**7. Case study on the recent gasification technology for MSW to electricity**

#### **7.1. Introduction of MSW gasification pilot plant in Korea**

The MSW gasification pilot plant in Korea, performed by the R&D project of the Korea Ministry of the Environment, was developed by the research team of the authors. This pilot gasification plant, installed in Y city of Korea, is composed of a fluff SRF manufacturing system and a fixed-bed gasification pilot system whose capacity is 8 tons/day. **Figure 8** shows the whole flow diagram of this plant. Generally, the economic efficiency of fluff SRF is higher than the economic efficiency of pelletized SRF due to skipping the pelletizing process. However, the fluff SRF created an issue for transporting and storage work because of its low density. In this process, manufactured fluff SRF was directly fed into the gasification process to overcome the transporting and storage problem.

system is composed of a cyclone, various scrubbers based on a wet system, and wet electric precipitation. All of the cleaning units except for the water used in the cyclone, which is recirculated by the water tank, and tar removal system for cleaning the produced gas. Lastly, the gas engine generator is installed for electricity production. For stable operation, this gas engine generator uses a low-speed gas engine that has a high-tolerance to tar and pollutants. The maximum power production of the gas engine is 300 kW but for stable power produc-

Gasification of Municipal Solid Waste http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.73685 135

For the stable operation of this gasification process, the process was controlled by various factors that affected operation. These conditions were selected so that the charging rate of the gasifier was 50–60% and ER was 0.17–0.36. **Figure 9** shows a representative performance test result of the gasification system. The gasification process was operated for 63 hours and shows stable operation trends for the production of syngas and electricity. Among these results, the heat-keeping and check on facility were included for continuous operation. Average syngas composition in the producer gas was about 20% and the heating value of the syngas was

tion, this is used at 100–250 kW.

**7.3. Performance of gasification system**

**Figure 9.** Reprehensive performance test results of the gasification system.

### **7.2. Configuration of gasification system**

This plant is divided into four sections, which are the feeding system, the gasifier, the cleaning system, and the gas engine generator. The feeding system is a two-step process of a conveyor for SRF transfer to the hopper and an input screw for continuous feeding into the gasifier. The gasifier is operated using a fixed-bed and downdraft concept. However, the gasifier can be converted to updraft depending on the operation conditions. The cleaning

**Figure 8.** Overall diagram of pilot-scale SRF manufacturing system and gasification process.

system is composed of a cyclone, various scrubbers based on a wet system, and wet electric precipitation. All of the cleaning units except for the water used in the cyclone, which is recirculated by the water tank, and tar removal system for cleaning the produced gas. Lastly, the gas engine generator is installed for electricity production. For stable operation, this gas engine generator uses a low-speed gas engine that has a high-tolerance to tar and pollutants. The maximum power production of the gas engine is 300 kW but for stable power production, this is used at 100–250 kW.

#### **7.3. Performance of gasification system**

For the stable operation of this gasification process, the process was controlled by various factors that affected operation. These conditions were selected so that the charging rate of the gasifier was 50–60% and ER was 0.17–0.36. **Figure 9** shows a representative performance test result of the gasification system. The gasification process was operated for 63 hours and shows stable operation trends for the production of syngas and electricity. Among these results, the heat-keeping and check on facility were included for continuous operation. Average syngas composition in the producer gas was about 20% and the heating value of the syngas was

**Figure 9.** Reprehensive performance test results of the gasification system.

**Figure 8.** Overall diagram of pilot-scale SRF manufacturing system and gasification process.

**7. Case study on the recent gasification technology for MSW to** 

The MSW gasification pilot plant in Korea, performed by the R&D project of the Korea Ministry of the Environment, was developed by the research team of the authors. This pilot gasification plant, installed in Y city of Korea, is composed of a fluff SRF manufacturing system and a fixed-bed gasification pilot system whose capacity is 8 tons/day. **Figure 8** shows the whole flow diagram of this plant. Generally, the economic efficiency of fluff SRF is higher than the economic efficiency of pelletized SRF due to skipping the pelletizing process. However, the fluff SRF created an issue for transporting and storage work because of its low density. In this process, manufactured fluff SRF was directly fed into the gasification process to overcome the

This plant is divided into four sections, which are the feeding system, the gasifier, the cleaning system, and the gas engine generator. The feeding system is a two-step process of a conveyor for SRF transfer to the hopper and an input screw for continuous feeding into the gasifier. The gasifier is operated using a fixed-bed and downdraft concept. However, the gasifier can be converted to updraft depending on the operation conditions. The cleaning

**7.1. Introduction of MSW gasification pilot plant in Korea**

**electricity**

134 Gasification for Low-grade Feedstock

transporting and storage problem.

**7.2. Configuration of gasification system**

1307 kcal/Nm3 . Also, the average power generation by the gas engine was 243 kW. Following this result, the MSW gasification shows sufficient possibility and stable operation trends. Particularly in the case of power production, and even though this plant was on a pilot scale, the gas engine generator shows good performance using syngas from a gasification system.

**References**

pp. 135-154p

[1] Klinghoffer NB, Castaldi MJ. 9–Gasification and Pyrolysis of Municipal Solid Waste

Gasification of Municipal Solid Waste http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.73685 137

[2] Beck RW. Iowa Statewide Waste Characterization Study [Internet]. 2006. Available from: https://www.google.co.kr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact =8&ved=0ahUKEwiirOrqvsnWAhWCwLwKHbfEDcAQFggqMAE&url=https%3A%2F %2Fwww.iowadnr.gov%2FPortals%2Fidnr%2Fuploads%2Fwaste%2Fwastechar05.pdf

[3] Tchobanoglous G, Theisen H, Vigil SA. Integrated Solid Waste Management: Engineering

[4] Young GC. Municipal Solid Waste to Energy Conversion Processes: Economic, Technical, and Renewable Comparisons. Vol. 2010. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2010.

[6] Di Blasi C. Dynamic behaviour of stratified downdraft gasifier. Chemical Engineering

[7] Hauserman WB et al. Biomass gasifiers for fuel cells systems. La Chimica e l'industria.

[8] Barducci G, Franchino R. The RDF gasifier of florentine area (Greve in chianti). I Simposio

[9] Baykara SZ, Bilgen E. A Feasibility Study on Solar Gasification of Albertan Coal.

[10] Bridgwater AV. Catalysis in thermal biomass conversion. Applied Catalysis A: General.

[11] Staniewski E. Gasification-the benefits of thermo chemical conversion over combustion.

[12] De Feo G et al. Solid wastes gasification. SIDISA international symposium on sanitary

[13] Paisley MA, Anson D. Biomass gasification for gas turbine-based power generation. Transactions-American Society of Mechanical Engineers Journal of Engineering for Gas

[14] Della Rocca C. I Processi e le Tecnologie di Gassificazione Delle Biomasse e dei Rifiuti Solidi [Civil Engineering Degree Thesis]. Universitadegli Studi di Salerno; 2001

[15] Knoef H. Practical Aspects of Biomass Gasification. Handbook of Biomass Gasification.

&usg=AFQjCNElkoeszk1PNFtmyIHGbJXHlGG91g [Accessed: 2017-09-29]

Principles and Management Issues. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1993. 978 p

Science. 2000, 2000;**55**:2931-2944. DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2509(99)00562-X

Italo-Brasiliano di Ingegneria Sanitaria-Ambientale SIBESA. 1992;**2**:80-94

Alternative Energy Sources IV. Vol. 6. New York: Ann Arbor Science; 1981

(MSW). Woodhead Publishing: Amsterdam; 2013. 146-176p

[5] Heat Treatment International. Michigan: Dutton; 2008

1997;**79**:199-206. DOI: 10.1016/S1359-4311(97)00116-6

1994;**116**:5-47. DOI: 10.1016/0926-860X(94)80278-5

and. Environmental Engineering. 2000

Turbines And Power. 1998;**120**:284-288

Enschede; 2005. pp. 13-37p

Hazardous Materials Management. October/November
