Transcript
Co-pyrolysis of Simulated Municipal Paper Wastes and solid Wastes of Mustard Oil Mills – Optimization
of Energy Yield of Lab-Scale Pyrolyser through RSM (Response Surface Methodology) and LCA
(Life Cycle Assessment) of 100 t/d Plants
Aparna Sarkar, Prof. Ranjana ChowdhuryChemical Engineering Department, Jadavpur University
Kolkata 700 032
Presented by,Presented by,Aparna SarkarAparna Sarkar
Arrangement of the Lecture
• Background of the research study
• Objectives of the study
• Materials and methods
• Product yield of PW and MPC
• RSM
• Introduction of LCA methodology
• LCA analysis of pyrolysis plant
• Results and discussions
• Conclusion
Pyrolysis
Direct thermal decomposition of organic matrix in an inert atmosphere
Temperature range is 300˚C - 1000˚C
The product yield may be maximized by adjusting the operating conditions.
Background of the research studyBackground of the research study
Mechanism of pyrolysis of feed stock
Feed stockMSW of Kolkata (Generation rate:2653 t/d)1.Food and Garden wastes 40%,2.Textile 6%3.Paper wastes 27%4.Plastic wastes 4%, 5.Metals 3%,6.Glass and ceramic 5%,7.Inert 15% (CPHEEO manual on MSW management, 2005)
Background of the research study
Pyrolysis Feedstock: Paper Waste and Mustard Press Cake
Packing paper Newspaper Printing Paper (60%) (30%) (10%) Paper Waste Mustard Press Cake
Objectives of the study• Investigation on the performance of a laboratory scale semi-batch pyrolyser
for co-pyrolysis of Paper waste (PW) and mustard press cake (MPC) using the reactor temperature and the ratio of PW to MPC as parameters
• Development of a statistical model to predict the energy yield with respect to bio-oil as a function of temperature and the ratio of PW to MPC using RSM technique.
• Determination of the condition corresponding to maximum energy yield through Optimization.
• Life cycle analysis of a 100 tpd Co-pyrolysis plant for PW and MPC mixture at the maximum energy yield condition
• Comparison of the energy analysis and GHG emission data of the pyrolysis plant with those of conventional incineration plant for power generation
Proximate and Ultimate Analyses of Feed stocks
PW
Materials and Methods
Lab-scale Pyrolysis Experimental Set-Up
Materials and Methods
Product Yield
Statistical Modeling and Optimization through RSM
Energy Yield = + 51.72 + 0.77 * A – 10.21 * B – 0.88 * A * B + 2.50 * A2 – 15.40 * B2
Maximum energy yield: 56.5% (A: 8.8:1.0, B: 812 K)
Ratio of PW to MPC
Pyr
olys
is t
emp
erat
ure
(K)
Ratio of PW to MPC
Pyrolysis temperature(K)
Per
cen
tage
of
ener
gy y
ield
of
bio
-oil
LCA of 100 t/d pyrolysis plant operated at Maximum Energy Yield Condition (T:812K; PW:MPC:: 8.8:1.0
Phases of LCA
Goal and Scope
Goal and scope of LCAGo
System boundary of pyrolysis plant
system bou=System Boundaries for LCA
Unit Process and Inventory Analysis
Plant construction and dismantling and transportation of waste Materials required for plant construction and dismantling and fuel required for
transportation
Sl No Materials and diesel required
Amount required (tonne)
1. Concrete 390.0
2. Steel 190.50
3. Aluminium 1.90
4. Diesel 5.24
LCA analysis of pyrolysis plant
Pretreatment of simulated waste
)2(0.44**)/1(*)]**/(1[*,2 ccCEEactualdryingdyingCNMWGCVDPPECO
)1(]**)1(})*{([* 11 TcpWHTcpWME swVwwdrying
LCA analysis of pyrolysis plant
Slow Pyrolysis
)3()1()()1( HwMTTCWME dspypswpy
LCA analysis of pyrolysis plant
Utilization of Pyro-Char, Pyro-Oil and Pyro-GasUtilization of pyro-oil in power plant
LCA analysis of pyrolysis plant
)4(**
*
/
//
foilpyrocharpyro
oilpyrocharpyrooilpyroCharpyro
EGCV
WME
)5(0.44*]*
[*
/
/
//2
oilpyrocharpyro
oilpyrocharpyro
oilpyrocharpyrooilpyrocharpyro
CN
MW
WMCO
)6(*)]*
*(**[(
44 fCHCH
COCOGasGas
EGCVX
GCVXWME
)7(0.44*)(**
42 CHCOGas
GasGas XX
MW
WMCO
LCA analysis of pyrolysis plant
3.6 Incineration
)8(** ffeedstockfeedstock EGCVME
)9(44**/2 Nfeedstock CMWMCO
LCA analysis of pyrolysis plant
Results and Discussions
Energy input and GHG emission of two
pyrolysis options
Unit phase(input)
Energy used (GJ)
GHG emission (t CO2eq)
Plant construction
0.021 1.66
Transportation of waste sample
8.064 0.056
Drying 39.90 14.57
Pyrolysis 75.096 27.42
Pyro-oil transport (only for option
2)
5.0176 0.112
Transportation of waste to power
plant (incineration
8.064 0.056
Energy output of two pyrolysis options
Unit phase(output)
Energy generated (GJ)
Pyro-char and pyro-gas used for CHP steam generation
(both for option 1 and 2)
480.65
Pyro-oil used in DG plant
(option 1)
476.14
Pyro-oil used in power plant
(option 2)
349.25
Waste used directly (incineration) in
power plant
510
Results and discussions
Life Cycle Efficiency
)10(100*b
u
E
EEefficiencycycleLife
)11(100*
b
g
E
EefficiencycycleLife
IncinerationUpstream
Results and discussions
Net Energy RatioNet energy ratio estimated by using the following equation,
)12(ffE
EratioenergyNet
Results and discussion
Comparison of two pyrolysis options with incineration method
GHG emission avoided in two pyrolysis options and incineration method
Results and discussions
Conclusion
Maximum Energy yield of 56.5%, based on bio-oil, is obtained at pyrolysis temperature of 812 K and PW:MPC:: 8.8:1.0
The energy analysis and GHG emission data of two alternative processes have been interpreted and compared with the conventional option of incineration.
GHG performances of both pyrolysis schemes are better than the direct incineration process for power generation.
Although the life cycle efficiency of pyrolysis option (1) is the best among the three options the GHG emission avoided is the highest in case of pyrolysis option 2.
More analysis on parametric sensitivity will reveal the best option for the most practicable operation of the plant.
Thank You
top related