Question of the week: What type of coal is most suitable for various types of gasifiers?
Thread Content
It is undeniable that the domestic market is currently a testing ground for various gasification units; aside from coal water slurry technology, which is fairly mature, other technologies, especially powder coal gasification technology, are not particularly satisfactory. In my opinion, GE’s water-coal slurry technology and the four-nozzle system have firmly secured a three-way split of the market, or perhaps even more. The area where breakthroughs are likely to occur in the future is powder gasification; the party whose technology matures first will gain a competitive advantage and capture at least one-third of the gasification market. But students shouldn’t pay tuition for nothing; once the tuition is paid, they must thoroughly understand the material. So this week, I hope to discuss with everyone the issue of suitable coal types for gasification furnaces. I have always believed that there is no gasifier that is perfect in every aspect; just as no one is perfect, each gasifier has its own advantages. I hope that people will discuss the strengths of various gasifiers based on their own practical experience or theoretical knowledge. The following are just examples; the exact figures are not known. For instance, for Texaco, the ash content is below 10%, while the volatile content is 25% or so. For Shell, the ash content is around 15%; its application may be limited due to the requirements of slag-resistant technologies as well as issues related to ash accumulation. GSP, aerospace furnace, two-stage furnace, Tsinghua furnace, Ende furnace, U-GAS Keda furnace, and so on. Everyone is welcome to speak freely here; I will do my job well to help everyone earn more points.
Well, although I don’t understand that much yet, I’ll just watch for now and try to learn*
Reply to 2# milans1899: You can add it, hehe. I hope everyone will cheer on and speak actively
Actually, the dust accumulation problem with Shell is no longer a major issue. Methods such as the coal blending concept, back-blowing renovation, and increasing the vibration frequency can be utilized. It has been basically resolved in many factories.
Reply to 5# lymhgbin: That’s good. Isn’t there also an issue of adaptability regarding different types of coal? Not all types of coal can be used. Blending coal is a good method.
For various furnace types, the key is stable coal quality. Sasol in South Africa has invested a great deal of effort in coal blending and homogenization, with the goal of minimizing the variation in coal quality between successive batches fed into the furnace. Even on stoves in South Africa, with all those years of experience, if the quality of coal is unstable, it takes a long time to get the operation under control.
For various furnace types, the key is stable coal quality. Sasol in South Africa has invested a great deal of effort in coal blending and homogenization, with the goal of minimizing the variation in coal quality between successive batches fed into the furnace. Even on stoves in South Africa, with all those years of experience, if the quality of coal is unstable, it takes a long time to get the operation under control.
This post was last edited by lymhgbin on 2010-11-23 09:46. Reply to 6# rhinocao: Shell uses pressurized transportation of pulverized coal; slurry coal cannot be used. It is best to choose coal with a not-too-high calorific value in order to reduce its ash fusion point.
BGL can gasify lignite with high moisture and ash content; higher-quality coal works even better
Stable coal quality is crucial, and this is even more important for Shell; if fluctuations lead to slag collapse, there is a probability of over 90% that slag blockage will occur.