to the following reasons:

development.

transport.

**29**

associated with feedstock transport.

## *3.2.3 Municipal solid waste residues*

In Mexico, 102,895.00 tons of waste are generated daily, from which 83.93% are collected and 78.54% are disposed of in landfills or open-air dumps, recycling only 9.63% of the waste generated. That translates into an economic loss by diverting materials that are susceptible to rejoining the production system, reducing the demand and exploitation of new resources, unlike countries like Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, and Denmark, where the final disposal of waste is less than 5% in sanitary landfills [74].

Article 10 from the Mexican General Law for the Prevention and Comprehensive Management of Waste (LGPGIR) establishes municipalities oversee the integral management of MSW, which consists of the collection, transfer, treatment, and final disposal [75].

Municipalities encounter challenges that fall outside their technical and financial capacities due to the lack of trained personnel in acquiring or committing financial resources that give certainty to private sector investments. This situation is maybe because of the short time of the municipal administrations, which leads to the breaking of the learning curve, and therefore to a lack of continuity in actions and projects that guarantee integral management of urban solid waste [74]. Whatever the case, the reality is that MSW has become a big problem in Mexico, especially in big cities like Mexico City.

Mexico has 2203 areas (landfills or open-air dumps) for final MSW disposal. **Figure 8** shows the average composition of MSW in Mexico.

Food and garden waste and disposable diapers have a share of 48.98% of the total MSW in Mexico. While other MSW fractions like paper, paperboard, rags, and plastics represent around 25% of the total MSW in Mexico. Those fractions can be

**Figure 8.** *Mexican MSW Composition 2017 adapted from [76].*

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

utilized to produce a refuse-derived fuel, which can be used as feedstock for gasification or pyrolysis processes, generating energy vectors and adding value to materials that did not have any other purpose than to be disposed of.

## *3.2.4 Mexican politics related to the bioenergy sector*

residue is 31%. As forestry residues, the use of agro residues is an opportunity for agro communities and industries to generate income by a better valorization of

In Mexico, 102,895.00 tons of waste are generated daily, from which 83.93% are collected and 78.54% are disposed of in landfills or open-air dumps, recycling only 9.63% of the waste generated. That translates into an economic loss by diverting materials that are susceptible to rejoining the production system, reducing the demand and exploitation of new resources, unlike countries like Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, and Denmark, where the final

Article 10 from the Mexican General Law for the Prevention and Comprehensive Management of Waste (LGPGIR) establishes municipalities oversee the integral management of MSW, which consists of the collection, transfer, treatment, and

Municipalities encounter challenges that fall outside their technical and financial capacities due to the lack of trained personnel in acquiring or committing financial resources that give certainty to private sector investments. This situation is maybe because of the short time of the municipal administrations, which leads to the breaking of the learning curve, and therefore to a lack of continuity in actions and projects that guarantee integral management of urban solid waste [74]. Whatever the case, the reality is that MSW has become a big problem in Mexico, especially in

Mexico has 2203 areas (landfills or open-air dumps) for final MSW disposal.

Food and garden waste and disposable diapers have a share of 48.98% of the total MSW in Mexico. While other MSW fractions like paper, paperboard, rags, and plastics represent around 25% of the total MSW in Mexico. Those fractions can be

residues.

*Gasification*

final disposal [75].

big cities like Mexico City.

**Figure 8.**

**28**

*Mexican MSW Composition 2017 adapted from [76].*

*3.2.3 Municipal solid waste residues*

disposal of waste is less than 5% in sanitary landfills [74].

**Figure 8** shows the average composition of MSW in Mexico.

The law for the promotion and development of bioenergetics published in 2008 aims to promote and develop bioenergetics to contribute to energy diversification and sustainable development as conditions that allow guaranteeing the development of the agricultural sector [77].

Another low that is related to the bioenergy sector is the Mexican General Law on Climate Change published in 2012 and modified in 2018, which sets the rights and responsibilities of state governments to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Since then, state governments have made progress in developing specific policy instruments, provided in both the Law and the National Climate Change Strategy. However, little clarity regarding the current level of progress of these state efforts exists at the national level. In this sense, seventeen policy instruments (laws, regulations, plans, programs, among others) of the 32 states of Mexico were set [78]. Four of them are related to MSW management, which is potential biomass to produce bioenergy.

#### *3.2.5 Limitations for implementing pyrolysis and gasification of biomass in Mexico*

Even though Mexico has a high potential for Renewable Energy Sources (RES) development, only a small amount of this energy has been utilized. This may be due to the following reasons:


Whether forestry agricultural residues or municipal solid waste, it exists a great potential to produce energy vectors in Mexico. However, socio-political factors have delayed their use. To overcome such limitations is vital to have a national plan for renewable energy in Mexico by the explicit establishment of RES participation, considering financial schemes that help small renewable energy producers as it was established in the law for the promotion and development of bioenergetics published in 2008. Another noteworthy point is the palletization of agroforestry residues or MSW to produce fuel pellets, also known as RDF, which is a more uniform fuel than MSW regarding particle size and heating value, and it is easy to transport.

Another important factor is to know beforehand the composition and yields of each technology's products, considering the available feedstocks in each country. Unfortunately, this would require major investments to produce experiential data.

Knowing this information can help decision-makers to decide which agroforestry residue is a priority, the type of technology to employ, and the use of the products. Fortunately, mathematical models of these technologies can help predict with certainty this information. The following chapter describes a mathematical model used for the gasification of wood residues, an important residue in Brazil and Mexico.

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

Mathematical models reduce efforts, investments, and time, promoting a better perception of the physical and chemical mechanisms immerse in complex technologies like pyrolysis and gasification [79]. Modeling approaches can be as complex as the available software allows. However, the approach can also be simple, effective, and with an excellent degree of certainty. For example, equilibrium models are reliable and uncomplex [79]. Nevertheless, they do not deal with essential parameters such as hydrodynamics, transport process, or reaction kinetics. In contrast with kinetic models that consider reactions' kinetic, being much more accurate but

Fortunately, the growth of computational power is leading to better software that is gradually replacing empirical or semi-empirical models for computational fluid dynamics. These models can provide relevant information on what is happening inside the reactor, which can lead to a better understanding of the technology as well as improvements in it. However, their extreme complexity means that these

Gasification and pyrolysis processes involve multiple phases, which makes them very complex. **Figure 9** summarize the validation of a model applied to two fluidized bed reactors with 250 kWth and the other 75 kWth, both operated by our research team. The relative deviation between the experimental and numerical syngas composition produced in the 250 kWth gasifier using forest residues and

**Figure 9b** displays the deviation between the experimental and the numerical fluidization curves performed at two different bed heights (8 and 18 cm) in the 75 kWth reactors. Overall, the numerical curves successfully forecasted the slope of the experimental curve with acceptable precision. The broader deviations arose at the lowest velocities. This is due to the movement of the solid before fluidization occurred. It can be also due to the inefficiency of the mathematical model since it

The mathematical model effectively predicted the acquired experimental data trends with acceptable accuracy for both equipment at different validation points and experimental conditions. It is worth acknowledging that this model has already been extensively validated and submitted to constant improvements in dealing with different biomass substrates and the heterogeneity of MSW at distinct operating conditions, gasifying agents, and reactor scales. In this example, the gas composition of wood gasification could contain an excellent number of combustible gases, namely H2, CO, CH4, and CO2 (see **Figure 9c**), which can be used to produce

As it was discussed in Section 2, gasification and pyrolysis are already at fullscale, mostly in developed countries [85]. However, small-scale energy systems

**4. Experimental and numerical analysis**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

models are still in the development stage [81, 82].

computationally expensive [80].

coffee husks is depicted in **Figure 9a**.

energy or heat in Brazil and Mexico.

considers a low entropy.

**5. Feasibility**

**31**

#### **Figure 9.**

*(a) Relative deviation between the experimental and numerical syngas composition produced in the 250 kWth gasifier using forest residues and coffee husks (b) Experimental and numerical fluidization curves gathered at 8 and 18 cm height from the 75 kWth reactors (c) Model gas composition of wood (adapted from [83, 84]).*

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

Knowing this information can help decision-makers to decide which agroforestry residue is a priority, the type of technology to employ, and the use of the products. Fortunately, mathematical models of these technologies can help predict with certainty this information. The following chapter describes a mathematical model used for the gasification of wood residues, an important residue in Brazil and Mexico.

## **4. Experimental and numerical analysis**

Mathematical models reduce efforts, investments, and time, promoting a better perception of the physical and chemical mechanisms immerse in complex technologies like pyrolysis and gasification [79]. Modeling approaches can be as complex as the available software allows. However, the approach can also be simple, effective, and with an excellent degree of certainty. For example, equilibrium models are reliable and uncomplex [79]. Nevertheless, they do not deal with essential parameters such as hydrodynamics, transport process, or reaction kinetics. In contrast with kinetic models that consider reactions' kinetic, being much more accurate but computationally expensive [80].

Fortunately, the growth of computational power is leading to better software that is gradually replacing empirical or semi-empirical models for computational fluid dynamics. These models can provide relevant information on what is happening inside the reactor, which can lead to a better understanding of the technology as well as improvements in it. However, their extreme complexity means that these models are still in the development stage [81, 82].

Gasification and pyrolysis processes involve multiple phases, which makes them very complex. **Figure 9** summarize the validation of a model applied to two fluidized bed reactors with 250 kWth and the other 75 kWth, both operated by our research team. The relative deviation between the experimental and numerical syngas composition produced in the 250 kWth gasifier using forest residues and coffee husks is depicted in **Figure 9a**.

**Figure 9b** displays the deviation between the experimental and the numerical fluidization curves performed at two different bed heights (8 and 18 cm) in the 75 kWth reactors. Overall, the numerical curves successfully forecasted the slope of the experimental curve with acceptable precision. The broader deviations arose at the lowest velocities. This is due to the movement of the solid before fluidization occurred. It can be also due to the inefficiency of the mathematical model since it considers a low entropy.

The mathematical model effectively predicted the acquired experimental data trends with acceptable accuracy for both equipment at different validation points and experimental conditions. It is worth acknowledging that this model has already been extensively validated and submitted to constant improvements in dealing with different biomass substrates and the heterogeneity of MSW at distinct operating conditions, gasifying agents, and reactor scales. In this example, the gas composition of wood gasification could contain an excellent number of combustible gases, namely H2, CO, CH4, and CO2 (see **Figure 9c**), which can be used to produce energy or heat in Brazil and Mexico.

## **5. Feasibility**

As it was discussed in Section 2, gasification and pyrolysis are already at fullscale, mostly in developed countries [85]. However, small-scale energy systems

**Figure 9.**

*Gasification*

**30**

*(a) Relative deviation between the experimental and numerical syngas composition produced in the 250 kWth gasifier using forest residues and coffee husks (b) Experimental and numerical fluidization curves gathered at 8 and 18 cm height from the 75 kWth reactors (c) Model gas composition of wood (adapted from [83, 84]).*

demonstrated to be more advantageous and cost-effective to install in certain regions since this model offers mobility and simplicity [86].

demonstrate to the authorities the nature and essentiality of WTE plants, especially in terms of cost and benefit, when compared to other sources of power generation. Biomass and MSW have the potential to become a major source in LATAM's primary energy sector, as presented in Section 3, with a survey of the availability of

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

Implementing gasification and pyrolysis in these countries can offer benefits in terms of reducing the use of fossil fuels, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by preventing the extraction of virgin fossil fuels, and providing income diversification to farmers. However, the integration of these energy vectors on large scale should pass for a previous step, which is decentralized gasification and pyrolysis plants as was analyzed in the feasibility section. This is because many rural areas are not connected to the grid yet, in addition, the logistics of biomass is complicated in rural

There is still a long way to go. However, the major urgency relies on real policy integration that enables a full converge of the different bioenergy actors. Therefore, catalyze the economic and environmental benefits that pyrolysis and gasification of

The authors would also like to express their gratitude to the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) for the grant SFRH/BD/146155/2019, and the projects IF/01772/2014, FCT/CAPES 2018/2019, DMAIC-AGROGAS: 02/SAICT/2018. This work is also a result of the project "Apoio à Contratação de Recursos Humanos Altamente Qualificados" (Norte-06-3559-FSE-000045), supported by Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE 2020), under the PORTUGAL

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in

biomass and MSW found in Brazil and Mexico.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

areas and involves an extra cost.

biomass can provide.

**Acknowledgements**

2020 Partnership Agreement.

**Conflict of interest**

this chapter.

**Nomenclature**

BR Brazil MX Mexico VE Venezuela CO Colombia AR Argentina CL Chile PY Paraguay PE Peru EC Ecuador UY Uruguay BO Bolivia

CAM\* Central America Lat Latin America EU European Union

**33**

These models can provide energy to decentralized areas or rural households communities, particularly in developing countries like Brazil and Mexico, delivering alternative electric power solutions to communities where connection to the central grid is economically unfeasible. Furthermore, blending biomass residues with other wastes, such as MSW (RDF included), is praised as a clever strategy to lessen exploration costs, boost plant production efficiency, and avoid biomass exploration excess and consequent disequilibrium of ecosystems [87]. In fact, smallscale biomass gasification systems became attractive for off-grid functions due to their cost-effectiveness and high plant load factor.

Biomass-based systems afford an important asset particularly in rural areas since agricultural and timber residues are easily accessible. Furthermore, biomass exploration affords a helping hand towards wildfire hazards reduction, promoting forest biomass harvesting and cleaning in overgrown areas [88]. These units have already proved their suitability for power generation in small towns, being already widely used for rural electrification solutions. In fact, small towns require low electrical load demand. Thus, biomass gasification systems are more cost-competitive than solar PV or even grid electrification for rural areas that are off-grid [89].

These factors could point to the feasibility of energy production through biomass in Brazil and Mexico because of their large amounts of biomass and regions that are not connected to the grid. Besides, the used small stations could be the step towards large-scale production using, for example, MSW, which has become a big problem in large cities such as Brasilia and Mexico City.

The feasibility of financial indicators is resolved by measuring their flexibility and assessing the project performance response to stressful scenarios, appointing either a favorable or unfavorable evolution of several variables simultaneously, where some variables may be more uncertain than others. Some of the variables that can affect the feasibility of a gasification or pyrolysis project are: (1) the initial investment, (2) the return of investment, (3) future costs and benefits, (4) electricity sales price (5) electricity production, (6) biomass cost, (7) governmental policies, etc. In short, sensitivity analysis allows assessing the project's risk by simulating several scenarios and forecasting their outcomes, assessing decisionmaking over uncertainty [90]. The World Bank Group has released a set of typical key financial benchmarks for success in biomass related energy projects, considering some financial indicators, namely Net Present Value (NPV) ought to be a positive value, International Rate of Return (IRR) above 10%, and a Payback Period (PBP) less than 10 years [91]. Some of these financial indicators might provide an idea of the benchmarks in the biomass to the energy sector. However, these financial indicators or models may not encompass all factors that can influence the success of a project. Some of these factors are the policy of a set country and its project-specific constraints. Yet, to the point, benchmarks allow standardizing decision-making by building trust within investors less willing to take risks.

## **6. Conclusions**

Latin American countries have one of the highest rates of urbanization in the world. Among the various problems caused by large urbanization, those that refer to mobility, safety, health, well-being, sanitation, and adequate management of MSW stand out. It is important to highlight that a waste energy recovery plant (WTE) is not exactly an energy generation undertaking, but essentially a sanitation agent whose energy input is a valuable by-product. This context is essential to

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

demonstrate to the authorities the nature and essentiality of WTE plants, especially in terms of cost and benefit, when compared to other sources of power generation. Biomass and MSW have the potential to become a major source in LATAM's primary energy sector, as presented in Section 3, with a survey of the availability of biomass and MSW found in Brazil and Mexico.

Implementing gasification and pyrolysis in these countries can offer benefits in terms of reducing the use of fossil fuels, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by preventing the extraction of virgin fossil fuels, and providing income diversification to farmers. However, the integration of these energy vectors on large scale should pass for a previous step, which is decentralized gasification and pyrolysis plants as was analyzed in the feasibility section. This is because many rural areas are not connected to the grid yet, in addition, the logistics of biomass is complicated in rural areas and involves an extra cost.

There is still a long way to go. However, the major urgency relies on real policy integration that enables a full converge of the different bioenergy actors. Therefore, catalyze the economic and environmental benefits that pyrolysis and gasification of biomass can provide.

### **Acknowledgements**

demonstrated to be more advantageous and cost-effective to install in certain

These models can provide energy to decentralized areas or rural households communities, particularly in developing countries like Brazil and Mexico, delivering alternative electric power solutions to communities where connection to the central grid is economically unfeasible. Furthermore, blending biomass residues with other wastes, such as MSW (RDF included), is praised as a clever strategy to lessen exploration costs, boost plant production efficiency, and avoid biomass exploration excess and consequent disequilibrium of ecosystems [87]. In fact, smallscale biomass gasification systems became attractive for off-grid functions due to

Biomass-based systems afford an important asset particularly in rural areas since agricultural and timber residues are easily accessible. Furthermore, biomass exploration affords a helping hand towards wildfire hazards reduction, promoting forest biomass harvesting and cleaning in overgrown areas [88]. These units have already proved their suitability for power generation in small towns, being already widely used for rural electrification solutions. In fact, small towns require low electrical load demand. Thus, biomass gasification systems are more cost-competitive than

These factors could point to the feasibility of energy production through biomass in Brazil and Mexico because of their large amounts of biomass and regions that are not connected to the grid. Besides, the used small stations could be the step towards large-scale production using, for example, MSW, which has become a big

The feasibility of financial indicators is resolved by measuring their flexibility and assessing the project performance response to stressful scenarios, appointing either a favorable or unfavorable evolution of several variables simultaneously, where some variables may be more uncertain than others. Some of the variables that can affect the feasibility of a gasification or pyrolysis project are: (1) the initial investment, (2) the return of investment, (3) future costs and benefits, (4) electricity sales price (5) electricity production, (6) biomass cost, (7) governmental policies, etc. In short, sensitivity analysis allows assessing the project's risk by simulating several scenarios and forecasting their outcomes, assessing decisionmaking over uncertainty [90]. The World Bank Group has released a set of typical key financial benchmarks for success in biomass related energy projects, considering some financial indicators, namely Net Present Value (NPV) ought to be a positive value, International Rate of Return (IRR) above 10%, and a Payback Period (PBP) less than 10 years [91]. Some of these financial indicators might provide an idea of the benchmarks in the biomass to the energy sector. However, these financial indicators or models may not encompass all factors that can influence the success of a project. Some of these factors are the policy of a set country and its project-specific constraints. Yet, to the point, benchmarks allow standardizing decision-making by building trust within investors less willing to take risks.

Latin American countries have one of the highest rates of urbanization in the world. Among the various problems caused by large urbanization, those that refer to mobility, safety, health, well-being, sanitation, and adequate management of MSW stand out. It is important to highlight that a waste energy recovery plant (WTE) is not exactly an energy generation undertaking, but essentially a sanitation agent whose energy input is a valuable by-product. This context is essential to

solar PV or even grid electrification for rural areas that are off-grid [89].

regions since this model offers mobility and simplicity [86].

*Gasification*

their cost-effectiveness and high plant load factor.

problem in large cities such as Brasilia and Mexico City.

**6. Conclusions**

**32**

The authors would also like to express their gratitude to the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) for the grant SFRH/BD/146155/2019, and the projects IF/01772/2014, FCT/CAPES 2018/2019, DMAIC-AGROGAS: 02/SAICT/2018. This work is also a result of the project "Apoio à Contratação de Recursos Humanos Altamente Qualificados" (Norte-06-3559-FSE-000045), supported by Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE 2020), under the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement.

### **Conflict of interest**

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this chapter.

### **Nomenclature**



**Author details**

Daniela Eusébio<sup>1</sup>

Vila Real, Portugal

valter.silva@forestwise.pt

**35**

provided the original work is properly cited.

José Antonio Mayoral Chavando<sup>1</sup>

, Valter Silva1,2\*, Danielle Regina Da Silva Guerra3

, João Sousa Cardoso1,4 and Luís A.C. Tarelho<sup>5</sup>

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

2 ForestWise, Collaborative Laboratory for Integrated Forest and Fire Management,

4 Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

\*Address all correspondence to: valter.silva@ipportalegre.pt;

5 Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), Department of Environment and Planning, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

1 Polytechnic Institute of Portalegre, Portalegre, Portugal

3 Federal University of Pará, Belém, Pará, Brazil

,

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

## **Author details**

W\*\* World SE Sweden FI Finland CA Canada NL Netherlands USA The United States

*Gasification*

IE Ireland DE Germany CH Switzerland IN India

LATAM Latin America CHP Coal handling plant EU European Union GHG greenhouse gas MSW municipal solid waste RDF refuse-derived fuel

RES Renewable Energy Sources

*LHVi* LHV of the component "i"

*mi* mass of the component "i"

*LHVF* lower heating value of the feed stream

*yigas* mass fraction of the component "i" in the gas *yiliquid* mass fraction of the component "i" in the liquid *yisolid* mass fraction of the component "i" in the solid

*CGE* cold gas efficiency

*LHVgas* LHV of the gas

*mliquid* liquid mass *msolid* solid mass

*Ygas* gas yield *ygas* gas Efficiency *Yliquid* liquid yield *Ysolid* solid yield *VG* Gas Volume

**34**

*LHVliquid* LHV of the liquid *LHVsolid* LHV of the solid *mF* feedstock mass *mgas* gas mass

> José Antonio Mayoral Chavando<sup>1</sup> , Valter Silva1,2\*, Danielle Regina Da Silva Guerra3 , Daniela Eusébio<sup>1</sup> , João Sousa Cardoso1,4 and Luís A.C. Tarelho<sup>5</sup>

1 Polytechnic Institute of Portalegre, Portalegre, Portugal

2 ForestWise, Collaborative Laboratory for Integrated Forest and Fire Management, Vila Real, Portugal

3 Federal University of Pará, Belém, Pará, Brazil

4 Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

5 Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), Department of Environment and Planning, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

\*Address all correspondence to: valter.silva@ipportalegre.pt; valter.silva@forestwise.pt

© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

## **References**

[1] IRENA, "Plan De Acción Regional: Acelerando El Despliegue De Energía Renovable En América Latina," 2019. Accessed: Dec. 08, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.irena.org/-/ media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Regional-Group/Latin-America-and-the-Caribbea n/IRENA\_LatAm\_plan\_de\_accion\_ 2019\_ES.PDF?la=en&hash= 5DE35BAFD5941A43F110B7E6F 0B88B5B5FC26C5D.

[2] IRENA, *Renewable Energy Statistics 2020*. 2020.

[3] OurWorldinData, "Share of electricity production from renewables, 2019," 2020. https://ourworldindata.org/ grapher/share-electricity-renewables (accessed Dec. 19, 2020).

[4] EPE, "Plano Decenal de Expansão de Energia 2026," 2020. https://www.epe. gov.br/pt/publicacoes-dados-abertos/pub licacoes/Plano-Decenal-de-Expansao-de-Energia-2026 (accessed Dec. 19, 2020).

[5] T. Liu, L. J. Mickley, S. Singh, M. Jain, R. S. DeFries, and M. E. Marlier, "Crop residue burning practices across north India inferred from household survey data: Bridging gaps in satellite observations," *Atmos. Environ. X*, vol. 8, p. 100091, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j. aeaoa.2020.100091.

[6] Y. H. Chan *et al.*, "An overview of biomass thermochemical conversion technologies in Malaysia," *Sci. Total Environ.*, vol. 680, pp. 105–123, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j. scitotenv.2019.04.211.

[7] W. Y. Chen, T. Suzuki, and M. Lackner, *Handbook of climate change mitigation and adaptation, second edition*, vol. 1–4. Springer International Publishing, 2016.

[8] A. V. Bridgwater, "Catalysis in thermal biomass conversion," *Appl.* *Catal. A, Gen.*, vol. 116, no. 1–2, pp. 5– 47, Sep. 1994, doi: 10.1016/0926-860X (94)80278-5.

com/quebec.html (accessed Dec. 07,

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

sh-energy.com/ (accessed Dec. 07,

of its district heating business in Joensuu, Finland ," Jan. 10, 2020. h ttps://www.fortum.com/media/2020/ 01/fortum-concludes-sale-its-districtheating-business-joensuu-finland

(accessed Dec. 21, 2020).

[28] Fortum, "Fortum concludes the sale

[29] F. Gao, "Pyrolysis of Waste Plastics into Fuels," University of Canterbury,

[30] VALMET, "Valmet Gasifier for biomass and waste," 2020. https://www. valmet.com/energyproduction/gasifica

[31] VALMET, "Fuel conversion for power boilers: Vaskiluodon Voima Oy, Vaasa, Finland," 2012. https://www.va lmet.com/media/articles/all-articles/fue l-conversion-for-power-boilers-va skiluodon-voima-oy-vaasa-finland/

[32] Thyssenkrupp, "Uhde entrainedflow gasification," 2020. Accessed: Dec. 14, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://uc pcdn.thyssenkrupp.com/\_binary/UCPth yssenkruppBAIS/en/products-and-se rvices/chemical-plants-and-processes/ gasification/link-TK\_20\_0770\_uhde\_ Gasification\_Broschuere\_SCREEN.pdf.

[33] "Outotec Advanced Staged Gasifier," 2020. https://www.outotec.com/produc ts-and-services/technologies/energyproduction/advanced-staged-gasifier/

tion/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

(accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

(accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[34] N. P. Cheremisinoff and M. B. Haddadin, "Refining Operations and the

[35] C. Marsico, "ThyssenKrupp Uhde's commercially proven PRENFLO ® and HTW TM Gasification Technologies," 2013. Accessed: Dec. 07, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://ibi-wachstumskern.de/

Sources of Pollution," in *Beyond Compliance*, Elsevier, 2006, pp. 1–77.

2020).

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

2010.

[18] Twence, "BTG-BTL hands over Empyro to Twence," Dec. 2018. https:// www.twence.nl/en/twence/news/ 2018/BTG-BTL-hands-over-Empyro-to-Twence.html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[19] ENSYN, "Georgia Project," 2020. http://www.ensyn.com/georgia.html

[20] D. Meier, C. Eusterbrock, and B. Gannon, "Ablative fast pyrolysis of biomass: A new demonstration project in California, USA," *Pyroliq 2019 Pyrolysis Liq. Biomass Wastes*, Jun. 2019, Accessed: Dec. 07, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://dc.engconfintl.org/

[21] ENSYN, "Licensed Production - Ensyn - Renewable Fuels and Chemicals from Non-Food Biomass.," 2020. http:// www.ensyn.com/licensed-production. html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[22] KIT, "bioliq - Flash Pyrolysis," 2018. https://www.bioliq.de/english/64.php

[23] S. Wijeyekoon, K. Torr, H. Corkran, and P. Bennett, "Commercial status of direct thermochemical liquefaction

[24] VALMET, "Bio-oil," 2015. https:// www.valmet.com/more-industries/ bio/bio-oil/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[25] ENSYN, "Aracruz Project," 2020. http://www.ensyn.com/brazil.html

[26] W. Cai and R. Liu, "Performance of

[27] MASH Energy, "Turning unused resources into value." https://www.ma

a commercial-scale biomass fast pyrolysis plant for bio-oil production," *Fuel*, vol. 182, pp. 677–686, Oct. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2016.06.030.

(accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

technologies," Aug. 2020.

(accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

**37**

(accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

pyroliq\_2019/32.

2020).

[9] I. Y. Mohammed, Y. A. Abakr, and R. Mokaya, "Integrated biomass thermochemical conversion for clean energy production: Process design and economic analysis," *J. Environ. Chem. Eng.*, vol. 7, no. 3, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jece.2019.103093.

[10] H. Chen, "Lignocellulose biorefinery product engineering," in *Lignocellulose Biorefinery Engineering*, Elsevier, 2015, pp. 125–165.

[11] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Products," 2020. https://www.greenfuelnordic. fi/en/products (accessed Dec. 13, 2020).

[12] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Our Production Technologies," 2020. https://www.greenfuelnordic.fi/en/ articles/our-production-technologies (accessed Dec. 13, 2020).

[13] IRENA, VTT, and MEAE, *Bioenergy from Finnish Forests*. 2018.

[14] btgbioliquids, "Pyrocell - BTG Bioliquids," 2020. https://www.btgbioliquids.com/plant/pyrocell-gavlesweden/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[15] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Green Fuel Nordic Oy," 2020. https://greenfuelnord ic.fi/en/company (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[16] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Lieksa refinery begins bio-oil deliveries to customers," Dec. 04, 2020. https://gree nfuelnordic.fi/en/articles/lieksa-refine ry-begins-bio-oil-deliveries-customers (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[17] ENSYN, "CÔTE NORD - Port-Cartier, Quebec - Biocrude Expansion," 2020. http://www.ensyn. *Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

com/quebec.html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

**References**

*Gasification*

0B88B5B5FC26C5D.

*2020*. 2020.

[1] IRENA, "Plan De Acción Regional: Acelerando El Despliegue De Energía Renovable En América Latina," 2019. Accessed: Dec. 08, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.irena.org/-/ media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Regional-Group/Latin-America-and-the-Caribbea n/IRENA\_LatAm\_plan\_de\_accion\_ 2019\_ES.PDF?la=en&hash= 5DE35BAFD5941A43F110B7E6F

*Catal. A, Gen.*, vol. 116, no. 1–2, pp. 5– 47, Sep. 1994, doi: 10.1016/0926-860X

[9] I. Y. Mohammed, Y. A. Abakr, and R.

thermochemical conversion for clean energy production: Process design and economic analysis," *J. Environ. Chem. Eng.*, vol. 7, no. 3, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jece.2019.103093.

Mokaya, "Integrated biomass

[10] H. Chen, "Lignocellulose biorefinery product engineering," in *Lignocellulose Biorefinery Engineering*,

Elsevier, 2015, pp. 125–165.

[11] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Products," 2020. https://www.greenfuelnordic. fi/en/products (accessed Dec. 13, 2020).

[13] IRENA, VTT, and MEAE, *Bioenergy*

[15] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Green Fuel Nordic Oy," 2020. https://greenfuelnord ic.fi/en/company (accessed Dec. 07,

[16] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Lieksa refinery begins bio-oil deliveries to customers," Dec. 04, 2020. https://gree nfuelnordic.fi/en/articles/lieksa-refine ry-begins-bio-oil-deliveries-customers

(accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[17] ENSYN, "CÔTE NORD - Port-Cartier, Quebec - Biocrude Expansion," 2020. http://www.ensyn.

[14] btgbioliquids, "Pyrocell - BTG Bioliquids," 2020. https://www.btgbioliquids.com/plant/pyrocell-gavlesweden/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[12] Green Fuel Nordic Oy, "Our Production Technologies," 2020. https://www.greenfuelnordic.fi/en/ articles/our-production-technologies

(accessed Dec. 13, 2020).

*from Finnish Forests*. 2018.

2020).

(94)80278-5.

[2] IRENA, *Renewable Energy Statistics*

electricity production from renewables, 2019," 2020. https://ourworldindata.org/ grapher/share-electricity-renewables

[4] EPE, "Plano Decenal de Expansão de Energia 2026," 2020. https://www.epe. gov.br/pt/publicacoes-dados-abertos/pub licacoes/Plano-Decenal-de-Expansao-de-Energia-2026 (accessed Dec. 19, 2020).

[5] T. Liu, L. J. Mickley, S. Singh, M. Jain, R. S. DeFries, and M. E. Marlier, "Crop residue burning practices across north India inferred from household survey data: Bridging gaps in satellite observations," *Atmos. Environ. X*, vol. 8, p. 100091, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.

[6] Y. H. Chan *et al.*, "An overview of biomass thermochemical conversion technologies in Malaysia," *Sci. Total Environ.*, vol. 680, pp. 105–123, Aug.

[7] W. Y. Chen, T. Suzuki, and M. Lackner, *Handbook of climate change mitigation and adaptation, second edition*,

vol. 1–4. Springer International

[8] A. V. Bridgwater, "Catalysis in thermal biomass conversion," *Appl.*

[3] OurWorldinData, "Share of

(accessed Dec. 19, 2020).

aeaoa.2020.100091.

2019, doi: 10.1016/j. scitotenv.2019.04.211.

Publishing, 2016.

**36**

[18] Twence, "BTG-BTL hands over Empyro to Twence," Dec. 2018. https:// www.twence.nl/en/twence/news/ 2018/BTG-BTL-hands-over-Empyro-to-Twence.html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[19] ENSYN, "Georgia Project," 2020. http://www.ensyn.com/georgia.html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[20] D. Meier, C. Eusterbrock, and B. Gannon, "Ablative fast pyrolysis of biomass: A new demonstration project in California, USA," *Pyroliq 2019 Pyrolysis Liq. Biomass Wastes*, Jun. 2019, Accessed: Dec. 07, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://dc.engconfintl.org/ pyroliq\_2019/32.

[21] ENSYN, "Licensed Production - Ensyn - Renewable Fuels and Chemicals from Non-Food Biomass.," 2020. http:// www.ensyn.com/licensed-production. html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[22] KIT, "bioliq - Flash Pyrolysis," 2018. https://www.bioliq.de/english/64.php (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[23] S. Wijeyekoon, K. Torr, H. Corkran, and P. Bennett, "Commercial status of direct thermochemical liquefaction technologies," Aug. 2020.

[24] VALMET, "Bio-oil," 2015. https:// www.valmet.com/more-industries/ bio/bio-oil/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[25] ENSYN, "Aracruz Project," 2020. http://www.ensyn.com/brazil.html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[26] W. Cai and R. Liu, "Performance of a commercial-scale biomass fast pyrolysis plant for bio-oil production," *Fuel*, vol. 182, pp. 677–686, Oct. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2016.06.030.

[27] MASH Energy, "Turning unused resources into value." https://www.ma sh-energy.com/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[28] Fortum, "Fortum concludes the sale of its district heating business in Joensuu, Finland ," Jan. 10, 2020. h ttps://www.fortum.com/media/2020/ 01/fortum-concludes-sale-its-districtheating-business-joensuu-finland (accessed Dec. 21, 2020).

[29] F. Gao, "Pyrolysis of Waste Plastics into Fuels," University of Canterbury, 2010.

[30] VALMET, "Valmet Gasifier for biomass and waste," 2020. https://www. valmet.com/energyproduction/gasifica tion/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[31] VALMET, "Fuel conversion for power boilers: Vaskiluodon Voima Oy, Vaasa, Finland," 2012. https://www.va lmet.com/media/articles/all-articles/fue l-conversion-for-power-boilers-va skiluodon-voima-oy-vaasa-finland/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[32] Thyssenkrupp, "Uhde entrainedflow gasification," 2020. Accessed: Dec. 14, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://uc pcdn.thyssenkrupp.com/\_binary/UCPth yssenkruppBAIS/en/products-and-se rvices/chemical-plants-and-processes/ gasification/link-TK\_20\_0770\_uhde\_ Gasification\_Broschuere\_SCREEN.pdf.

[33] "Outotec Advanced Staged Gasifier," 2020. https://www.outotec.com/produc ts-and-services/technologies/energyproduction/advanced-staged-gasifier/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[34] N. P. Cheremisinoff and M. B. Haddadin, "Refining Operations and the Sources of Pollution," in *Beyond Compliance*, Elsevier, 2006, pp. 1–77.

[35] C. Marsico, "ThyssenKrupp Uhde's commercially proven PRENFLO ® and HTW TM Gasification Technologies," 2013. Accessed: Dec. 07, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://ibi-wachstumskern.de/

tl/tl\_files/PDF/symposium-2013/Marsic o.pdf.

[36] Sumitomo Heavy Industries, "Biomass Gasifiers," 2020. https:// www.shi-fw.com/clean-energysolutions/biomass-gasifiers/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[37] L. Sumitomo Heavy Industries, "NSE Biofuels Oy Ltd." https://www.sh i-fw.com/all\_projects/nse-biofuels-oyltd/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[38] E. Kurkela, "Review of Finnish biomass gasification technologies," 2002. https://www.researchgate.net/publica tion/30482338\_Review\_of\_Finnish\_ biomass\_gasification\_technologies (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[39] Sumitomo, "High-value gasification solutions The power of sustainable energy solutions."

[40] M. Dobrin, "Production of Biofuels using thyssenkrupp Gasification Technologies," 2016. Accessed: Dec. 07, 2020. [Online]. Available: https:// missionenergy.org/Gasification2016/pre sentation/thyssenkrupp.pdf.

[41] VALMET, "Highest electrical efficiency from waste: Lahti Energia, Lahti Finland," 2012. https://www.va lmet.com/media/articles/all-articles/h ighest-electrical-efficiency-from-wastelahti-energia-lahti-finland/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[42] RENUGAS, "RENUGAS ," 1993. https://www.gti.energy/renugas/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[43] VALMET, "Valmet-supplied gasification plant inaugurated at Göteborg Energi's GoBiGas in Sweden," 2014. https://www.valmet. com/energyproduction/gasification/ valmet-supplied-gasification-plantinaugurated-at-goteborg-energisgobigas-in-sweden/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[44] VALMET, "Biomass gasification eliminates fossil fuels in the pulp mill," 2017. https://www.valmet.com/e nergyproduction/gasification/biomassgasification-eliminates-fossil-fuelsin-the-pulp-mill/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[52] P. Ponangrong and A. Chinsuwan, "An investigation of performance of a horizontal agitator gasification reactor," in *Energy Procedia*, Jan. 2019, vol. 157,

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

com-lavouras.html (accessed Jan. 05,

[60] T. Forster-Carneiro, M. D. Berni, I.

[61] S. L. de Moraes, C. P. Massola, E. M. Saccoccio, D. P. da Silva, and Y. B. T. Guimarães, "Cenário brasileiro da geração e uso de biomassa adensada," *Rev. IPT | Tecnol. e Inovação*, vol. 1, no. 4,

[62] Abrelpe, "Panorama dos Resíduos Sólidos no Brasil," 2020. https://abrelpe. org.br/panorama/ (accessed Jan. 10,

[63] R. G. de S. M. Alfaia, A. M. Costa, and J. C. Campos, "Municipal solid waste in Brazil: A review," *Waste Management and Research*, vol. 35, no. 12. SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 1195– 1209, Dec. 01, 2017, doi: 10.1177/

[64] Institui a Política Nacional de Resíduos Sólidos, "LEI N<sup>o</sup> 12.305," Aug. 02, 2010. http://www.planalto.gov.br/cc ivil\_03/\_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12305.

[65] C. Nunes De Castro, "O Programa Nacional De Produção E Uso Do Biodiesel (Pnpb) E A Produção De Matéria-Prima De Óleo Vegetal No Norte E No Nordeste," 2011. Accessed: Jan. 28, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/

htm (accessed Jan. 28, 2021).

stories/PDFs/TDs/td\_1613.pdf.

de Produção e Uso do Biodiesel

[66] Minist'erio da Agricultura Pecuária e Abastecimento., "Programa Nacional

(PNPB)," 2020. https://www.gov.br/ag ricultura/pt-br/assuntos/agriculturafamiliar/biodiesel/programa-nacional-

L. Dorileo, and M. A. Rostagno, "Biorefinery study of availability of agriculture residues and wastes for integrated biorefineries in Brazil," *Resour. Conserv. Recycl.*, vol. 77, pp. 78–

88, Aug. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j. resconrec.2013.05.007.

pp. 58–73, 2017.

0734242X17735375.

2021).

2021).

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

pp. 683–690, doi: 10.1016/j.

[53] EPE and Ministerio de Minas e Energia, "Balanço Energético Nacional," 2020. Accessed: Jan. 05, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www. epe.gov.br/sites-pt/publicacoes-dadosabertos/publicacoes/Publicacoe sArquivos/publicacao-479/topico-528/

[54] Ministério de Minas E Energia, "Resenha Energética Brasileira 2020," May 2020. Accessed: Jan. 05, 2021. [Online]. Available: www.mme.gov.br/

[55] FAO, "FAO Country Profiles: Brazil," 2016. http://www.fao.org/ countryprofiles/index/en/?iso3=BRA

[56] Ministry of Agriculture. and Livestock and Food Supply., "BRAZILIAN FORESTS at a glance 2019," 2019. Accessed: Jan. 10, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://www.floresta l.gov.br/documentos/publicacoes/ 4262-brazilian-forests-at-a-glance-

[57] Indústria Brasileira de árvores, "Relatório 2019 Indústria Brasileira de árvores," 2019. https://iba.org/datafiles/ publicacoes/relatorios/iba-relatorioanua l2019.pdf (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[58] FAOSTAT, "FAOSTAT: Forestry Production and Trade," 2019. http:// www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FO

[59] Revista Globo Rural, "Nasa aponta que Brasil usa 7,6% do seu território com lavouras," Dec. 29, 2017. https://revistag loborural.globo.com/Noticias/Agric ultura/noticia/2017/12/nasa-apontaque-brasil-usa-76-do-seu-territorio-

(accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

(accessed Jan. 05, 2021).

egypro.2018.11.234.

BEN2020\_sp.pdf.

Publica.

2019/file.

**39**

[45] Taylor Biomass Energy, "The Montgomery Project," 2019. http:// www.taylorbiomassenergy.com/taylorb iomass04\_mont\_mn.html (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[46] E. Voegele, "Taylor Biomass Energy project receives RES approval in New York |," Jan. 29, 2019. http://bioma ssmagazine.com/articles/15912/taylorbiomass-energy-project-receives-resapproval-in-new-york (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[47] Amec Foster Wheeler, "Amec Foster Wheeler," 2020. https://www. woodplc.com/investors/amec-fosterwheeler (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[48] Amec Foster Wheeler, "VESTA methanation," 2020. https://www.wood plc.com/capabilities/consulting/tech nology-and-process-equipment/vestamethanation (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[49] Vaskiluodon Voima, "Pioneer of Biofuel Plants, Producer of Combined Heat and Power," 2020.

[50] VALMET, "Turning Waste to Energy Efficiently," 2020. https://valme tsites.secure.force.com/solutionfinde rweb/FilePreview?id= 06958000001COcNAAW (accessed Dec. 14, 2020).

[51] J. Fuchs, J. C. Schmid, S. Müller, A. M. Mauerhofer, F. Benedikt, and H. Hofbauer, "The impact of gasification temperature on the process characteristics of sorption enhanced reforming of biomass," *Biomass Convers. Biorefinery*, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 925–936, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s13399-019- 00439-9.

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

[52] P. Ponangrong and A. Chinsuwan, "An investigation of performance of a horizontal agitator gasification reactor," in *Energy Procedia*, Jan. 2019, vol. 157, pp. 683–690, doi: 10.1016/j. egypro.2018.11.234.

tl/tl\_files/PDF/symposium-2013/Marsic

[44] VALMET, "Biomass gasification eliminates fossil fuels in the pulp mill," 2017. https://www.valmet.com/e nergyproduction/gasification/biomassgasification-eliminates-fossil-fuelsin-the-pulp-mill/ (accessed Dec. 07,

[45] Taylor Biomass Energy, "The Montgomery Project," 2019. http:// www.taylorbiomassenergy.com/taylorb iomass04\_mont\_mn.html (accessed

[46] E. Voegele, "Taylor Biomass Energy project receives RES approval in New York |," Jan. 29, 2019. http://bioma ssmagazine.com/articles/15912/taylorbiomass-energy-project-receives-resapproval-in-new-york (accessed Dec.

[47] Amec Foster Wheeler, "Amec Foster Wheeler," 2020. https://www. woodplc.com/investors/amec-fosterwheeler (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[48] Amec Foster Wheeler, "VESTA methanation," 2020. https://www.wood plc.com/capabilities/consulting/tech nology-and-process-equipment/vestamethanation (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[49] Vaskiluodon Voima, "Pioneer of Biofuel Plants, Producer of Combined

[50] VALMET, "Turning Waste to Energy Efficiently," 2020. https://valme tsites.secure.force.com/solutionfinde

06958000001COcNAAW (accessed

[51] J. Fuchs, J. C. Schmid, S. Müller, A. M. Mauerhofer, F. Benedikt, and H. Hofbauer, "The impact of gasification

characteristics of sorption enhanced reforming of biomass," *Biomass Convers. Biorefinery*, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 925–936, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s13399-019-

Heat and Power," 2020.

rweb/FilePreview?id=

temperature on the process

Dec. 14, 2020).

00439-9.

2020).

Dec. 07, 2020).

07, 2020).

[36] Sumitomo Heavy Industries, "Biomass Gasifiers," 2020. https:// www.shi-fw.com/clean-energysolutions/biomass-gasifiers/ (accessed

[37] L. Sumitomo Heavy Industries, "NSE Biofuels Oy Ltd." https://www.sh i-fw.com/all\_projects/nse-biofuels-oy-

[38] E. Kurkela, "Review of Finnish biomass gasification technologies," 2002. https://www.researchgate.net/publica tion/30482338\_Review\_of\_Finnish\_ biomass\_gasification\_technologies

[39] Sumitomo, "High-value gasification solutions The power of sustainable

[40] M. Dobrin, "Production of Biofuels

Technologies," 2016. Accessed: Dec. 07, 2020. [Online]. Available: https:// missionenergy.org/Gasification2016/pre

using thyssenkrupp Gasification

sentation/thyssenkrupp.pdf.

[41] VALMET, "Highest electrical efficiency from waste: Lahti Energia, Lahti Finland," 2012. https://www.va lmet.com/media/articles/all-articles/h ighest-electrical-efficiency-from-wastelahti-energia-lahti-finland/ (accessed

[42] RENUGAS, "RENUGAS ," 1993. https://www.gti.energy/renugas/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

[43] VALMET, "Valmet-supplied gasification plant inaugurated at Göteborg Energi's GoBiGas in Sweden," 2014. https://www.valmet. com/energyproduction/gasification/ valmet-supplied-gasification-plantinaugurated-at-goteborg-energisgobigas-in-sweden/ (accessed Dec. 07,

ltd/ (accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

(accessed Dec. 07, 2020).

energy solutions."

Dec. 07, 2020).

2020).

**38**

o.pdf.

*Gasification*

Dec. 07, 2020).

[53] EPE and Ministerio de Minas e Energia, "Balanço Energético Nacional," 2020. Accessed: Jan. 05, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www. epe.gov.br/sites-pt/publicacoes-dadosabertos/publicacoes/Publicacoe sArquivos/publicacao-479/topico-528/ BEN2020\_sp.pdf.

[54] Ministério de Minas E Energia, "Resenha Energética Brasileira 2020," May 2020. Accessed: Jan. 05, 2021. [Online]. Available: www.mme.gov.br/ Publica.

[55] FAO, "FAO Country Profiles: Brazil," 2016. http://www.fao.org/ countryprofiles/index/en/?iso3=BRA (accessed Jan. 05, 2021).

[56] Ministry of Agriculture. and Livestock and Food Supply., "BRAZILIAN FORESTS at a glance 2019," 2019. Accessed: Jan. 10, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://www.floresta l.gov.br/documentos/publicacoes/ 4262-brazilian-forests-at-a-glance-2019/file.

[57] Indústria Brasileira de árvores, "Relatório 2019 Indústria Brasileira de árvores," 2019. https://iba.org/datafiles/ publicacoes/relatorios/iba-relatorioanua l2019.pdf (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[58] FAOSTAT, "FAOSTAT: Forestry Production and Trade," 2019. http:// www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FO (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[59] Revista Globo Rural, "Nasa aponta que Brasil usa 7,6% do seu território com lavouras," Dec. 29, 2017. https://revistag loborural.globo.com/Noticias/Agric ultura/noticia/2017/12/nasa-apontaque-brasil-usa-76-do-seu-territoriocom-lavouras.html (accessed Jan. 05, 2021).

[60] T. Forster-Carneiro, M. D. Berni, I. L. Dorileo, and M. A. Rostagno, "Biorefinery study of availability of agriculture residues and wastes for integrated biorefineries in Brazil," *Resour. Conserv. Recycl.*, vol. 77, pp. 78– 88, Aug. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j. resconrec.2013.05.007.

[61] S. L. de Moraes, C. P. Massola, E. M. Saccoccio, D. P. da Silva, and Y. B. T. Guimarães, "Cenário brasileiro da geração e uso de biomassa adensada," *Rev. IPT | Tecnol. e Inovação*, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 58–73, 2017.

[62] Abrelpe, "Panorama dos Resíduos Sólidos no Brasil," 2020. https://abrelpe. org.br/panorama/ (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[63] R. G. de S. M. Alfaia, A. M. Costa, and J. C. Campos, "Municipal solid waste in Brazil: A review," *Waste Management and Research*, vol. 35, no. 12. SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 1195– 1209, Dec. 01, 2017, doi: 10.1177/ 0734242X17735375.

[64] Institui a Política Nacional de Resíduos Sólidos, "LEI N<sup>o</sup> 12.305," Aug. 02, 2010. http://www.planalto.gov.br/cc ivil\_03/\_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12305. htm (accessed Jan. 28, 2021).

[65] C. Nunes De Castro, "O Programa Nacional De Produção E Uso Do Biodiesel (Pnpb) E A Produção De Matéria-Prima De Óleo Vegetal No Norte E No Nordeste," 2011. Accessed: Jan. 28, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/ stories/PDFs/TDs/td\_1613.pdf.

[66] Minist'erio da Agricultura Pecuária e Abastecimento., "Programa Nacional de Produção e Uso do Biodiesel (PNPB)," 2020. https://www.gov.br/ag ricultura/pt-br/assuntos/agriculturafamiliar/biodiesel/programa-nacionalde-producao-e-uso-do-biodiesel-pnpb (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[67] Ubrabio, "Política Nacional de Biocombustíveis (RenovaBio) - Lei n<sup>o</sup> 13.576/2017," 2017. https://ubrabio.com. br/2017/12/26/lei-no-13-576-2017/ (accessed Jan. 28, 2021).

[68] RenovaBio.org, "RenovaBio.org," 2020. https://www.renovabio.org/ (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[69] ABCP, "Frente Brasil de Recuperação Energética de Resíduos," 2020. https://abcp.org.br/imprensa/ criada-a-fbrer-frente-brasil-derecuperacao-energetica-de-residuos/ (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[70] ABEGÁS, "WEG aposta na gaseificação do lixo para geração," 2020. https://www.abegas.org.br/arquivos/ 74019 (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[71] E. J. F. Dallemand, J. A. Hilbert, and F. Monforti, *Bioenergy and Latin America: A Multi-Country Perspective*. 2015.

[72] PRONADEN, "Programa Nacional de Dendroenergía," 2018. Accessed: Dec. 17, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/a ttachment/file/281088/Programa\_Nac ional\_de\_Dendroenergia\_2016-2018.pdf.

[73] J. A. Honorato-Salazar and J. Sadhukhan, "Annual biomass variation of agriculture crops and forestry residues, and seasonality of crop residues for energy production in Mexico," *Food Bioprod. Process.*, vol. 119, pp. 1–19, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j. fbp.2019.10.005.

[74] SEMARNAT, "Residuos Sólidos Urbanos (RSU)," 2020. https://www. gob.mx/semarnat/acciones-y-programa s/residuos-solidos-urbanos-rsu (accessed Dec. 18, 2020).

[75] SEMARNAT, "Prevención y gestión integral de los residuos." https://www.

gob.mx/semarnat/acciones-y-programa s/prevencion-y-gestion-integral-de-losresiduos (accessed Jan. 25, 2021).

[82] V. Silva *et al.*, "Multi-stage

optimization in a pilot scale gasification plant," *Int. J. Hydrogen Energy*, vol. 42, no. 37, pp. 23878–23890, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.04.261.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico*

[90] J. A. Ramirez and T. J. Rainey, "Comparative techno-economic analysis

[91] I. F. Corporation, "Converting Biomass to Energy A Guide for Developers and Investors,"

10986/28305.

Washington, DC, 2017. Accessed: Apr. 22, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://ope nknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/

of biofuel production through gasification, thermal liquefaction and pyrolysis of sugarcane bagasse," *J. Clean. Prod.*, vol. 229, pp. 513–527, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.017.

[83] V. B. R. E. Silva and J. Cardoso, "Overview of biomass gasification modeling: Detailed analysis and case study," in *Computational Fluid Dynamics Applied to Waste-To-energyprocesses*, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 123–149.

[84] V. Silva *et al.*, "Multi-stage

10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.04.261.

[86] R. L. Fosgitt, "Small-scale

[87] S. Ciuta, D. Tsiamis, and M. J. Castaldi, "Field scale developments," in

*Technologies for Generating Energy, Gas, and Chemicals from Municipal Solid Waste, Biomass, Nonrecycled Plastics, Sludges, and Wet Solid Wastes*, Elsevier,

[88] J. Cardoso, V. Silva, and D. Eusébio, "Techno-economic analysis of a biomass gasification power plant dealing with forestry residues blends for electricity production in Portugal," *J. Clean. Prod.*, vol. 212, pp. 741–753, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.054.

[89] S. Mahapatra and S. Dasappa, "Rural electrification: Optimising the choice between decentralised renewable energy sources and grid extension," *Energy Sustain. Dev.*, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 146–154, Jun. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.

*Gasification of Waste Materials:*

CHP Applications," 2015.

pp. 175–188.

2017, pp. 65–91.

esd.2012.01.006.

**41**

optimization in a pilot scale gasification plant," *Int. J. Hydrogen Energy*, vol. 42, no. 37, pp. 23878–23890, Sep. 2017, doi:

[85] P. Bajpai, "Biomass energy projects worldwide," in *Biomass to Energy Conversion Technologies*, Elsevier, 2020,

Gasification for Biomass and Waste-to-Energy for Military and Commercial

[76] DBGIR, "Diagnóstico Básico para la Gestión Integral de los Residuos," May 2020. Accessed: Dec. 26, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.gob. mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/ 554385/DBGIR-15-mayo-2020.pdf.

[77] Camara de diputados Mexico, "Ley de promoción y desarrollo de los bioenergéticos," Feb. 2008. Accessed: Dec. 27, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBib lio/pdf/LPDB.pdf.

[78] INECC, "Análisis de la incorporación de la política climática en instrumentos de planeación estatales | Instituto Nacional de Ecología y Cambio Climático," 2020. https://www.gob.mx/ inecc/documentos/analisis-de-la-vinc ulacion-de-instrumentos-normativosde-planeacion-y-programaticos-detemas-estrategicos-con-la-politicanacional-de-cambi (accessed Dec. 27, 2020).

[79] T. K. Patra and P. N. Sheth, "Biomass gasification models for downdraft gasifier: A state-of-the-art review," *Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews*, vol. 50. Elsevier Ltd, pp. 583–593, May 30, 2015, doi: 10.1016/ j.rser.2015.05.012.

[80] C. Loha, S. Gu, J. De Wilde, P. Mahanta, and P. K. Chatterjee, "Advances in mathematical modeling of fluidized bed gasification," *Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews*, vol. 40. Elsevier Ltd, pp. 688–715, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.199.

[81] R. I. Singh, A. Brink, and M. Hupa, "CFD modeling to study fluidized bed combustion and gasification," *Applied Thermal Engineering*, vol. 52, no. 2. Elsevier Ltd, pp. 585–614, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng. 2012.12.017.

*Review Chapter: Waste to Energy through Pyrolysis and Gasification in Brazil and Mexico DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98383*

[82] V. Silva *et al.*, "Multi-stage optimization in a pilot scale gasification plant," *Int. J. Hydrogen Energy*, vol. 42, no. 37, pp. 23878–23890, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.04.261.

de-producao-e-uso-do-biodiesel-pnpb

gob.mx/semarnat/acciones-y-programa s/prevencion-y-gestion-integral-de-losresiduos (accessed Jan. 25, 2021).

[76] DBGIR, "Diagnóstico Básico para la Gestión Integral de los Residuos," May 2020. Accessed: Dec. 26, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.gob. mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/ 554385/DBGIR-15-mayo-2020.pdf.

[77] Camara de diputados Mexico, "Ley de promoción y desarrollo de los bioenergéticos," Feb. 2008. Accessed: Dec. 27, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBib

incorporación de la política climática en instrumentos de planeación estatales | Instituto Nacional de Ecología y Cambio Climático," 2020. https://www.gob.mx/ inecc/documentos/analisis-de-la-vinc ulacion-de-instrumentos-normativosde-planeacion-y-programaticos-detemas-estrategicos-con-la-politicanacional-de-cambi (accessed Dec. 27,

lio/pdf/LPDB.pdf.

2020).

[78] INECC, "Análisis de la

[79] T. K. Patra and P. N. Sheth, "Biomass gasification models for downdraft gasifier: A state-of-the-art review," *Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews*, vol. 50. Elsevier Ltd, pp. 583–593, May 30, 2015, doi: 10.1016/

[80] C. Loha, S. Gu, J. De Wilde, P. Mahanta, and P. K. Chatterjee,

10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.199.

doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.

2012.12.017.

"Advances in mathematical modeling of fluidized bed gasification," *Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews*, vol. 40. Elsevier Ltd, pp. 688–715, 2014, doi:

[81] R. I. Singh, A. Brink, and M. Hupa, "CFD modeling to study fluidized bed combustion and gasification," *Applied Thermal Engineering*, vol. 52, no. 2. Elsevier Ltd, pp. 585–614, 2013,

j.rser.2015.05.012.

[67] Ubrabio, "Política Nacional de Biocombustíveis (RenovaBio) - Lei n<sup>o</sup> 13.576/2017," 2017. https://ubrabio.com. br/2017/12/26/lei-no-13-576-2017/

[68] RenovaBio.org, "RenovaBio.org," 2020. https://www.renovabio.org/

Recuperação Energética de Resíduos," 2020. https://abcp.org.br/imprensa/ criada-a-fbrer-frente-brasil-derecuperacao-energetica-de-residuos/

gaseificação do lixo para geração," 2020. https://www.abegas.org.br/arquivos/ 74019 (accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[71] E. J. F. Dallemand, J. A. Hilbert, and F. Monforti, *Bioenergy and Latin America: A Multi-Country Perspective*. 2015.

[72] PRONADEN, "Programa Nacional de Dendroenergía," 2018. Accessed: Dec.

17, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/a ttachment/file/281088/Programa\_Nac ional\_de\_Dendroenergia\_2016-2018.pdf.

[73] J. A. Honorato-Salazar and J. Sadhukhan, "Annual biomass variation of agriculture crops and forestry residues, and seasonality of crop residues for energy production in Mexico," *Food Bioprod. Process.*, vol. 119, pp. 1–19, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.

[74] SEMARNAT, "Residuos Sólidos Urbanos (RSU)," 2020. https://www. gob.mx/semarnat/acciones-y-programa

[75] SEMARNAT, "Prevención y gestión integral de los residuos." https://www.

s/residuos-solidos-urbanos-rsu (accessed Dec. 18, 2020).

fbp.2019.10.005.

**40**

(accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

*Gasification*

(accessed Jan. 28, 2021).

(accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

(accessed Jan. 10, 2021).

[70] ABEGÁS, "WEG aposta na

[69] ABCP, "Frente Brasil de

[83] V. B. R. E. Silva and J. Cardoso, "Overview of biomass gasification modeling: Detailed analysis and case study," in *Computational Fluid Dynamics Applied to Waste-To-energyprocesses*, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 123–149.

[84] V. Silva *et al.*, "Multi-stage optimization in a pilot scale gasification plant," *Int. J. Hydrogen Energy*, vol. 42, no. 37, pp. 23878–23890, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.04.261.

[85] P. Bajpai, "Biomass energy projects worldwide," in *Biomass to Energy Conversion Technologies*, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 175–188.

[86] R. L. Fosgitt, "Small-scale Gasification for Biomass and Waste-to-Energy for Military and Commercial CHP Applications," 2015.

[87] S. Ciuta, D. Tsiamis, and M. J. Castaldi, "Field scale developments," in *Gasification of Waste Materials: Technologies for Generating Energy, Gas, and Chemicals from Municipal Solid Waste, Biomass, Nonrecycled Plastics, Sludges, and Wet Solid Wastes*, Elsevier, 2017, pp. 65–91.

[88] J. Cardoso, V. Silva, and D. Eusébio, "Techno-economic analysis of a biomass gasification power plant dealing with forestry residues blends for electricity production in Portugal," *J. Clean. Prod.*, vol. 212, pp. 741–753, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.054.

[89] S. Mahapatra and S. Dasappa, "Rural electrification: Optimising the choice between decentralised renewable energy sources and grid extension," *Energy Sustain. Dev.*, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 146–154, Jun. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j. esd.2012.01.006.

[90] J. A. Ramirez and T. J. Rainey, "Comparative techno-economic analysis of biofuel production through gasification, thermal liquefaction and pyrolysis of sugarcane bagasse," *J. Clean. Prod.*, vol. 229, pp. 513–527, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.017.

[91] I. F. Corporation, "Converting Biomass to Energy A Guide for Developers and Investors," Washington, DC, 2017. Accessed: Apr. 22, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://ope nknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/ 10986/28305.

**Chapter 2**

**Abstract**

50 mg/m3

**1. Introduction**

**43**

of Biomass

*Georgy Aleksandrovich Sytchev,*

*Olga Mihailovna Larina*

*Vladimir Aleksandrovich Sinelshchikov, Vladimir Aleksandrovich Lavrenov and*

Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion

*Oleg Aleksandrovich Ivanin, Viktor Zaichenko Mikhailovich,*

The widespread adoption of biomass as an energy fuel is hindered by a number of its significant drawbacks, such as low heating value, low ash melting point, low bulk density etc. Technological solutions that allow to fully overcome these shortcomings and ensure high economic performance have not yet been proposed, although there is a significant demand for them. A new technology for thermal processing of biomass into gas fuel, based on the pyrolysis process, has been developed at the Joint Institute for High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences (JIHT RAS). The degree of energy conversion of the processed raw mate-

/kg of

. The content of the liquid

rials in the proposed technology is about 75%. The gas fuel yield is 1.3 m<sup>3</sup>

**Keywords:** synthesis gas, pyrolysis, biomass processing, two-stage thermal

direction for using this gas is the production of liquid motor fuels.

phase in the energy gas obtained by the developed technology is not more than

consists of 90% hydrogen and carbon monoxide. According to existing standards, this gas can be used as a fuel for mini-CHP with gas-piston engines. A promising

The development of distributed generation and the gradual decline in the share of traditional hydrocarbon energy sources in the global energy balance are sustainable trends of the 21st century. The decision to gradually refuse fossil fuels made by world's leading economies is caused by depletion of deposits cheap in the exploitation. The desire to reduce the environmental burden and to improve the energy security through the use of local energy resources also matters. Biomass has a number of advantages over other types of renewable energy resources as an alternative to fossil hydrocarbons (availability, all-seasonality), which is directly reflected in its contribution to energy production: 12.4% of world consumption in 2017 [1]. However, biomass also has a number of obvious disadvantages: low specific heating value, high hygroscopicity, low bulk density. Some types of

. The gas produced by the technology under consideration on average

biomass, and its heating value, on average, is 11 MJ/m<sup>3</sup>

conversion process, liquid fuel, biochar

**Chapter 2**

## Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass

*Oleg Aleksandrovich Ivanin, Viktor Zaichenko Mikhailovich, Georgy Aleksandrovich Sytchev, Vladimir Aleksandrovich Sinelshchikov, Vladimir Aleksandrovich Lavrenov and Olga Mihailovna Larina*

## **Abstract**

The widespread adoption of biomass as an energy fuel is hindered by a number of its significant drawbacks, such as low heating value, low ash melting point, low bulk density etc. Technological solutions that allow to fully overcome these shortcomings and ensure high economic performance have not yet been proposed, although there is a significant demand for them. A new technology for thermal processing of biomass into gas fuel, based on the pyrolysis process, has been developed at the Joint Institute for High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences (JIHT RAS). The degree of energy conversion of the processed raw materials in the proposed technology is about 75%. The gas fuel yield is 1.3 m<sup>3</sup> /kg of biomass, and its heating value, on average, is 11 MJ/m<sup>3</sup> . The content of the liquid phase in the energy gas obtained by the developed technology is not more than 50 mg/m3 . The gas produced by the technology under consideration on average consists of 90% hydrogen and carbon monoxide. According to existing standards, this gas can be used as a fuel for mini-CHP with gas-piston engines. A promising direction for using this gas is the production of liquid motor fuels.

**Keywords:** synthesis gas, pyrolysis, biomass processing, two-stage thermal conversion process, liquid fuel, biochar

## **1. Introduction**

The development of distributed generation and the gradual decline in the share of traditional hydrocarbon energy sources in the global energy balance are sustainable trends of the 21st century. The decision to gradually refuse fossil fuels made by world's leading economies is caused by depletion of deposits cheap in the exploitation. The desire to reduce the environmental burden and to improve the energy security through the use of local energy resources also matters. Biomass has a number of advantages over other types of renewable energy resources as an alternative to fossil hydrocarbons (availability, all-seasonality), which is directly reflected in its contribution to energy production: 12.4% of world consumption in 2017 [1]. However, biomass also has a number of obvious disadvantages: low specific heating value, high hygroscopicity, low bulk density. Some types of

biomass are characterized by a low ash melting point, which makes it difficult for direct combustion in industrial plants. In addition, one of the most economically efficient way of converting thermal energy from solid biomass combustion into electrical energy for power plants with a capacity of less than 2 MW is the use of turbine CHP operating according to the Rankine cycle using a low-boiling coolant (ORC) and having an electrical efficiency of no more than 18% [2]. All these disadvantages can be largely overcome by converting biomass into liquid or gaseous fuels [3, 4]. Gasification is one of the most efficient and commercially viable methods of such processing used in industry today [5, 6]. At the same time, syngas obtained in air-blown gasifier is, firstly, strongly ballasted with nitrogen, which leads to a significant decrease in its higher heating value (4–6 MJ/m<sup>3</sup> ), and secondly, it contains a significant amount of high molecular weight organic compounds (the so-called "tar") [7]. With oxygen or steam gasification, which makes it possible to increase the heating value of the resulting gas mixture, an air separation unit or a steam generator must be provided in the technological chain, which leads to a significant increase in the cost of the final product. As concerned tar there are rather severe restrictions on its content in the gas mixtures receiving by biomass gasification and using as gaseous fuel. Presence of tar leads to fouling process equipments such as internal combustion engines and turbines. Various methods of tar removal are used both directly at the gasification stage and at the stage of purification of the resulting gas mixtures [8, 9]. The need for gas cleaning and its high cost are among the obstacles to the widespread introduction of gasification technologies.

A two-stage pyrolytic conversion is proposed as a method for producing pure mid-calorific synthesis gas. Two-stage pyrolytic conversion is a process that combines pyrolysis and subsequent high-temperature heterogeneous cracking of volatiles on biomass coke (**Figure 1**). As a result of this conversion, a high efficiency of energy conversion of raw materials (more than 70%) is achieved in comparison with conventional pyrolysis and gasification. In addition, a sufficiently high heating value of the resulting gas is provided (11–12 MJ/m<sup>3</sup> ) due to a decrease in the proportion of non-combustible components (for example, nitrogen, which is an integral component of the gas mixture obtained during air gasification).

The idea of using heterogeneous cracking as an additional stage in the processing of biomass into gaseous fuel in order to reduce the tar content was expressed in [10] and, later, was developed and used in the works of the Joint Institute for High Temperatures RAS (JIHT RAS) [11, 12] in relation to processing of wood, peat and straw. Similar approach was also implemented in the Viking gasifier developed at the Danish Technical University [13]. The proposed technology of two-stage pyrolytic conversion differs from the process implemented by "Viking" due to the absence of an oxidant supply to the reactor, which allows achieving the maximum heating value of the obtained synthesis gas. In the works of JIHT RAS, which will be discussed below, the process of converting biomass into gas was completely allothermal – the heat necessary for its implementation came from outside.

characteristics of product gas obtained from the same types of biomass by the

*Schematic diagram of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process. Tp – Temperature in the pyrolysis chamber; Tc – Temperature in the cracking chamber; mb – Mass of feedstock loaded into the reactor; mc – Mass of*

• Section 4 contains a description of the pilot installation for two-stage pyrolytic conversion, designed and built at the Joint Institute for High Temperatures RAS, and the characteristics of the gas produced by it. The section also includes an assessment of the energy efficiency of this installation and an analysis of

• Section 5 describes the possible applications of gas produced by the two-stage

The condensing fraction of the pyrolysis products of woody biomass is a complex mixture of pyrogenetic moisture, acetic, formic and lactic acids, methanol,

technical solutions that can improve the efficiency of its operation.

**2. Features of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process**

**2.1 The mass ratio of the coke residue in the cracking zone**

**and recommended operating parameters**

method of traditional pyrolysis.

*charcoal loaded into the cracking chamber.*

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

**Figure 1.**

**45**

pyrolytic conversion method.

**and the initial biomass**

This chapter provides an overview of the results obtained in laboratory conditions for justification of the new technology conversion of biomass into synthesis gas and a description and characteristics of a pilot plant implementing the technology under consideration. The chapter has been designed so that the reader can get a comprehensive understanding of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process, its effectiveness, features of practical realization and possible applications:


*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

#### **Figure 1.**

*Schematic diagram of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process. Tp – Temperature in the pyrolysis chamber; Tc – Temperature in the cracking chamber; mb – Mass of feedstock loaded into the reactor; mc – Mass of charcoal loaded into the cracking chamber.*

characteristics of product gas obtained from the same types of biomass by the method of traditional pyrolysis.


## **2. Features of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process and recommended operating parameters**

**2.1 The mass ratio of the coke residue in the cracking zone and the initial biomass**

The condensing fraction of the pyrolysis products of woody biomass is a complex mixture of pyrogenetic moisture, acetic, formic and lactic acids, methanol,

furfural, levoglucosan, compounds of various classes (aldehydes, ketones, esters), etc. [14]. Heating pyrolysis products when passing through a porous coke residue leads to thermal decomposition of high-molecular substances (heterogeneous cracking), mainly with the formation of carbon monoxide and hydrogen. In addition, non-condensable pyrolysis products and pyrogenetic moisture vapor interact with the carbon of the coke residue with the formation of CO and H2, which leads to a decrease in the mass of the coke residue. Obviously, the ratio of the masses of the feedstock and coke residue fed into the reactor of two-stage pyrolytic conversion should affect the yield of conversion products. The influence of this ratio was studied in detail experimentally by the authors in [15] for coniferous wood pellets, while in [16] later studies for dry oak sawdust are also included. The results of these experiments are shown in **Figure 2**. In both cases, the heating rate in the pyrolysis zone was 10 °C/min until the temperature reached 1000 °C.

as the maximum pyrolysis temperature, which, according to [18], is the upper temperature limit for the formation of primary tar. With further heating, the formation of tar does not occur due to thermal destruction of biomass, but only

temperature in the pyrolysis zone for woody biomass is shown in **Figure 3**. In the process of two-stage conversion when the biomass pyrolysis stage is carried out in the temperature range of Tp = 250–500 °C, formation of gas has two main mechanisms: decomposition of vapors of condensable high-molecular com-

pounds and three reactions proceeding in the forward direction:

hydrogen from the carbonized feedstock in the pyrolysis zone.

950 °C the increase of the gas yield is 0.285 m<sup>3</sup>

*Dependence of the specific yield of non-condensable gases (m3*

*fixed temperature in the cracking zone Tc = 1000 °C.*

another 0.227 m<sup>3</sup>

**Figure 3.**

**47**

The dependence of the specific yield of non-condensable product gases on the

where (Eq. (1)) is the reaction of steam gasification of carbon on the coke residue, (Eq. (2)) is the water-gas shift reaction, (Eq. (3)) is the Boudouard reaction. In the temperature range of Tp = 500–700 °C, a further, relatively small increase in the volume of produced gases occurs, mainly due to the release of

The temperature in the cracking zone significantly affects the yield of noncondensable gases. Of greatest interest is temperature Tc = 1000 °C, since it was shown in [12] that at a temperature of Tc = 1000 °C and an interaction time of about 4 seconds in the cracking zone, almost complete conversion of condensing pyrolysis products into gas occurs, and CO2 is almost completely converted to CO due to the developed surface and high reactivity of the coke residue. The experimentally obtained dependences of the yield of non-condensable gases on the temperature in the pyrolysis zone for different temperatures in the cracking zone [17] are shown in **Figure 4**. It can be seen from the figure that with an increase in Tc from 850 °C to

950 °C to 1000 °C the volume of produced non-condensable gases is increased by

/kg. At the same time, as the temperature in the cracking zone

*C* þ *H*2*O* \$ *CO* þ *H*2; (1) *CO* þ *H*2*O* \$ *CO*<sup>2</sup> þ *H*2; (2) *C* þ *СO*<sup>2</sup> \$ 2*CO*; (3)

/kg, and with an increase in Tc from

*/kg) on the temperature in the pyrolysis zone at a*

from primary tar.

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

The points in **Figure 2** correspond to the experimental data, while the lines are plotted by approximation. In accordance with the experimental results, the maximum yield of non-condensable gases in both cases corresponds to the mass ratio of the coke residue and the biomass sample mc/mb = 0.67. This ratio can be considered optimal for the given experimental conditions. With an increase in the rate of the feedstock heating, the optimal ratio mc/mb increases due to an increase of the mass flow rate of volatiles through the coke residue, and with a decrease in the rate of heating, it decreases. It is important to note that the weight loss of the coke residue in the experiments did not exceed some dozens of percent of the newly formed residue mass; therefore, the use of heterogeneous cracking does not require additional costs for the production or purchase of the coke residue.

## **2.2 The temperatures in the pyrolysis and cracking zones**

In biomass processing by the two-stage pyrolytic conversion method, the first stage is conventional pyrolysis. The main change in the mass of raw materials and an increase in the volume of non-condensable gases formed as a result of the process occurs at a temperature in the pyrolysis zone Tp = 250–500 °C, corresponding to the range of formation of the liquid fraction [17]. However, Tp = 700 °C can be chosen

#### **Figure 2.**

*Dependence of the specific yield of non-condensable gases (m<sup>3</sup> /kg) on the ratio of the mass of the charcoal residue and the studied sample of biomass (mc/mb) for pellets from coniferous wood (1) and oak sawdust (2).*

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

as the maximum pyrolysis temperature, which, according to [18], is the upper temperature limit for the formation of primary tar. With further heating, the formation of tar does not occur due to thermal destruction of biomass, but only from primary tar.

The dependence of the specific yield of non-condensable product gases on the temperature in the pyrolysis zone for woody biomass is shown in **Figure 3**.

In the process of two-stage conversion when the biomass pyrolysis stage is carried out in the temperature range of Tp = 250–500 °C, formation of gas has two main mechanisms: decomposition of vapors of condensable high-molecular compounds and three reactions proceeding in the forward direction:

$$\rm{C} + H\_{2}O \leftrightarrow CO + H\_{2}; \tag{1}$$

$$\rm{CO} + H\_2O \leftrightarrow CO\_2 + H\_2;\tag{2}$$

$$\text{C} + \text{CO}\_2 \leftrightarrow \text{2CO};\tag{3}$$

where (Eq. (1)) is the reaction of steam gasification of carbon on the coke residue, (Eq. (2)) is the water-gas shift reaction, (Eq. (3)) is the Boudouard reaction. In the temperature range of Tp = 500–700 °C, a further, relatively small increase in the volume of produced gases occurs, mainly due to the release of hydrogen from the carbonized feedstock in the pyrolysis zone.

The temperature in the cracking zone significantly affects the yield of noncondensable gases. Of greatest interest is temperature Tc = 1000 °C, since it was shown in [12] that at a temperature of Tc = 1000 °C and an interaction time of about 4 seconds in the cracking zone, almost complete conversion of condensing pyrolysis products into gas occurs, and CO2 is almost completely converted to CO due to the developed surface and high reactivity of the coke residue. The experimentally obtained dependences of the yield of non-condensable gases on the temperature in the pyrolysis zone for different temperatures in the cracking zone [17] are shown in **Figure 4**. It can be seen from the figure that with an increase in Tc from 850 °C to 950 °C the increase of the gas yield is 0.285 m<sup>3</sup> /kg, and with an increase in Tc from 950 °C to 1000 °C the volume of produced non-condensable gases is increased by another 0.227 m<sup>3</sup> /kg. At the same time, as the temperature in the cracking zone

#### **Figure 3.**

*Dependence of the specific yield of non-condensable gases (m3 /kg) on the temperature in the pyrolysis zone at a fixed temperature in the cracking zone Tc = 1000 °C.*

operation. Based on the dependences shown in **Figure 5**, it can be concluded that the content of tar in the gas obtained by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conver-

**3. Characteristics of the synthesis gas obtained from various types of biomass and comparison of two-stage pyrolytic conversion with**

The process characteristics described in the previous section are derived from experiments carried out on woody biomass. However, the possibilities of processing other types of biomass are of great interest. This section is devoted to a brief description of the results of experiments on processing by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion of six types of biomass: wood pellets, peat pellets, straw pellets, sunflower husk pellets, pellets from poultry litter and wastewater sludge

**Table 1** shows the characteristics of the considered types of biomass. The data on the elemental composition of pellets from sunflower husks were borrowed from [21]. The experimental setup had structure corresponding to the diagram shown in **Figure 1**. During the experiments, the temperature in the pyrolysis section gradually increased to 1000 °C with a heating rate of 10 °C/min. The temperature in the cracking section was 1000 °C during the entire experiment, and the time of passage of pyrolysis vapors and gases through it was no less than 4 s. The characteristics of the synthesis gas obtained as a result of a series of experiments are shown in **Table 2**. It should be noted that the synthesis gas obtained during the processing of wastewater sludge contains the largest amount of hydrogen, which makes this type of waste the most suitable raw material for the subsequent production of synthetic

To compare the two-stage pyrolytic conversion with conventional pyrolysis, a series of experiments in which the temperature inside the cracking did not exceed 100 °C was carried out. Thus, the treatment was reduced to conventional pyrolysis. The characteristics of the gas mixture obtained as a result of these experiments are

> **dry state dry ash-free state WA Mvp C HN O S** *Q***exp**

7.4 6.4 79.1 51.7 6.3 42.0 21.4 20.8

Wood pellets 8.0 0.8 83.6 50.3 6.0 0.4 43.3 <0.05 20.6 19.8 Peat pellets 8.0 3.3 64.1 55.7 6.9 1.7 35.7 <0.05 21.9 23.6 Straw pellets 6.0 6.8 79.4 47.8 6.2 0.6 45.4 <0.05 19.6 19.0

Litter pellets 16 13.8 82.6 48.0 6.4 5.9 39.0 0.7 20.4 20.1 WWS 2.7 22.7 89.1 51.7 7.5 8.5 26.0 1.5 25.0 25.9

*Characteristics of the raw materials. The 'exp' index denotes the experimentally measured heating value, while the 'cal' index denotes the value obtained by calculation on the base of elemental composition data.*

**Elemental composition, wt %**

**Higher heating value, MJ/kg**

> *<sup>H</sup> Q*cal *H*

**Volatile fraction, wt %**

(WWS). These results are presented in more detail in [20].

sion will correspond to the permissible and preferable values in modes with

Tc ≥ 930 °C and Tc ≥ 985 °C, respectively.

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

**conventional pyrolysis**

aviation fuel.

**Raw material**

Sunflower husk pellets

**Table 1.**

**49**

presented in **Table 3**.

**Moisture, wt %**

**Ash cont., wt %**

**Figure 4.**

*Specific yield of non-condensable gases for different temperatures in the cracking zone (850 °C, 950 °C, 1000 °C) depending on the temperature in the pyrolysis zone.*

#### **Figure 5.**

*Dependences of the specific content of tar (a) and moisture (b) in gas on temperature in the cracking zone Tc.*

rises, a decrease in the content of tar and moisture in the resulting synthesis gas is also observed (**Figure 5**).

The tar content is an important characteristic of synthesis gas, since it largely determines the possibility of its use in internal combustion engines. The issue of the maximum permissible tar content remains controversial due to the small number of tests on engines operating on gas contaminated with tars. However, most of the authors of the works cited in [19] agree that a specific tar content of less than 100 mg/m3 is acceptable, and less than 50 mg/m3 is preferable for long-term engine operation. Based on the dependences shown in **Figure 5**, it can be concluded that the content of tar in the gas obtained by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion will correspond to the permissible and preferable values in modes with Tc ≥ 930 °C and Tc ≥ 985 °C, respectively.

## **3. Characteristics of the synthesis gas obtained from various types of biomass and comparison of two-stage pyrolytic conversion with conventional pyrolysis**

The process characteristics described in the previous section are derived from experiments carried out on woody biomass. However, the possibilities of processing other types of biomass are of great interest. This section is devoted to a brief description of the results of experiments on processing by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion of six types of biomass: wood pellets, peat pellets, straw pellets, sunflower husk pellets, pellets from poultry litter and wastewater sludge (WWS). These results are presented in more detail in [20].

**Table 1** shows the characteristics of the considered types of biomass. The data on the elemental composition of pellets from sunflower husks were borrowed from [21].

The experimental setup had structure corresponding to the diagram shown in **Figure 1**. During the experiments, the temperature in the pyrolysis section gradually increased to 1000 °C with a heating rate of 10 °C/min. The temperature in the cracking section was 1000 °C during the entire experiment, and the time of passage of pyrolysis vapors and gases through it was no less than 4 s. The characteristics of the synthesis gas obtained as a result of a series of experiments are shown in **Table 2**. It should be noted that the synthesis gas obtained during the processing of wastewater sludge contains the largest amount of hydrogen, which makes this type of waste the most suitable raw material for the subsequent production of synthetic aviation fuel.

To compare the two-stage pyrolytic conversion with conventional pyrolysis, a series of experiments in which the temperature inside the cracking did not exceed 100 °C was carried out. Thus, the treatment was reduced to conventional pyrolysis. The characteristics of the gas mixture obtained as a result of these experiments are presented in **Table 3**.


#### **Table 1.**

*Characteristics of the raw materials. The 'exp' index denotes the experimentally measured heating value, while the 'cal' index denotes the value obtained by calculation on the base of elemental composition data.*


pyrolysis. The ratio of volume contents of hydrogen to carbon monoxide in the produced synthesis gas varies from 1:1 to 1:2 depending on the type of biomass. Moreover, the synthesis gas does not contain volatile pyrolysis products of high

*Volume yield of gas per 1 kg of combustible mass of the feedstock (a) and the degree of energy conversion (b) at conventional (1) and two-stage pyrolytic processing (2) of different types of biomass: WP – Wood pellets, PP –*

**4. An experimental installation for the implementation of the two-stage**

**Figure 7** shows a schematic diagram of a two-stage pyrolytic conversion module

The thermochemical conversion module operates in the following way. Wood biomass (sawdust, shavings) from the feedstock storage is fed in portions to the pyrolysis reactor using a reciprocating piston; the role of the lift mechanism is performed by a hydraulic cylinder connected to the pumping station through a hydraulic valve with electromagnetic control. At the entrance to the pyrolysis reactor, the biomass is compacted under the action of the force applied from the piston,

**pyrolytic conversion process and the results of its testing**

molecular weight, which makes this fuel cleaner than pyrolytic.

*Schematic diagram of a two-stage pyrolytic biomass conversion module.*

*Peat pellets, SP – Straw pellets, SHP – Sunflower husk pellets, LP – Litter pellets.*

designed at the JIHT RAS.

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

**Figure 6.**

**Figure 7.**

**51**

#### **Table 2.**

*Characteristics of synthesis gas obtained by two-stage pyrolytic processing from different types of biomass.*


#### **Table 3.**

*Characteristics of product gas obtained in conventional pyrolysis from different types of biomass.*

Comparison of conventional pyrolysis with two-stage pyrolytic conversion in terms of the generated gas volume and the degree of energy conversion is shown in **Figure 6**. It is important to note that the degree of energy conversion was estimated exclusively for gaseous pyrolysis products.

From the presented data, it follows that the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion makes it possible to efficiently process biomass of various types into synthesis gas with a calorific value of about 10–12 MJ/m<sup>3</sup> . The gas productivity of the process is several times higher than the gas productivity of conventional

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

**Figure 6.**

*Volume yield of gas per 1 kg of combustible mass of the feedstock (a) and the degree of energy conversion (b) at conventional (1) and two-stage pyrolytic processing (2) of different types of biomass: WP – Wood pellets, PP – Peat pellets, SP – Straw pellets, SHP – Sunflower husk pellets, LP – Litter pellets.*

pyrolysis. The ratio of volume contents of hydrogen to carbon monoxide in the produced synthesis gas varies from 1:1 to 1:2 depending on the type of biomass. Moreover, the synthesis gas does not contain volatile pyrolysis products of high molecular weight, which makes this fuel cleaner than pyrolytic.

## **4. An experimental installation for the implementation of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process and the results of its testing**

**Figure 7** shows a schematic diagram of a two-stage pyrolytic conversion module designed at the JIHT RAS.

The thermochemical conversion module operates in the following way. Wood biomass (sawdust, shavings) from the feedstock storage is fed in portions to the pyrolysis reactor using a reciprocating piston; the role of the lift mechanism is performed by a hydraulic cylinder connected to the pumping station through a hydraulic valve with electromagnetic control. At the entrance to the pyrolysis reactor, the biomass is compacted under the action of the force applied from the piston,

**Figure 7.** *Schematic diagram of a two-stage pyrolytic biomass conversion module.*

creating an air-tight briquette that prevents the release of gaseous products to the outside, and then, in the form of a compressed briquette, moves through the pyrolysis reactor due to the arrival of new portions. Heat is supplied to the compacted biomass through the wall from the hot combustion products formed in the furnace or burner. To ensure the supply of the amount of thermal energy required to maintain the conversion process, any available fuel is burned, for example, natural gas or propane (used in experiments on separate modules of the installation), the initial biomass or coke residue of the processed biomass. In the pyrolysis reactor, the biomass is gradually warmed up to a temperature of about 500–700 °C, accompanied by the release of volatiles, which, through perforation in the wall of the pyrolysis reactor, enter the gas collectors, along which they move into a vertically located retort filled with coke residue of the processed biomass - a cracking reactor. The temperature of the coke residue in the cracking reactor can be maintained by supplying heat through the wall from the combustion products at a level of 1000 °C. Pyrolysis gases and vapors pass through a fixed high-temperature layer of coke residue, in which gases and highmolecular compounds (including tar) are converted into synthesis gas, which is then removed for cleaning, cooling and further use. As a result of chemical reactions, the coke residue in the cracking reactor is consumed, but is constantly replenished with coke residue coming from the pyrolysis reactor. The mass loss of coke residue in the cracking reactor is less than the mass of the newly formed coke residue. Therefore, a coke storage is provided in the thermochemical reactor, which can be periodically unloaded. The excess of the resulting coke residue can be used both in the process itself (to provide for own needs in thermal energy), and for other purposes. The outer casing of the thermochemical conversion module has a bypass and dampers that allow regulating the flow of combustion products in the pyrolysis zone, thereby ensuring the ability to maintain the required reactor temperature.

The unit was tested for two modes of operation (mode A, mode B). The parameters characterizing the operating modes of the unit are presented in **Table 4**. The characteristics of woody biomass and coal residue obtained during the tests are presented in **Table 5**, and the characteristics of the resulting synthesis gas are presented in **Table 6**. Data on the calorific value of raw materials and two-stage conversion products obtained in mode A are presented

energy flows diagram of the installation is shown in **Figure 9**. The general energy balance equation is as follows:

*PBM* <sup>þ</sup> *PCP* � *PL* <sup>¼</sup> *Pch*

The energy balance of the installation can be calculated from the test results. The

*SP* <sup>þ</sup> *Pph*

where the superscript "ch" refers to chemical heat and the superscript "ph" refers to the physical heat of solid and gaseous products of the process. The results

The degree of energy conversion of the installation was determined as follows:

*SG Qnet BM*

*<sup>η</sup>ec* <sup>¼</sup> *gSG* � *<sup>Q</sup>net*

of calculating the components of the energy balance are shown in **Table 8**.

*SG* is the lower heating value of synthesis gas, MJ/m<sup>3</sup>

**Parameter Dimen-sion Mode Mode symbol A B** Biomass type Oak sawdust Pine shavings Biomass consumption kg/h 6,0 5,0 The mass of the coke residue in the cracking reactor kg 8,6 8,6 Fuel type for own needs Natural gas Propane Working value of gas pressure bar 0,1 – 0,4(0,45) 0,4 – 2,0(2,2)

Thermal power of burners in steady mode kWt 30,0 27,4

At the entrance to the pyrolysis reactor (T1) °С 300 250 At the outlet of the pyrolysis reactor (T2) °С 660 500 At the entrance to the cracking reactor (T3) °С 950 870 In the middle of a cracking reactor (T4) °С 980 910 At the outlet of the cracking reactor (T5) °С 1000 950 Combustion products inlet (T6) °С 1100 1100 Combustion products outlet (T7) °С 600 570

Pumping station power kWt 2,26

*SP* <sup>þ</sup> *<sup>P</sup>ch*

*GP* <sup>þ</sup> *Pph*

; *gSG* is the specific productivity of the unit for

/kg. According to the results of calculations,

/h 3,22 1,08

*GP*, (4)

; is the lower

, (5)

in **Table 7**.

where *Qnet*

**Table 4.**

**53**

heating value of biomass, MJ/m<sup>3</sup>

synthesis gas per 1 kg of feedstock, m<sup>3</sup>

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

the degree of energy conversion was 79,8%.

Fuel consumption for own needs in steady mode m<sup>3</sup>

Temperature parameters of pyrolysis and cracking reactors:

*Operating parameters of the pilot installation during tests.*

The pilot installation for two-stage pyrolytic conversion was implemented as a structure of 4 modules. The scheme of the module and the photograph of the installation are shown in **Figure 8**.

#### **Figure 8.**

*Diagram of a thermochemical conversion module (a) and a photograph of an installation consisting of four modules (b).*

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

The unit was tested for two modes of operation (mode A, mode B). The parameters characterizing the operating modes of the unit are presented in **Table 4**. The characteristics of woody biomass and coal residue obtained during the tests are presented in **Table 5**, and the characteristics of the resulting synthesis gas are presented in **Table 6**. Data on the calorific value of raw materials and two-stage conversion products obtained in mode A are presented in **Table 7**.

The energy balance of the installation can be calculated from the test results. The energy flows diagram of the installation is shown in **Figure 9**.

The general energy balance equation is as follows:

$$P\_{\rm BM} + P\_{\rm CP} - P\_L = P\_{\rm SP}^{ch} + P\_{\rm SP}^{ph} + P\_{\rm GP}^{ch} + P\_{\rm GP}^{ph} \tag{4}$$

where the superscript "ch" refers to chemical heat and the superscript "ph" refers to the physical heat of solid and gaseous products of the process. The results of calculating the components of the energy balance are shown in **Table 8**.

The degree of energy conversion of the installation was determined as follows:

$$\eta\_{cc} = \frac{\mathbf{g}\_{SG} \cdot \mathbf{Q}\_{SG}^{net}}{\mathbf{Q}\_{BM}^{net}},\tag{5}$$

where *Qnet SG* is the lower heating value of synthesis gas, MJ/m<sup>3</sup> ; is the lower heating value of biomass, MJ/m<sup>3</sup> ; *gSG* is the specific productivity of the unit for synthesis gas per 1 kg of feedstock, m<sup>3</sup> /kg. According to the results of calculations, the degree of energy conversion was 79,8%.


#### **Table 4.**

*Operating parameters of the pilot installation during tests.*


#### **Table 5.**

*Characteristics of woody biomass and coke residue. \* In terms of working/ dry/dry ash-free condition.*

The efficiency of the installation was calculated as follows:

*GBM* � *<sup>Q</sup>net*

lower heating value of natural gas, MJ/m<sup>3</sup>

*Characteristics of synthesis gas obtained as a result of tests.*

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

the efficiency was 37.1%.

**Table 7.**

**Table 6.**

70.3%.

**55**

*<sup>η</sup>*<sup>P</sup> <sup>¼</sup> *GBM* � *gSG* � *<sup>Q</sup>net*

**Parameter Dimension Value** Lower heating value of biomass MJ/kg 16,9 Higher heating value of biomass MJ/kg 18,2 Lower heating value of coke residue MJ/kg 33,0 Higher heating value of coke residue MJ/kg 33,2 Lower heating value of synthesis gas MJ/ m<sup>3</sup> 10,5

**Parameter Dimen-sion Parameter value**


Higher heating value of synthesis gas MJ/ m<sup>3</sup> 11,5

*Heating value of raw materials, coke residue and synthesis gas obtained as a result of tests in mode a.*

station, MW; *GNG* – consumption of natural gas burned in the furnace, m<sup>3</sup>

*SG*

*NG*

. According to the results of calculations,

MJ/kg 16,0

**Oak sawdust (A)**

**Pine shavings (B)**

MJ/kg 17,5

, (6)

/s; *Qnet NG* –

*BM* <sup>þ</sup> *NPS* <sup>þ</sup> *GNG* � *<sup>Q</sup>net*

where *GBM* is the consumption of biomass, kg/s; *NPS* is the power of the pump

Thus, the designed unit has a high efficiency of energy conversion of woody biomass into synthesis gas, but it has a low thermal efficiency. The main ways to increase efficiency are to increase the degree of using biomass energy and reduce heat losses with the flue gases [22, 23]. The problem of reducing heat losses with the flue gases can be solved both by increasing the efficiency of heat exchange processes inside the unit (improving the flow parts of heat exchangers by using developed fins and optimizing the geometry of the coolant channels), and by recuperating part of the thermal energy of flue gases for heating air, which then goes into the solid fuel furnace for combustion. The disadvantage of the latter solution is also the complication of the installation and an increase in electricity consumption due to the appearance of a heat exchanger and an air blower. A schematic diagram, including the proposed areas of modernization, is shown in **Figure 10**.

It is shown in [12] that when solving the problem of finding the optimal operat-

ing parameters of a modernized installation, its efficiency can be increased to 69.5%, but the efficiency of energy conversion of raw materials will decrease to


## *Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*


#### **Table 6.**

*Characteristics of synthesis gas obtained as a result of tests.*


#### **Table 7.**

*Heating value of raw materials, coke residue and synthesis gas obtained as a result of tests in mode a.*

The efficiency of the installation was calculated as follows:

$$\eta \sum = \frac{G\_{\rm BM} \cdot \mathbf{g}\_{\rm SG} \cdot Q\_{\rm SG}^{\rm net}}{G\_{\rm BM} \cdot Q\_{\rm BM}^{\rm net} + N\_{\rm PS} + G\_{\rm NG} \cdot Q\_{\rm NG}^{\rm net}},\tag{6}$$

where *GBM* is the consumption of biomass, kg/s; *NPS* is the power of the pump station, MW; *GNG* – consumption of natural gas burned in the furnace, m<sup>3</sup> /s; *Qnet NG* – lower heating value of natural gas, MJ/m<sup>3</sup> . According to the results of calculations, the efficiency was 37.1%.

Thus, the designed unit has a high efficiency of energy conversion of woody biomass into synthesis gas, but it has a low thermal efficiency. The main ways to increase efficiency are to increase the degree of using biomass energy and reduce heat losses with the flue gases [22, 23]. The problem of reducing heat losses with the flue gases can be solved both by increasing the efficiency of heat exchange processes inside the unit (improving the flow parts of heat exchangers by using developed fins and optimizing the geometry of the coolant channels), and by recuperating part of the thermal energy of flue gases for heating air, which then goes into the solid fuel furnace for combustion. The disadvantage of the latter solution is also the complication of the installation and an increase in electricity consumption due to the appearance of a heat exchanger and an air blower. A schematic diagram, including the proposed areas of modernization, is shown in **Figure 10**.

It is shown in [12] that when solving the problem of finding the optimal operating parameters of a modernized installation, its efficiency can be increased to 69.5%, but the efficiency of energy conversion of raw materials will decrease to 70.3%.

**5. Potential application areas for two-stage pyrolytic conversion**

The schematic diagram of an autonomous cogeneration complex is shown in **Figure 11**. The diagram assumes parallel operation of 4 thermochemical conversion modules. The capacity of each module is 10–12 kg/h for the initial biomass or

The synthesis gas produced during the conversion of biomass is cleaned of solid particles (cleaning from tar is not required) in the filter and through the receiver enters the gas-piston engine (GPE). The rated power of the generator connected to the GPE is 75 kW. The combustion products of the GPE are cooled in a shell-andtube heat exchanger to a temperature of 50 °C, after which they are removed into the atmosphere. In the same heat exchanger water is heated, which is then cooled in a heater (heat load up to 100 kW). The heater can be replaced by any other heat

The parameters of the energy complex are chosen in such a way as to ensure the possibility of testing it at the JIHT RAS stand. In the course of the tests carried out, the thermochemical conversion module was brought to the operating temperature mode, then the elastic gas tank was filled with synthesis gas, after which the GPE was started in the mode of the minimum load, which increased stepwise to 30 and then to 50 kW. During the tests, for each mode, we measured the flow rate of synthesis gas at the engine inlet, temperatures, pressures, and parameters of the electric generator. The engine running time at each load was 10 minutes. The results

The tests carried out with one thermochemical conversion module have shown the possibility of implementing an autonomous cogeneration complex. The data obtained indicate that with the capacity of one module (in terms of feedstock – 12 kg/h), four thermochemical conversion modules will be able to provide gas to a power plant with a capacity of up to 50 kW. The thermal power in the cogeneration

*Schematic diagram of a cogeneration energy-technological complex based on a gas piston unit. SG – Synthesis*

**5.1 Cogeneration complex based on a gas piston engine**

of measurements and calculations are presented in **Table 9**.

/h for the synthesis gas.

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

12.8–15.4 m<sup>3</sup>

consumer.

mode will be 54.4 kW.

**Figure 11.**

**57**

*gas; CP – Combustion products.*

#### **Figure 9.**

*Energy flows diagram of a thermochemical conversion installation. PBM – Energy of biomass processed per unit of time; PCP – Thermal power introduced by natural gas combustion products; PL – Total heat losses of the installation; PSP – Energy corresponding to the heat content of solid products produced per unit of time; PGP – Energy corresponding to the heat content of gaseous products produced per unit of time.*


#### **Table 8.**

*Energy balance of the pilot plant.*

#### **Figure 10.**

*Schematic diagram of the modernized installation. CP – Combustion products.*

## **5. Potential application areas for two-stage pyrolytic conversion**

## **5.1 Cogeneration complex based on a gas piston engine**

The schematic diagram of an autonomous cogeneration complex is shown in **Figure 11**. The diagram assumes parallel operation of 4 thermochemical conversion modules. The capacity of each module is 10–12 kg/h for the initial biomass or 12.8–15.4 m<sup>3</sup> /h for the synthesis gas.

The synthesis gas produced during the conversion of biomass is cleaned of solid particles (cleaning from tar is not required) in the filter and through the receiver enters the gas-piston engine (GPE). The rated power of the generator connected to the GPE is 75 kW. The combustion products of the GPE are cooled in a shell-andtube heat exchanger to a temperature of 50 °C, after which they are removed into the atmosphere. In the same heat exchanger water is heated, which is then cooled in a heater (heat load up to 100 kW). The heater can be replaced by any other heat consumer.

The parameters of the energy complex are chosen in such a way as to ensure the possibility of testing it at the JIHT RAS stand. In the course of the tests carried out, the thermochemical conversion module was brought to the operating temperature mode, then the elastic gas tank was filled with synthesis gas, after which the GPE was started in the mode of the minimum load, which increased stepwise to 30 and then to 50 kW. During the tests, for each mode, we measured the flow rate of synthesis gas at the engine inlet, temperatures, pressures, and parameters of the electric generator. The engine running time at each load was 10 minutes. The results of measurements and calculations are presented in **Table 9**.

The tests carried out with one thermochemical conversion module have shown the possibility of implementing an autonomous cogeneration complex. The data obtained indicate that with the capacity of one module (in terms of feedstock – 12 kg/h), four thermochemical conversion modules will be able to provide gas to a power plant with a capacity of up to 50 kW. The thermal power in the cogeneration mode will be 54.4 kW.

#### **Figure 11.**

*Schematic diagram of a cogeneration energy-technological complex based on a gas piston unit. SG – Synthesis gas; CP – Combustion products.*


**Table 9.**

*Test results of the power engineering complex.*

## **5.2 Substitution of liquid fuel in existing liquid fuel boilers**

The synthesis gas obtained in the process of two-stage pyrolytic conversion can be used for partial replacement of diesel fuel in liquid fuel boilers. To study the cofiring of syngas and diesel fuel, a thermochemical conversion module was installed next to the boiler house. The schematic diagram of the heating complex is shown in **Figure 12**.

The heating complex uses a floor-standing cast iron boiler "RIELLO RTT 93" with an installed oil burner "CUENOD NC12H101". The nominal heat output of the boiler is 100 kW. The schematic diagram is provided for two modules for thermochemical conversion of biomass, which allow replacing up to 90% of diesel fuel with synthesis gas during continuous operation of the boiler at rated power. At the time of testing, one module and one elastic gas tank with a volume of 10 m<sup>3</sup> were installed, which made it possible to carry out preliminary tests and evaluate the possibility of replacing liquid fuel with synthesis gas, since in fact the boiler operated in intermittent mode: after heating the direct supply water to the set temperature, the burner automatically turned off and remained off until the temperature of the direct supply water reached the lower threshold value, after which the burner re-ignited and the cycle was repeated.

allows synthesis gas to be fed into a turbulized air stream, which results in good mixing of gas and air. When it enters the boiler combustion chamber, the gas-air mixture burns out, while the liquid-fuel part of the burner, the power of which can be reduced to 10% of the nominal due to the installation of a low-flow nozzle, ensures guaranteed ignition of the mixture, preventing the occurrence of explosive situations. The total area of the openings for the gas outlet was selected experimentally (by measuring the gas flow rate) in such a way as to ensure the required gas performance of the burner in the operating range of excess pressures (5–30 mbar).

1.Bringing the thermochemical conversion module to the operating mode.

3. Start-up and subsequent operation of the boiler only on diesel fuel.

4.Boiler operation in the mode of combined combustion of diesel fuel and

During testing of the heating complex, the temperature of the direct supply water was set on the boiler control panel and amounted to 58–62 °C. The tests were carried out for five modes of operation: three modes of operation on diesel fuel and two modes of co-combustion of diesel fuel and synthesis gas. Pine sawdust was used as the initial biofuel. The operating time in each mode was 10–15 minutes. Data on fuel consumption and parameters of combustion products in each mode are

Based on the data obtained as a result of the tests, the power and efficiency of

As tests have shown, the efficiency of the boiler in operating modes 4 and 5 turns out to be practically equal to the efficiency corresponding to the operation in the nominal mode, which indicates that there are no significant changes in the combustion conditions when diesel fuel is partially replaced by synthesis gas. Thus, the tests confirm the possibility of replacing liquid fuel in boiler houses with gas-

the boiler were calculated in five operating modes (**Table 11**).

eous fuel obtained by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion.

2.Filling an elastic gas tank with synthesis gas with subsequent determination of

Heating complex tests included the following stages:

*Flame head of liquid fuel burner with nozzle for co-combustion of gaseous fuel.*

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

the composition of the syngas in the tank.

synthesis gas.

**Figure 13.**

presented in **Table 10**.

**59**

For the co-combustion of diesel fuel and synthesis gas, a special nozzle was made on the flame head of a liquid fuel burner, which consists of two main elements - a supply pipe and a gas manifold with outlets after the air swirler (**Figure 13**). This

**Figure 12.** *Schematic diagram of the heating complex.*

**Figure 13.** *Flame head of liquid fuel burner with nozzle for co-combustion of gaseous fuel.*

allows synthesis gas to be fed into a turbulized air stream, which results in good mixing of gas and air. When it enters the boiler combustion chamber, the gas-air mixture burns out, while the liquid-fuel part of the burner, the power of which can be reduced to 10% of the nominal due to the installation of a low-flow nozzle, ensures guaranteed ignition of the mixture, preventing the occurrence of explosive situations. The total area of the openings for the gas outlet was selected experimentally (by measuring the gas flow rate) in such a way as to ensure the required gas performance of the burner in the operating range of excess pressures (5–30 mbar).

Heating complex tests included the following stages:


During testing of the heating complex, the temperature of the direct supply water was set on the boiler control panel and amounted to 58–62 °C. The tests were carried out for five modes of operation: three modes of operation on diesel fuel and two modes of co-combustion of diesel fuel and synthesis gas. Pine sawdust was used as the initial biofuel. The operating time in each mode was 10–15 minutes. Data on fuel consumption and parameters of combustion products in each mode are presented in **Table 10**.

Based on the data obtained as a result of the tests, the power and efficiency of the boiler were calculated in five operating modes (**Table 11**).

As tests have shown, the efficiency of the boiler in operating modes 4 and 5 turns out to be practically equal to the efficiency corresponding to the operation in the nominal mode, which indicates that there are no significant changes in the combustion conditions when diesel fuel is partially replaced by synthesis gas. Thus, the tests confirm the possibility of replacing liquid fuel in boiler houses with gaseous fuel obtained by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion.


**6. Conclusions**

the pyrolysis reactor is 10 °C/min.

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

with the heat recovery from flue gases.

CHP combined heat and power (plant);

ORC organic Rankine cycle; WWS wastewater sludge; SG synthesis gas;

CP combustion products; GPE gas piston engine; DF diesel fuel; DME dimethyl ether.

to its high hydrogen content.

**Acknowledgements**

**Nomenclature**

**61**

Two-stage pyrolytic conversion is a method for obtaining gaseous fuel with a calorific value of about 11 MJ/m<sup>3</sup> from biomass. The process includes two stages: pyrolysis of the feedstock and subsequent heterogeneous cracking of pyrolysis products when they are passed through a carbon packing. As a result, synthesis gas is formed, as well as a coal residue, which can be further used in the coal packing in the cracking reactor, as a fuel for own heat demand or for other applications.

The optimum (in terms of the specific yield of non-condensable gases) temperature in the pyrolysis zone is 500–700 °C, while the optimum temperature in the cracking zone is 1000 °C. The minimum mass of coal in the cracking reactor to achieve the maximum yield of non-condensable gases should be at least 67% of the mass of the feedstock fed to the pyrolysis reactor, provided that the heating rate in

Experiments on the processing of six types of biomass (pellets from wood, peat,

An experimental installation was built at the JIHT RAS, which implements the process of two-stage pyrolytic conversion. The unit provides the degree of energy conversion of the initial biomass into synthesis gas up to 79.8%. However, it has a low thermal efficiency: only 37.1%. This characteristic can be increased up to 69.5%

Tests have confirmed that the synthesis gas obtained in the process of two-stage pyrolytic conversion can be used as motor fuel for internal combustion engines, as well as for partial replacement of diesel fuel in liquid fuel boilers. Moreover, it can be used as a raw material for the production of liquid aviation fuel. The best suited for this is the synthesis gas obtained during the processing of wastewater sludge due

The authors are grateful to colleagues who took part in the development and study of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process, as well as in the preparation of the materials published in this chapter: Kosov V.F., Kosov V.V., Markov A.V., Morozov A.V., Pchelkin M.D., Suslov V.A., Faleeva Yu.M., Tsyplakov A.I.

straw, sunflower husks and poultry litter, as well as wastewater sludge) by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion showed that each of the considered types of biomass can be used as raw material for synthesis gas production. The gas productivity of the process is several times higher than the gas productivity of conventional pyrolysis. The ratio of volumes of hydrogen to carbon monoxide in the produced synthesis gas varies from 1:1 to 1:2 depending on the type of biomass, while it does not contain volatile pyrolysis products with high molecular weight,

which makes it possible to use it as fuel for internal combustion engines.

#### **Table 10.**

*Fuel consumption and parameters of combustion products during testing of the heating complex. DF – Diesel fuel; SG – Synthesis gas.*


#### **Table 11.**

*Power and efficiency of the boiler at different operating modes.*

The efficiency of the heating complex can be increased if the combustion products formed in the boiler are sent to the thermochemical conversion module. In a similar way, the efficiency of the energy technology complex shown in **Figure 11** can be increased by using the combustion products generated in the GPE in the thermochemical conversion module.

#### **5.3 Production of synthetic aviation fuel**

The authors of [24, 25] have shown that synthesis gas obtained by two-stage thermal conversion of woody biomass during experiments can be used to synthesize dimethyl ether (DME) and methanol, which serve as the basis for the production of the base component of aviation fuel. Studies have shown that the synthesis of DME and methanol from lean synthesis gas with an H2:CO ratio of 0.95–1.25 can be efficiently carried out with a two-layer loading of a methanol catalyst and γ-Al2O3.

The volumetric content of individual gases, as well as various inclusions in the composition of the synthesis gas used for the production of DME and methanol, have a significant impact on both the efficiency of synthesis and the quality of the products obtained. Tar, moisture, solid particles, nitrogen and sulfur compounds in synthesis gas are undesirable impurities that reduce the catalyst life and deteriorate the quality of synthesis products. In the production of synthesis gas from woody feedstock by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion, gas purification is significantly simplified in comparison with the gas obtained from air gasification.

## **6. Conclusions**

Two-stage pyrolytic conversion is a method for obtaining gaseous fuel with a calorific value of about 11 MJ/m<sup>3</sup> from biomass. The process includes two stages: pyrolysis of the feedstock and subsequent heterogeneous cracking of pyrolysis products when they are passed through a carbon packing. As a result, synthesis gas is formed, as well as a coal residue, which can be further used in the coal packing in the cracking reactor, as a fuel for own heat demand or for other applications.

The optimum (in terms of the specific yield of non-condensable gases) temperature in the pyrolysis zone is 500–700 °C, while the optimum temperature in the cracking zone is 1000 °C. The minimum mass of coal in the cracking reactor to achieve the maximum yield of non-condensable gases should be at least 67% of the mass of the feedstock fed to the pyrolysis reactor, provided that the heating rate in the pyrolysis reactor is 10 °C/min.

Experiments on the processing of six types of biomass (pellets from wood, peat, straw, sunflower husks and poultry litter, as well as wastewater sludge) by the method of two-stage pyrolytic conversion showed that each of the considered types of biomass can be used as raw material for synthesis gas production. The gas productivity of the process is several times higher than the gas productivity of conventional pyrolysis. The ratio of volumes of hydrogen to carbon monoxide in the produced synthesis gas varies from 1:1 to 1:2 depending on the type of biomass, while it does not contain volatile pyrolysis products with high molecular weight, which makes it possible to use it as fuel for internal combustion engines.

An experimental installation was built at the JIHT RAS, which implements the process of two-stage pyrolytic conversion. The unit provides the degree of energy conversion of the initial biomass into synthesis gas up to 79.8%. However, it has a low thermal efficiency: only 37.1%. This characteristic can be increased up to 69.5% with the heat recovery from flue gases.

Tests have confirmed that the synthesis gas obtained in the process of two-stage pyrolytic conversion can be used as motor fuel for internal combustion engines, as well as for partial replacement of diesel fuel in liquid fuel boilers. Moreover, it can be used as a raw material for the production of liquid aviation fuel. The best suited for this is the synthesis gas obtained during the processing of wastewater sludge due to its high hydrogen content.

## **Acknowledgements**

The authors are grateful to colleagues who took part in the development and study of the two-stage pyrolytic conversion process, as well as in the preparation of the materials published in this chapter: Kosov V.F., Kosov V.V., Markov A.V., Morozov A.V., Pchelkin M.D., Suslov V.A., Faleeva Yu.M., Tsyplakov A.I.

## **Nomenclature**


## **Author details**

Oleg Aleksandrovich Ivanin\*, Viktor Zaichenko Mikhailovich, Georgy Aleksandrovich Sytchev, Vladimir Aleksandrovich Sinelshchikov, Vladimir Aleksandrovich Lavrenov and Olga Mihailovna Larina Joint Institute for High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences (JIHT RAS), Moscow, Russia

**References**

[1] Renewables 2019 Global Status Report [Internet]. 2020. Available from: https://www.ren21.net/gsr-2019/

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

> [9] Rios M.L.V., Gonzalez A.M., Lora E. E.S., Almazan del Olmo O.A. Reduction

> [10] Chembukulam S.K et al. Smokeless fuel from carbonized sawdust. Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev. 1981, 20, 4, 714–

of tar generated during biomass gasification: A review. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2018;108:345–370. DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.12.002

719. DOI: 10.1021/i300004a024

[11] Batenin V.M. et al. Thermal Methods of Reprocessing Wood and Peat for Power Engineering Purposes. Thermal Engineering. 2010;57(11):946– 952. DOI: 10.1134/S0040601510110066

[12] Batenin V.M., Zaichenko V.M., Kosov V.F., and Sinel'shchikov V.A. Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass to Gaseous Fuel. Doklady Chemistry. 2012;

[13] Henriksen U. et al. The Design, Construction and Operation of a 75 kW Two-Stage Gasifier. Energy. 2006;31 (10–11):1542–1553. DOI: 10.1016/j.

[14] Bajus M. Pyrolysis of woody

[15] Kosov V.F., Kosov V.V.,

material. Petroleum & Coal. 2010:52(3):

Zaichenko V.M. Investigation of a twostage process of biomass gasification. Chemical Engineering Transactions. 2015;43:457–462. DOI: 10.3303/

[16] Lavrenov V.A. Eksperimental'noe issledovanie processa dvuhstadijnoj termicheskoj konversii drevesnoj biomassy v sintez-gaz (Experimental study of the process of two-stage thermal conversion of woody biomass into synthesis gas) [thesis]. Moscow: Joint Institute for High Temperatures

446(1):196–199. DOI: 10.1134/

S0012500812090030

energy.2005.05.031

207–214.

CET1543077

RAS; 2016.

[2] Quoilina S., Van Den Broekb M., Declayea S. et al. Techno-economic survey of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2013;22: 168–186. DOI:

[3] Sikarwar V. S., Zhao M., Fennel P.S. et al. Progress in biofuel production from gasification. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. 2017;61:189– 248. DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2017.04.001

[4] Molino A., Larocca V., Chianese S., Musmarra D. Biofuels Production by Biomass Gasification: A Review. Energies. 2018;11:811–842. DOI:

[5] Wang L., Weller C.L., Jones D.D., Hanna M.A. Contemporary issues in thermal gasification of biomass and its application to electricity and fuel production. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2008;32:573–581. DOI: 10.1016/j.

[6] Sikarwar V. S., Zhao M., Clough P. et al. An overview of advances in biomass gasification. Energy & Environmental Science. 2016;9 (10):2927–3304. DOI: 10.1039/

[7] Geletuha G.G., ZHeleznaya T.A. Obzor tekhnologij gazifikacii biomassy (Review of biomass gasification technologies). Ekotekhnologii i resursosberezhenie. 1998;2:21–29.

[8] Neubauer Y. Strategies for Tar Reduction in Fuel-Gases and Synthesis-Gases from Biomass Gasification. Journal of Sustainable Energy & Environment Special Issue.

[Accessed: 2020-12-01]

10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.028

10.3390/en1104081

biombioe.2007.12.007

C6EE00935B

2011:67–71.

**63**

\*Address all correspondence to: oleggin2006@yandex.ru

© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96670*

## **References**

[1] Renewables 2019 Global Status Report [Internet]. 2020. Available from: https://www.ren21.net/gsr-2019/ [Accessed: 2020-12-01]

[2] Quoilina S., Van Den Broekb M., Declayea S. et al. Techno-economic survey of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2013;22: 168–186. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.028

[3] Sikarwar V. S., Zhao M., Fennel P.S. et al. Progress in biofuel production from gasification. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. 2017;61:189– 248. DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2017.04.001

[4] Molino A., Larocca V., Chianese S., Musmarra D. Biofuels Production by Biomass Gasification: A Review. Energies. 2018;11:811–842. DOI: 10.3390/en1104081

[5] Wang L., Weller C.L., Jones D.D., Hanna M.A. Contemporary issues in thermal gasification of biomass and its application to electricity and fuel production. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2008;32:573–581. DOI: 10.1016/j. biombioe.2007.12.007

[6] Sikarwar V. S., Zhao M., Clough P. et al. An overview of advances in biomass gasification. Energy & Environmental Science. 2016;9 (10):2927–3304. DOI: 10.1039/ C6EE00935B

[7] Geletuha G.G., ZHeleznaya T.A. Obzor tekhnologij gazifikacii biomassy (Review of biomass gasification technologies). Ekotekhnologii i resursosberezhenie. 1998;2:21–29.

[8] Neubauer Y. Strategies for Tar Reduction in Fuel-Gases and Synthesis-Gases from Biomass Gasification. Journal of Sustainable Energy & Environment Special Issue. 2011:67–71.

[9] Rios M.L.V., Gonzalez A.M., Lora E. E.S., Almazan del Olmo O.A. Reduction of tar generated during biomass gasification: A review. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2018;108:345–370. DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.12.002

[10] Chembukulam S.K et al. Smokeless fuel from carbonized sawdust. Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev. 1981, 20, 4, 714– 719. DOI: 10.1021/i300004a024

[11] Batenin V.M. et al. Thermal Methods of Reprocessing Wood and Peat for Power Engineering Purposes. Thermal Engineering. 2010;57(11):946– 952. DOI: 10.1134/S0040601510110066

[12] Batenin V.M., Zaichenko V.M., Kosov V.F., and Sinel'shchikov V.A. Pyrolytic Conversion of Biomass to Gaseous Fuel. Doklady Chemistry. 2012; 446(1):196–199. DOI: 10.1134/ S0012500812090030

[13] Henriksen U. et al. The Design, Construction and Operation of a 75 kW Two-Stage Gasifier. Energy. 2006;31 (10–11):1542–1553. DOI: 10.1016/j. energy.2005.05.031

[14] Bajus M. Pyrolysis of woody material. Petroleum & Coal. 2010:52(3): 207–214.

[15] Kosov V.F., Kosov V.V., Zaichenko V.M. Investigation of a twostage process of biomass gasification. Chemical Engineering Transactions. 2015;43:457–462. DOI: 10.3303/ CET1543077

[16] Lavrenov V.A. Eksperimental'noe issledovanie processa dvuhstadijnoj termicheskoj konversii drevesnoj biomassy v sintez-gaz (Experimental study of the process of two-stage thermal conversion of woody biomass into synthesis gas) [thesis]. Moscow: Joint Institute for High Temperatures RAS; 2016.

[17] Zaitchenko V.M., Lavrenov V.A., Sinelshchikov V.A. Study of characteristics of gaseous fuel produced by two-stage pyrolytic conversion of wood waste. Alternative Energy and Ecology (ISJAEE). 2016;(23–24):42–50. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.15518/ isjaee.2016.23-24.042-050

[18] Morf P., Hasler P., Nussbaumer T. Mechanisms and kinetics of homogeneous secondary reactions of tar from continuous pyrolysis of wood chips. Fuel. 2002;81:843–853. DOI: 0.1016/S0016–2361(01)00216–2

[19] Liu K., Song C., Subramani V. Hydrogen and Syngas Production and Purification Technologies. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010. 533 p.

[20] Lavrenov V.A., Larina O.M., Sinelshchikov V.A., and Sytchev G.A. Two-Stage Pyrolytic Conversion of Different Types of Biomass into Synthesis Gas. High Temperature. 2016; 54(6):892–898. DOI: 10.1134/ S0018151X16060092

[21] Kollerov L.K., Gazifikatsionnye kharakteristiki rastitel'nykh otkhodov (Gasification Characteristics of Plant Waste), Nikiforov V.V., Ed. Leningrad: Mashgiz; 1950.

[22] Zaitchenko V.M., Kosov V.F., Lavrenov V.A. Razrabotka sposobov uvelicheniya effektivnosti pererabotki biomassy v sintez gaz metodom dvuhstadijnoj termicheskoj konversii (Development of ways to increase the efficiency of biomass processing into synthesis gas by the method of twostage thermal conversion). In: Proceedings of the IV International Conference 'Renewable Energy: Problems and Prospects'; 21–24 September 2015; Makhachkala. Makhachkala; 2015;2:150–153.

[23] Kosov V.F., Lavrenov V.A., Zaitchenko V.M. Simulation of a process for the two-stage thermal conversion of biomass into the synthesis gas. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2015;653 (1):012031. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/ 653/1/012031

[24] Kachalov V.V., Lavrenov V.A., Lishchiner I.I. et al. Scientific bases of biomass processing into basic component of aviation fuel. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2016;774(1): 012136. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/774/1/ 012136

[25] Ershov M.A., Zaitchenko V.M., Kachalov V.V. et al. Synthesis of the base component of aviation gasoline from synthesis gas obtained from biomass. Ecology and Industry of Russia. 2016;20(12):25–29. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18412/1816-0395-2016-12-25-29

**65**

**Chapter 3**

**Abstract**

conventional fuel

**1. Introduction**

Co-Pyrolysis of Biomass Solid

Reduction of conventional fuel has encouraged to find new sources of renewable energy. Oil produced from the pyrolysis method using biomass is considered as an emerging source of renewable energy. Pyrolytic oil produced in pyrolysis needs to be upgraded to produce bio-oil that can be used with conventional fuel. However, pyrolytic oil contains high amounts of oxygen that lower the calorific value of fuel, creates corrosion, and makes the operation unstable. On the other hand, the upgradation process of pyrolytic oil involves solvent and catalyst material that requires a high cost. In this regard, the co-pyrolysis method can be used to upgrade the pyrolytic oil where two or more feedstock materials are involved. The calorific value and oil yield in the co-pyrolysis method are higher than pyrolytic oil. Also, the upgraded oil in the co-pyrolysis method contains low water that can improve the fuel property. Therefore, the co-pyrolysis of biomass waste is an emerging source of energy. Among different biomasses, solid waste and aquatic plants are significantly used as feedstock in the co-pyrolysis method. As a consequence, pressure on conventional fuel can be reduced to fulfill the demand for global energy. Moreover, the associated operating and production cost of the co-pyrolysis method is comparatively low. This

Waste and Aquatic Plants

*Md. Emdadul Hoque and Fazlur Rashid*

method also reduces environmental pollution.

tional fuel is to use renewable sources of energy [3, 6, 7].

**Keywords:** co-pyrolysis, pyrolytic oil, biomass solid waste, aquatic plants,

The reduction of conventional fuel sources such as coal, natural gas, and petroleum encourages to search for new sources of renewable energy. Previous literature predicts that coal would be the sole fossil fuel after 2042 [1]. On the other hand, the increase in fossil fuel prices and sustainable effects on the environment are the primary reasons for the use of alternate renewable energy [2–4]. A number of different ways are now underway to search for alternate sources of energy that are environmentally-friendly. However, environmental impact is more apparent after an environmental summit of the earth [5]. Therefore, to reduce environmental warming and pollution, it is required to control emissions produced by fossil fuels. The effective way of reducing environmental pollution and dependency on conven-

There are a number of different alternative sources of available energy that can be utilized to substitute conventional sources of energy. The selection of effective and efficient alternative sources of energy is important. In general, an alternate source of energy is suggested to select based on cost, availability, and

## **Chapter 3**
