1. A 1-dimensional model for an atmospheric circulating fluidized bed biomass gasifier (CFBBG) under stationary state is presented in this paper.
2. The model includes kinetic equations for the reaction network, mass and heat balances, and hydrodynamic considerations.
3. The model can calculate axial profiles of concentration of ten different species and temperature to optimize both design and operation of CFBBGs.
The article "Modeling circulating fluidized bed biomass gasifiers. A pseudo-rigorous model for stationary state" presents a 1-dimensional model for an atmospheric circulating fluidized bed biomass gasifier (CFBBG) under stationary state. The model is based on kinetic equations for the reaction network solved together with mass and heat balances and several hydrodynamic considerations. The article aims to develop a valuable model for CFBBGs to optimize both design and operation.
The article provides a comprehensive review of the literature on modeling biomass gasification in fluidized beds, which is useful for understanding the context of the research. However, the authors acknowledge that there is a lack of accurate data in some areas, which led them to make several assumptions. As a result, the overall model has some empirical aspects and can be considered as semi-rigorous.
One potential bias in the article is that it focuses only on atmospheric CFBBGs with air as the gasifying agent, ignoring other types of gasifiers or gasifying agents. This narrow focus may limit the applicability of the model to other types of gasifiers or gasifying agents.
Another potential bias is that the authors rely heavily on their own kinetic data and published equations with some corrective factors, which may not accurately reflect real-world conditions. Additionally, they do not provide detailed information about how they obtained their kinetic data or how they validated their model against experimental data.
The article also lacks discussion of potential risks associated with CFBBGs, such as emissions of pollutants like particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. While these risks are mentioned briefly in passing, they are not explored in depth.
Overall, while the article provides a valuable contribution to the literature on modeling CFBBGs, its narrow focus and reliance on empirical data may limit its applicability to real-world conditions. Further research is needed to validate the model against experimental data and explore potential risks associated with CFBBGs more thoroughly.