Comparison of Biomass To Bio-Oils Reactor Systems Direct Conversion vs. Companion Coal Gasification

CHE 656: Process Analysis and Modeling I
Comparison of Biomass to Bio-oils Reactor Systems: Direct Conversion vs. Companion

Coal Gasification
By
Pothiwan Lakonpon 63070700109

Manassawin Phetbuasak 63070700113
Wuttichai Yingcharoenmak 63070700115
Technical Advisor: Asst. Prof. Dr. Hong-Ming Ku
English Advisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Asawin Meechai
The Chemical Engineering Practice School
King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi

Preface
This report is a part of Process Analysis and Modeling I (CHE 656). The purpose of this
report is to provide the design process of petrochemical plant that relates with integration of
practical knowledge of chemical engineering base on safety and economic.
Bio-oil is a synthetic fuel under investigation as a substitute for petroleum. Bio-oil is not
only used as fuel in the boiler, or engine but also used in a turbine for heat and power generation
that produces electrical energy. Moreover, bio-oil can be upgraded to transportation fuel and
chemicals. Bio-oil production processes can be produced in many ways; the direct conversion
process and the companion coal gasification process are compared feasibility in this report. Both
production processes are designed to produce the bio-oil at 50,000 tons/yr. This report describes
the details of the bio-oil production processes that are divided into seven chapters including
introduction, theory and literature review, methodology, simulation and results, size and cost
estimation, economic analysis, and conclusion and suggestion. We hope those who go through it
will find it useful and worth learning.
I
Abstract
Bio-oil is a type of fuel that can substitute for petroleum. It has many advantages, for an
instant, it can be used in electrical generation. Bio-oil can be produced by biomass pyrolysis, but
it uses a lot of utilities. Hence, this project aimed to compare the feasibility of bio-oil production
processes. The first process is the direct conversion process which converted biomass to bio-oil by
pyrolysis reaction directly. The second process is the companion coal gasification process in which
the heat from the gasification is sent to the pyrolysis reactor to reduce the utilities of the process.
The direct conversion process was divided into four sections which are biomass feed
preparation section, biomass pyrolysis section, bio-oil purification section, and heat recovery
section. For the companion coal gasification process looks like the direct conversion process, but
it has two more sections. The first section is the coal feed preparation section where the coal was
crushed and sent to the next section where the coal was entered the gasifier to produce the heat
used in the pyrolysis section.
Moreover, equipment sizing, and costing were carried out to evaluate the economic
feasibility for both processes. As a result, the direct conversion process has a fixed capital
investment (FCI) cost of 51,387,000 USD. For companion coal gasification, FCI was 25,279,000
USD. Ultimately, the economic analysis was performed to evaluate the profitability of both plants.
Assume that, it required 2 years of construction and had a lifetime of 20 years. Therefore, the
payback period (PBP) was 8 years 11 months and 3 years 9 months for direct conversion and
companion coal gasification process, respectively. The internal rate of return (IRR) was 18.6%
and 58.7% for the direct conversion process and the companion coal gasification process. The
equivalent annual operating cost (EAOC) was -4,020,000 USD/yr and -10,544,000 USD/yr for the
direct conversion process and the companion coal gasification process, respectively. The values of
these profitability criteria showed that a companion coal gasification process has more attractive
to investment.
II
Table of contents
Page
Preface I
Abstract II
Table of contents III
List of figures VII
List of tables IX
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background of bio-oil 1
1.2 Use of bio-oil 3
1.3 Problem statement 4
1.4 Objectives 4
1.5 Scope of work 5
Chapter 2 Theory and literature review 6
2.1 Definition and properties of the bio-oil 6
2.2 Process description 7
2.2.1 Direct conversion process 7
2.2.2 Companion coal gasification process 8
2.3 Pyrolysis of biomass 8
2.4 Literature review 10
2.4.1 Pyrolysis process comparison 10
2.4.2 Pyrolysis reactor comparison 10
2.4.3 Typical parameters of gasifiers 11
Chapter 3 Methodology 12
3.1 Methodology 12
3.1.1 Design a preliminary process flowsheet and perform simulation 12
3.1.2 Improve the preliminary process flowsheet and perform simulation 12
3.1.3 Estimate of the size and cost of main equipment 13
3.1.4 Perform an economic evaluation 13
III
Page
3.2 Work plan 13
Chapter 4 Simulation and results 15
4.1 Types of the operation 15
4.2 Input-output structure 15
4.3 Property methods selection 17
4.4 Simulation of the process 18
4.4.1.1 Biomass feed preparation section 18
4.4.1.2 Biomass pyrolysis section 19
4.4.1.3 Bio-oil purification section 20
4.4.1.4 Heat recovery section 21
4.4.1.5 Mass and energy balance 22
4.4.1.6 Stream summary 23
4.4.2.1 Coal feed preparation section 27
4.4.2.2 Coal gasification section 28
4.4.2.3 Biomass feed preparation section 29
4.4.2.4 Biomass pyrolysis section 30
4.4.2.5 Bio-oil purification section 31
4.4.2.6 Syngas purification section 32
4.4.2.7 Mass and energy balance 33
4.4.2.8 Stream summary 34
Chapter 5 Size and cost estimation 40
5.1 Equipment analysis 40
5.1.1 Crusher 40
5.1.2 Cyclone 41
IV
Page
5.1.3 Vessel 41
5.1.4 Reactor 42
5.1.5 Heat exchanger 43
5.1.6 Separation column 43
5.1.7 Pump 44
5.1.8 Compressor 44
5.2 Costing calculation 45
Chapter 6 Economic analysis 47
6.1 Total capital investment 47
6.2 Cost of manufacturing 48
6.2.1 Direct costs 48
6.2.2 Fixed costs 49
6.2.3 General expenses 49
6.3 Economic evaluation 54
6.3.1 Cash flow diagram 56
6.3.2 Equivalent annual operating cost 61
Chapter 7 Conclusion and suggestion 63
7.1 Conclusion 63
7.2 Suggestion 63
References 65
Appendix A Cost and selling price 68
Appendix B Equipment sizing and costing 69
B.1 Pump 69
B.1.1 Pump sizing 69
B.1.2 Pump costing 73
B.2 Simple separation column 77
B.2.1 Simple separation column sizing 77
B.2.2 Simple separation column costing 81
V
Page
B.3 Compressor 84
B.3.1 Compressor sizing 84
B.3.2 Compressor costing 87
B.4 Cyclone 90
B.4.1 Cyclone sizing 90
B.4.2 Cyclone costing 97
B.5 Crusher 99
B.5.1 Crusher sizing 99
B.5.2 Crusher costing 101
B.6 Reactor 102
B.6.1 Reactor sizing 102
B.6.2 Reactor costing 105
B.7 Heat exchanger 108
B.7.1 Heat exchanger sizing 108
B.7.2 Heat exchanger costing 114
B.8 Vessel 117
B.8.1 Vessel sizing 117
B.8.2 Vessel costing 123
Appendix C Utility costs 126
Appendix D Economic calculation 127
D.1 Depreciation 127
D.2 Revenue 129
D.3 Taxation, cash flow and profit 129
D.4 Discount factors 130
D.5 Payback period 130
D.6 Internal rate of return 131
D.7 Equivalent annual operating cost 133
VI
List of figures
Page
Figure 1.1 World petroleum consumption 1
Figure 1.2 The major energy consumption in the United States 2
Figure 1.3 The renewable energy consumption in the United States 2
Figure 1.4 The bio-oil applications 3
Figure 1.5 Process structures of a.) Direct conversion process, and b.) Companion
4
coal gasification process
Figure 2.1 The schematic of the direct conversion process from the Ensyn technology 7
Figure 2.2 The schematic of the companion coal gasification process 8
Figure 4.1 The block flow diagram of the direct conversion process 16
Figure 4.2 The block flow diagram of the companion coal gasification process 17
Figure 4.3 The process flow diagram of the biomass feed preparation section in the
18
direct conversion process
Figure 4.4 The process flow diagram of the biomass pyrolysis section in the direct
19
conversion process
Figure 4.5 The process flow diagram of the bio-oil purification section in the direct
20
conversion process
Figure 4.6 The process flow diagram of the heat recovery section in the direct
21
conversion process
Figure 4.7 The mass balance of the direct conversion process 22
Figure 4.8 The overall process flow diagram of the direct conversion process 23
Figure 4.9 The process flow diagram of the coal feed preparation section in the
27
companion coal gasification process
Figure 4.10 The process flow diagram of the coal gasification section in the
28
Figure 4.11 The process flow diagram of the biomass feed preparation section in the
29
Figure 4.12 The process flow diagram of the biomass pyrolysis section in the
30
Figure 4.13 The process flow diagram of the bio-oil purification section in the
31
VII
Page
Figure 4.14 The process flow diagram of the syngas purification section in the
32
Figure 4.15 The mass balance of the companion coal gasification process 33
Figure 4.16 The overall process flow diagram of the companion coal gasification
34
process
Figure 6.1 Discounted cumulative cash flow diagram of the direct conversion process 59
Figure 6.2 Discounted cumulative cash flow diagram of the companion coal
61
gasification process
Figure B.1 Type of pump selection 69
Figure B.2 Material factors of the pump 74
Figure B.3 Material factors of the simple separation column 82
Figure B.4 Bare module cost factors of the compressor 88
Figure B.5 Dimensions of the cyclone 96
Figure B.6 Summary of crushing work index tests 100
Figure B.7 The cost curve of the crusher 101
Figure B.8 Material factors of the reactor 106
Figure B.9 Temperature driving force profile for E-101 109
Figure B.10 Material factors of the heat exchanger 115
Figure B.11 Material factors of the vessel 124
VIII
List of tables
Page
Table 2.1 ASTM D7544 physicochemical properties of bio-oil 6
Table 2.2 Pyrolysis yields from the experiment 9
Table 2.3 Pseudo-components defined in the biomass pyrolysis process 9
Table 2.4 Pyrolysis process comparison 10
Table 2.5 Pyrolysis reactor comparison 11
Table 2.6 Typical parameters of gasifiers 11
Table 3.1 The detailed work plan 14
Table 4.1 The destination codes of streams for the direct conversion process 16
Table 4.2 The destination codes of streams for the companion coal gasification
17
process
Table 4.3 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass feed
19
preparation section in the direct conversion process
Table 4.4 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass pyrolysis
20
section in the direct conversion process
Table 4.5 The description and input data of the equipment of the bio-oil
21
purification section in the direct conversion process
22
purification section in the direct conversion process
Table 4.7 The stream summary of the direct conversion process 24
Table 4.8 The heat duty required for each equipment in direct conversion process 27
Table 4.9 The description and input data of the equipment of the coal feed
28
preparation section in the companion coal gasification process
Table 4.10 The description and input data of the equipment of the coal gasification
29
section in the companion coal gasification process
Table 4.11 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass feed
30
preparation section in the companion coal gasification process
Table 4.12 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass
31
pyrolysis section in the companion coal gasification process
32
purification section in the companion coal gasification process
IX
Page
Table 4.14 The description and input data of the syngas purification section in the
33
Table 4.15 The stream summary of the companion coal gasification process 35
Table 4.16 The heat duty required for each equipment in the companion coal
39
Table 5.1 Summary of equipment sizing 40
Table 5.2 The crusher sizing results 41
Table 5.3 The cyclone sizing results 41
Table 5.4 The vessel sizing results 42
Table 5.5 The reactor sizing results 42
Table 5.6 The heat exchangers sizing results 43
Table 5.7 The separation column sizing results 44
Table 5.8 The pump sizing results 44
Table 5.9 The compressor sizing results 45
Table 5.10 The equipment cost and installation cost in the direct conversion
45
process
Table 5.11 The equipment cost and installation cost in the companion coal
46
Table 6.1 Plant costs estimated from delivered equipment cost 47
Table 6.2 Total capital investment summary of both processes 48
Table 6.3 List of the cost of manufacturing 49
Table 6.4 Determination of the operating labor requirement of both processes 51
Table 6.5 Number of operating labors and operating labors cost of both processes 52
Table 6.6 Utility cost of both processes 52
Table 6.7 Ash disposal cost of both processes 53
Table 6.8 Raw material cost of both processes 53
Table 6.9 Total cost of all parameters for calculating cost of manufacturing 53
Table 6.10 Discounted rate 55
Table 6.11 MACRS’s ratio for calculate depreciation cost 56
X
Page
Table 6.12 Cash flow analysis of the direct conversion process 58
Table 6.13 Cash flow analysis of the companion coal gasification process 60
Table 6.14 Equivalent annual operating cost of both processes 62
Table A.1 The price of raw materials, products, and utility 68
Table B.1 Information of the pump 69
Table B.2 The Antoine’s equation constants of water 72
Table B.3 The constants for Bare module factor of the pump 73
Table B.4 The identification number of the pump 74
Table B.5 Pressure factors of the pump 75
Table B.6 Equipment cost data of the pump 75
Table B.7 Information of the simple separation column 77
Table B.8 Maximum allowable stress of the simple separation column 79
Table B.9 Welded joint efficiency of the simple separation column 79
Table B.10 Minimum practical wall thickness of the simple separation column 80
Table B.11 Thickness of the simple separation column 80
Table B.12 Constants for Bare module factor of the simple separation column 81
Table B.13 The identification number of the simple separation column 81
Table B.14 Equipment cost data of the simple separation column 83
Table B.15 Information of the compressor 84
Table B.16 The guidelines for choosing the proper number of stages 85
Table B.17 Piston displacement per 100 RPM for each compressor model 86
Table B.18 The identification number of the compressor 88
Table B.19 Equipment cost data of the compressor 89
Table B.20 Standard cyclone geometries for a tangential inlet 90
Table B.21 Input data of the cyclone 99
Table B.22 Control panel of the cyclone 95
Table B.23 Calculations of the dimensions of the cyclone 95
Table B.24 Bare module cost factors of the cyclone 97
XI
Page
Table B.25 Equipment cost data of the cyclone 98
Table B.26 Information of the reactor 102
Table B.27 Maximum allowable stress of the reactor 103
Table B.28 Welded joint efficiency of the reactor 104
Table B.29 Minimum practical wall thickness of the reactor 104
Table B.30 Thickness of the reactor 105
Table B.31 Constants for Bare module factor of the reactor 106
Table B.32 The identification number of the reactor 106
Table B.33 Equipment cost data of the reactor 107
Table B.34 Preliminary data of the heat exchanger 108
Table B.35 Estimated heat transfer area (No fouling factor) 110
Table B.36 Type of each heat exchanger 111
Table B.37 Fouling factor 112
Table B.38 Overall heat transfer coefficient and heat transfer area 113
Table B.39 Material of the heat exchanger 114
Table B.40 Constants for Bare module factor of the heat exchanger 114
Table B.41 Identification number of the heat exchanger 115
Table B.42 Pressure factors of the heat exchanger 116
Table B.43 Data of sizing vessel V-101 119
Table B.44 Maximum allowable stress of the vessel 121
Table B.45 Welded joint efficiency of the vessel 121
Table B.46 Minimum practical wall thickness of the vessel 122
Table B.47 Thickness of the vessel 122
Table B.48 Constants for Bare module factor of the vessel 123
Table B.49 The identification number of the vessel 123
Table B.50 Equipment cost data of the vessel 124
Table C.1 Determination of the utilities cost in the direct conversion process 126
Table C.2 Determination of the utilities cost in the companion coal gasification
126
process
XII
Page
Table D.1 Depreciation schedule for MACRS’s method 127
Table D.2 Determination of depreciation by MACRS’s method of the direct
128
conversion process
Table D.3 Determination of depreciation by MACRS’s method of the companion
128
Table D.4 Revenue of the direct conversion process 129
Table D.5 Revenue of the companion coal gasification process 129
Table D.6 Evaluation of cash flow 129
Table D.7 Commonly used factors for cash flow diagram calculations 130
Table D.8 Cumulative discounted cash flow of the direct conversion process 131
Table D.9 Cumulative discounted cash flow of the companion coal gasification
132
process
XIII
Chapter 1
Introduction
In this chapter presents a view on the background and application of bio-oil. Moreover, the
chapter notifies objectives and scope of this project.
1.1 Background of bio-oil
From world petroleum consumption, the United States of America is the most petroleum
consumer in the world. It is about 30% of the total petroleum consumption [1], as shown in figure
1.1.
Figure 1.1 World petroleum consumption [1]
The United States Energy Information Administration (EIA) told that the major energy
consumption in the United States were petroleum and natural gas [1]. The major energy
consumption in the United States is shown in figure 1.2.
1
Figure 1.2 The major energy consumption in the United States [1]
In many recent years, the petroleum and natural gas importation had been decreasing. On
the other hand, renewable energy had been continuously increasing for 20 years as shown in figure
1.3.
Figure 1.3 The renewable energy consumption in the United States [1]
2
Renewable energy has many types, and bio-oil is the one of the most important energy.
Bio-oil is a synthetic fuel under investigation as substitute for petroleum. It is obtained by heating
dried biomass (such as wood chip, sugar cane, corn stover and rice straw) without oxygen in a
reactor at a temperature of about 500°C. Bio-oil is a kind of tar and normally contains levels of
oxygen too high to be considered a pure hydrocarbon. This high oxygen content results in non-
volatility, corrosiveness, immiscibility with fossil fuels, thermal instability, and a tendency to
polymerize when exposed to air. As such, it is distinctly different from petroleum products.
Removing oxygen from bio-oil or nitrogen from algal bio-oil is known as upgrading which can be
upgraded to fuels and many chemicals [2].
1.2 Use of bio-oil
The main application of bio-oil is fuel in boiler, engine, and turbine for heat and power
generations that produce electrical energy. Moreover, bio-oil can be upgraded to transportation
fuel and chemicals such as resins, fertilizer, flavors, and adhesive [3].
Figure 1.4 The bio-oil applications [3]
3
1.3 Problem statement
Bio-oil can be produced from many ways, but the most commonly production process is a
direct conversion process. The direct conversion process is the process that converts biomass to
bio-oil with a pyrolysis reaction directly. However, this process uses a lot of utility for a pyrolysis
reaction to achieve a desired product. Therefore, the companion coal gasification process is
developed to reduce the utility by using a heat from the coal gasification.
Figure 1.5 Process structures of a.) Direct conversion process, and b.) Companion coal
1.4 Objectives
1. To design and simulate chemical processes for producing 50,000 tons/yr of bio-oil from
biomass by using the direct conversion process and the companion coal gasification process.
2. To compare the cost-saving and profitability of the direct conversion process and the
companion coal gasification process.
4
1.5 Scope of work
1. ASPEN Plus V8.8 is used to simulate the direct conversion process and the companion
coal gasification process.
2. The production rate of bio-oil is 50,000 tons/yr by using pine wood chips as a raw
material.
3. Bio-oil from both processes must be typical properties from ASTM D7544 [4].
4. Sizing and costing of all main equipment in these production processes are performed.
5. Economic evaluation is performed to analyze and determine a profit of both production

processes.
5
Chapter 2
Theory and literature review
The theory of the bio-oil production involves the definition and properties of the bio-oil,
the pyrolysis information, and the process description. Additionally, this chapter discusses the
literature review and compares conditions each of literatures.
2.1 Definition and properties of the bio-oil
Bio-oil, or pyrolysis oil, is a liquid biofuel produced by biomass pyrolysis: rapid heating
and rapid quenching of biomass to form a liquid. As liquefied biomass it is more easily pumped,
stored, fed to useful processes, and more compatible to chemical modification, processing, or
extraction. Bio-oil has properties that are dissimilar to petroleum oil, including [5]:
- Primarily comprising polar molecules, it is not miscible with polar petroleum oils.
- Contains water up to 20 to 30% and higher density than water.
- The compounds contain oxygen, up to 40% by weight, thus lower heating value.
- Acidic and reactive compounds that can react over time, faster with heat.
For the commercial, the properties of bio-oil should be following ASTM D7544 as shown
in table 2.1.
Table 2.1 ASTM D7544 physicochemical properties of bio-oil [4]
Properties ASTM D7544

Gross calorific value (MJ/kg) 15 min
pH -
Kinematic viscosity (cSt) at 40oC 125 max
Density (kg/dm3) at 20oC 1.1-1.3
Pyrolysis solid content (%wt.) 2.5 max
Water content (%wt.) 30 max
Sulfur content (%wt.) 0.05 max
Ash content (%wt.) 0.25 max
Flash point (oC) 45 min
Pour point (oC) -9 max
6
2.2 Process description
This project has to two processes: the direct conversion process and the companion coal
gasification process because the aim of this project would like to compare the cost-saving and
profitability of both processes.
2.2.1 Direct conversion process
Figure 2.1 shows a process flow schematic of the Ensyn Rapid Thermal Processing unit
(RTP) which the heart of this system is a transported bed reactor which contacts hot recirculated
sand with biomass in an up flow reactor. In all systems, biomass is comminuted to 6 mm and dried
to not more than 10% moisture before feeding to the reactor. The products are passed through two
cyclones to separate solids, then the vapor is rapidly quenched and cooled in a multiple stage
system. The total residence time of the hot vapors can be controlled down to a few hundred
milliseconds which “freezes” the thermally unstable liquid intermediates of pyrolysis. These very
low residence times are used for chemical production, while longer residence times are used for
liquid fuels in order to completely crack the lignin [6].
Figure 2.1 The schematic of the direct conversion process from the Ensyn technology [6]
7
2.2.2 Companion coal gasification process
Figure 2.2 shows the schematic of the companion coal gasification process. The process
starts from coal is pyrolyzed (perhaps the Texaco process is economically preferred) at a pressure
of 44 bar (650 psia) and 1,370°C. The hot gases from the coal pyrolysis are then rapidly mixed
with a water/biomass slurry feed at the proper ratio to lower the temperature to 500°C, where the
biomass will rapidly pyrolyze to bio-oil, char, and gases. Rapid condensation of the off gases from
the biomass pyrolysis reactor will condense the bio-oil. The produced gases will then be sent to a
Fischer-Tropsch reactor or any other beneficial use device [6].
Figure 2.2 The schematic of the companion coal gasification process [6]
2.3 Pyrolysis of biomass
This project uses a fast pyrolysis process to convert biomass to bio-oil because this process
provides high product oil yield and short residence time [7]. Pyrolysis products are obtained in all
phases: gas, liquid, and solid. The gas product contains CO, CO2, H2, CH4, and light hydrocarbons.
The liquid product consists of an organic phase and an aqua phase: the organic phase is a mixture
of different organic compounds within a wide range of molecular weights and boiling points, and
the aqua phase can be water. Solid product, the so-called biochar, consists mainly of fixed carbon,
ash, and some volatiles. Experimental measurements realized below 550°C and the pyrolysis yield
and gas composition given in table 2.2, where the organic tar yield is shown to be fractionated into
five fractions based on their average boiling point as shown in table 2.3.
8
Table 2.2 Pyrolysis yields from the experiment [7]
Component Yield (kg/kgBiomass)

Char 0.2
Tar1 0.04
Tar2 0.08
Tar3 0.12
Tar4 0.12
Tar5 0.04
H2O 0.1
CO 0.05435
CO2 0.13285
CH4 0.02588
H2 0.004313
Ethane 0.032351
Propane 0.2372
n-Butane 0.01251
i-Butane 0.00625
Pentane 0.00776
Table 2.3 Pseudo-components defined in the biomass pyrolysis process [7]
Mass fraction Average boiling point Average density

Tar ID
(kg/kgTar) (oC) (kg/m3)
Tar1 0.1 75.0 822
Tar2 0.2 175.0 894
Tar3 0.3 275.0 955
Tar4 0.3 375.0 1,000
Tar5 0.1 700.0 1,162
9
2.4 Literature review
2.4.1 Pyrolysis process comparison [7]
Table 2.4 is shown the information to compare the pyrolysis processes that consist of slow,
fast, and flash pyrolysis. This process prefers high oil product yield to char and gas product yield.
Therefore, fast and flash pyrolysis are considered for a bio-oil production. Then, the heating rate
between both processes are considered, the flash pyrolysis requires a very high heating rate that
means it requires high energy to converse biomass to bio-oil. Therefore, the fast pyrolysis is
selected for this project.
Table 2.4 Pyrolysis process comparison [7]
2.4.2 Pyrolysis reactor comparison [8]
This literature classifies the pyrolysis reactor into bubbling fluidized bed, circulating
fluidized bed, rotating cone, and vacuum reactor. The circulating fluidized bed is selected for the
bio-oil production process because of high production rate, oil product yield, heat transfer rate.
10
Table 2.5 Pyrolysis reactor comparison [8]
2.4.3 Typical parameters of gasifiers [9]
This paper compares four technologies of a gasification process: Shell, Texaco, BGL, and
KRW. Literature recommends Texaco technology which use an entrained bed reactor with slurry
feeding because the Texaco gasifier produces the highest ratio of hydrogen to carbon dioxide. It
will be used as the gasifier which supplies hot gases to heat the biomass to reaction temperature.
Table 2.6 Typical parameters of gasifiers [9]
11
Chapter 3
Methodology
This chapter consists of methodology that explains the process of work and strategies to
achieve purposes of this project and the work plan which helps a project manage workflow and
milestone deadlines.
3.1 Methodology
3.1.1 Design a preliminary process flowsheet and perform simulation
Before designing the process flowsheet, the direct conversion process and the companion
coal gasification process needed to be understood in order to carry out the simulation. Biomass
was used as a raw material in both processes. The bio-oil must be typical properties from ASTM
D7544 [4]. Literature reviews were needed to gather useful information about both production
processes. The required information was process operating conditions and raw materials.
Furthermore, the price of the substance such as raw material, product, and utility was collected in
this step as well.
The process was designed based on literature review’s information to determine mass
balance and energy balance using ASPEN Plus V8.8. In order to achieve the objectives, the direct
conversion process was divided into four sections: biomass feed preparation section, biomass
pyrolysis section, bio-oil purification section, and heat recovery section. The companion coal
gasification was divided into six sections: coal feed preparation section, coal gasification section,
biomass feed preparation, biomass pyrolysis section, bio-oil purification section, and syngas
purification section.
3.1.2 Improve the preliminary process flowsheet and perform simulation
The improved process flowsheet was performed by using the information from the problem
statement and literatures. Then, the flow rate of the feedstock was used to calculate the mass
balance to obtain the bio-oil production rate of 50,000 tons/yr. The operating conditions were
obtained from problem statement, literatures, and journals.
12
3.1.3 Estimate of the size and cost of main equipment
The size of all main equipment was calculated by ASPEN Capital Cost Estimator which
used the data from process simulations. For the cost of investment, the calculation was
approximated from the size of equipment. After that, purchasing cost and installation cost of
equipment were obtained from Excel program which was based on the Bare module’s method.
3.1.4 Perform an economic evaluation
The feasibility of investment was assessed by internal rate of return (IRR), payback period
(PBP), and equivalent annual operating cost (EAOC) as shown in equation 3.1 and equation 3.2.
EAOC = - ( Product value - Cost of manufacturing - Cost annuity ) Equation 3.1
i (1 + i )
n
Capital Cost Annuity (CCA) = FCI Equation 3.2

(1 + i )
n
-1
This step focuses on the profitability of both production processes. There were mainly three
parameters that had to be concerned. Firstly, cash flow analysis was needed to find the revenue,
cost of manufacture, and profit in each year. Secondly, the PBP was the length of time required to
recover the cost of investment. Finally, the IRR was the interest rate that makes net present value
(NPV) equals to zero.
3.2 Work plan
A work plan described the plan of this project to be accomplish and the strategies used to
achieve the objectives. The work plan consists of five steps as shown in table 3.1.
13
Table 3.1 The detailed work plan
Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week

Milestone
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Problem understanding and flowsheet synthesis
1.1 Problem definition
1.2 Literature review
1.3 Description of the process
2. Mass and energy balances
2.1 Reactor design
2.2 Reaction kinetics and thermodynamics
2.3 Separation processes
2.4 Complete overall mass and energy balances
3. Equipment sizing and costing
3.1 Complete heat exchanger network and utilities
3.2 Equipment specifications
3.3 Cost estimates (Equipment cost, Manufacturing
cost, General expense)
4. Economic evaluation and final presentation
4.1 Cash flow analysis
4.2 Net present value, payback period and internal
rate of return analysis
4.3 Complete final report
14
Chapter 4
Simulation and results
In this chapter, the process simulation, and results of both processes from ASPEN Plus
V8.8 were performed. In addition, it also consisted of types of the operation, input-output structure,
property methods selection.
4.1 Types of the operation
In chemical industries, there are two types of production processes which are continuous
and batch processes. If the production rate is more than 450 tons/yr, a continuous process should
be used. The goal for both processes was to achieve more than 50,000 tons/yr of bio-oil. As a
result, a continuous process was chosen for both processes.
4.2 Input-output structure
Input-output structure is used to define the type of each streams whether it is a reactant, a
product or a recycle stream.
The direct conversion process consists of four sections which are biomass feed preparation
section, biomass pyrolysis section, bio-oil purification section, and heat recovery section. In the
biomass feed preparation section, biomass is fed to the crusher for reduce the particle size before
it is sent to the biomass pyrolysis section where the biomass is converted to bio-oil. Then, the
effluent of this section which one stream contains the char is sent to the heat recovery section and
another stream is bio-vapor is sent to the bio-oil purification section for separating the bio-oil from
the water and the waste gas. After that, the waste gas is sent to the heat recovery section where
char, air, and waste gas are combusted to the exhaust gas and used to produce a steam. The block
flow diagram (BFD) of the entire process is shown in figure 4.1.
15
Figure 4.1 The block flow diagram of the direct conversion process
Table 4.1 The destination codes of streams for the direct conversion process
Component Classification Destination code

Bio-oil Primary product Primary product
Water Secondary product By-product
Solid waste Secondary product Waste
Exhaust gas Secondary product Waste
Wet biomass Reactant Reactant
Air Reactant Reactant
Waste gas Secondary product Recycle
The companion coal gasification process consists of six sections which are coal feed
preparation section, coal gasification section, biomass feed preparation section, biomass pyrolysis
section, bio-oil purification section, and syngas purification section. In the coal feed preparation
section, coal is fed to the crusher for reduce the particle size and mixed with the water to form
a slurry before sent to the coal gasification section which the coal reacted with the oxygen and
converted to hot syngas. Then, the effluent of this section which contains the hot syngas is sent to
the biomass pyrolysis section for heating up the biomass. After that, the effluent of this section
which one stream contains the char is sent back to the coal gasification section and another stream
is bio-vapor is sent to the bio-oil purification section where obtained the bio-oil. The last section
is the syngas purification section which separates the syngas and waste gas. The block flow
diagram of the entire process is shown in figure 4.2.
16
Figure 4.2 The block flow diagram of the companion coal gasification process
Table 4.2 The destination codes of streams for the companion coal gasification process
Component Classification Destination code

Bio-oil Primary product Primary product
Syngas Secondary product Secondary product
Waste gas Secondary product Waste
Ash Secondary product Waste
Purge gas Secondary product Waste
Wet biomass Reactant Reactant
Oxygen Reactant Reactant
Water Reactant Reactant
Coal Reactant Reactant
4.3 Property methods selection
In order to achieve the accurate simulation results, a suitable thermodynamic method was
needed. The selection of the property method was done by considering the components and the
conditions in the process.
Biomass is defined as a non-conventional compound due to its heterogeneous nature. Thus,

it does not participate in phase or chemical equilibrium calculations unless it is converted into its
conventional compounds. Representation of non-conventional materials is mostly provided by the
respective component attributes based on its proximate and ultimate analyses. The most commonly
property methods in gasification modeling are the Peng-Robinson cubic equation-of-state (PENG-
ROB), Peng-Robinson cubic equation-of-state with the Boston-Mathias alpha function (PR-BM),
17
IDEAL method, Redlich-Kwong-Soave (RKS) cubic equation-of-state, and Redlich-Kwong-
Soave (RKS-BM) cubic equation-of-state with Boston-Mathias alpha function [10].
The Peng-Robinson cubic equation-of-state with the Boston-Mathias alpha function (PR-
BM) is recommended for gasification, refinery, and petrochemical applications [11]. In addition,
it is the most widely used for the gasification process therefore, PR-BM model was chosen for
both processes.
4.4 Simulation of the process
This topic performs the suitable condition of each equipment in both processes and shows
the result of each streams.

4.4.1.1 Biomass feed preparation section
The reactant was fed to the biomass feed preparation section as shown in figure 4.3.
Biomass is reduced the particle size for suitable operating before entering the reactor. The
description and input data of the equipment in the biomass feed preparation section are shown in
table 4.3.
Figure 4.3 The process flow diagram of the biomass feed preparation section in the direct
conversion process
18
Table 4.3 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass feed preparation section
in the direct conversion process [8]
Model in
Unit Equipment Description Input data
ASPEN Plus
Reduce the particle Maximum particle
K-101 Crusher -
size of biomass diameter: 2 mm
4.4.1.2 Biomass pyrolysis section
In the biomass pyrolysis section, biomass was converted to produce bio-oil. After that, the
effluent of the reactor (R-101) was separated as the bio-vapor and char at the cyclone (S-101). The
process flow diagram of the biomass pyrolysis section is shown in figure 4.4 and the description
and input data of the equipment in the biomass pyrolysis section are shown in table 4.4.
Figure 4.4 The process flow diagram of the biomass pyrolysis section in the direct conversion
process
19
Table 4.4 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass pyrolysis section in the
direct conversion process [6]
Model in
ASPEN Plus
Pyrolysis Produce bio-oil Pressure: 1 bar
R-101 RYield
reactor from biomass Temperature: 500°C
Method: Leith-Licht
Separate bio-vapor Type: Barth 1-rectangular inlet
S-101 Cyclone Cyclone
from char
Diameter: 3 m
4.4.1.3 Bio-oil purification section
For the bio-oil purification section in figure 4.5, both coolers (E-101 and E-102) were used
to cool down the bio-vapor from the cyclone (S-101). Then, it was sent to the flash vessel (V-101)
which separated the bio-oil as a product from the gas mixture. The gas mixture which consisted of
water, and other gas from the pyrolysis was sent to another flash vessel (V-102) for separated the
water as a by-product from waste gas which it was sent to heat recovery section. The description
and input data of the equipment in the bio-oil purification section are shown in table 4.5.
Figure 4.5 The process flow diagram of the bio-oil purification section in the direct conversion
process
20
Table 4.5 The description and input data of the equipment of the bio-oil purification section in the
Model in
ASPEN Plus
Produce HP steam and
Heat Cold stream outlet
E-101 HeatX decrease temperature of bio-
exchanger vapor fraction: 1
vapor
Heat Decrease temperature of bio- Hot stream outlet

E-102 HeatX
exchanger vapor from 243°C to 60°C temperature: 60°C
Separate bio-oil from gas Pressure: 1 bar

V-101 Flash vessel Flash2
mixture Adiabatically
Separate water from exhaust Pressure: 1 bar

gas Temperature: 30°C
4.4.1.4 Heat recovery section
In the heat recovery section in figure 4.6, the reactor (R-102) was used to combust the char
and waste gas with air. After that, the effluent of the reactor was separated as the solid waste and
exhaust gas at the cyclone (S-102) and it was cooled in the cooler (E-103). The description and
input data of the equipment in the heat recovery section are shown in table 4.6.
Figure 4.6 The process flow diagram of the heat recovery section in the direct conversion
process
21
Table 4.6 The description and input data of the equipment of the bio-oil purification section in the
Model in
Unit Equipment Description Input Data
ASPEN Plus
Produce exhaust gas
Pressure: 1 bar
R-102 Combustor RGibbs from the combustion
Adiabatically
of char and air
Method: Leith-Licht
Separate bio-vapor
S-102 Cyclone Cyclone Type: Barth 1-rectangular inlet
from char
Diameter: 4 m
Produce HP steam
Heat and decrease Cold stream outlet vapor
E-103 HeatX
exchanger temperature of fraction: 1
exhaust gas
4.4.1.5 Mass and energy balance
The result of the process simulation of the direct conversion process by ASPEN Plus V8.8
was performed in mass and energy balance. Mass balance of the direct conversion process is shown
in figure 4.7. 18,150 kg/hr of wet biomass feed and 50,000 kg/hr of air were fed to the process.
Outlet stream contained 380 kg/hr of solid waste that was removed, 59,660 kg/hr of exhaust gas
that was recycled to heat the biomass, 1,610 kg/hr of water, and 6,500 kg/hr of bio-oil product.
The mass of each stream and heat duty required for each equipment are shown in table 4.7 and
table 4.8, respectively.
Figure 4.7 The mass balance of the direct conversion process

22
4.4.1.6 Stream summary
K-101 R-101 S-101 E-101 E-102 V-101 V-102

Crusher Pyrolysis reactor Cyclone Heat exchanger Heat exchanger Flash vessel Flash vessel
R-102 S-102 E-103

Combustor Cyclone Heat exchanger
Figure 4.8 The overall process flow diagram of the direct conversion process
23
Table 4.7 The stream summary of the direct conversion process
Stream 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Pressure (bar) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 40.0 40.0 1.0
Temperature (°C) 25.0 25.0 25.0 500.0 500.0 30.0 249.7 243.2
Total flow rate (kg/hr) 18,150.50 18,150.50 18,150.50 14,520.10 3,630.40 3,000.00 3,000.00 14,520.10
Component mass flow rate (kg/hr)
Biomass 9,074.30 9,074.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
H2O 9,074.30 9,074.30 1,815.05 1,815.05 0.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 1,815.05
Char 0.95 0.95 3,630.11 0.00 3,630.11 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ash 0.95 0.95 0.29 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bio-oil 0.00 0.00 7,260.20 7,260.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 7,260.20
CO2 0.00 0.00 2,411.29 2,411.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,411.29
CO 0.00 0.00 986.48 986.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 986.48
CH4 0.00 0.00 469.73 469.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 469.73
H2 0.00 0.00 78.28 78.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.28
C2H6 0.00 0.00 587.19 587.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 587.19
C3H8 0.00 0.00 430.53 430.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 430.53
C4H10 0.00 0.00 340.50 340.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 340.50
n-C5H12 0.00 0.00 140.85 140.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 140.85
O2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
NH3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24
Table 4.7 The stream summary of the direct conversion process (Cont.)
Stream 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pressure (bar) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Temperature (°C) 35.0 35.3 60.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 30.0 25.0
Biomass 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
H2O 270,229.00 270,229.00 1,815.05 65.30 1,749.75 1,610.35 139.4 0.00
Char 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bio-oil 0.00 0.00 7,260.20 6,414.27 845.93 0.00 845.93 0.00
CO2 0.00 0.00 2,411.29 3.72 2,407.57 0.02 2,407.55 0.00
CO 0.00 0.00 986.48 0.14 986.34 0.00 986.34 0.00
CH4 0.00 0.00 469.73 0.19 469.54 0.00 469.54 0.00
H2 0.00 0.00 78.28 0.01 78.27 0.00 78.27 0.00
C2H6 0.00 0.00 587.19 1.19 586 0.00 586 0.00
C3H8 0.00 0.00 430.53 2.64 427.89 0.00 427.89 0.00
C4H10 0.00 0.00 340.50 5.60 334.90 0.00 334.90 0.00
n-C5H12 0.00 0.00 140.85 6.96 133.89 0.00 133.89 0.00
O2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11,645.85
N2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38,354.15
NH3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
25
Table 4.7 The stream summary of the direct conversion process (Cont.)
Stream 17 18 19 20 21 22
Pressure (bar) 1.0 1.0 1.0 40.0 40.0 1.0
Temperature (°C) 1,648.3 1,648.3 1,648.3 30.0 249.7 43.6
Total flow rate (kg/hr) 60,040.10 379.74 59,660.36 45,359.24 45,359.24 59,660.36
Biomass 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
H2O 4,078.13 270,229.00 4,078.13 45,359.24 45,359.24 4,078.13
Char 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ash 379.74 379.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bio-oil 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 7,362.39 0.00 7,362.39 0.00 0.00 7,362.39
CO 9,619.42 0.00 9,619.42 0.00 0.00 9,619.42
CH4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
H2 221.57 0.00 221.57 0.00 0.00 221.57
C2H6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C3H8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C4H10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
n-C5H12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
O2 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01
N2 38,378.83 0.00 38,378.83 0.00 0.00 38,378.83
NH3 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01
26
Table 4.8 The heat duty required for each equipment in direct conversion process
Unit Equipment Duty (kW)

K-101 Crusher 0.0
R-101 91,647.2
Reactor
R-102 0.0
E-101 -2,361.8
E-102 Heat exchanger -1,783.3
E-103 -35,709.6
V-101 0.0
Flash vessel
V-102 -1,231.1
S-101 0.0
Cyclone
S-102 0.0
4.4.2.1 Coal feed preparation section
The reactant was fed to the coal feed preparation section as shown in figure 4.9. Coal is
reduced the particle size for suitable operating and it was mixed with the recycled char and water
at the suitable ratio [13] to form a slurry before entering the reactor. The description and input data
of the equipment in the coal feed preparation section are shown in table 4.9.
Figure 4.9 The process flow diagram of the coal feed preparation section in the companion coal
27
Table 4.9 The description and input data of the equipment of the coal feed preparation section in
the companion coal gasification process [12]
Model in
ASPEN Plus
K-101 Crusher Crusher
size of coal diameter: 1 mm
Increase pressure Outlet pressure: 3 bar

P-101 Pump Pump
from 3 bar to 41 bar Efficiency: 0.8
4.4.2.2 Coal gasification section
In the coal gasification section, coal reacted with the oxygen at the suitable ratio [13] and
converted to produce the syngas and undesired product. After that, the effluent of the reactor
(R-101) was separated the syngas and ash at the cyclone (S-101). Then, one stream of the syngas
was purged to the atmosphere. Another stream was pass through the valve for pressure reducing
and sent to the biomass pyrolysis section for heat the biomass. The process flow diagram of the
coal gasification section is shown in figure 4.10 and the description and input data of the equipment
in the coal gasification section are shown in table 4.10.
Figure 4.10 The process flow diagram of the coal gasification section in the companion coal
28
Table 4.10 The description and input data of the equipment of the coal gasification section in the
companion coal gasification process [13]
Model in
ASPEN Plus
Increase pressure Outlet pressure: 41 bar

C-101 Compressor Compr
from 3 bar to 41 bar Equal pressure ratio
Produce syngas Pressure: 41 bar

R-101 Gasifier RGibbs
from coal Temperature: 1,350°C
Method: Leith-Licht
Separate syngas
from char and ash
Diameter: 3 m
Split the stream into Split fraction of

SP-101 Splitter FSplit
two streams purge stream: 0.1
Decrease pressure Outlet pressure: 1 bar

VL-101 Valve Valve
from 41 bar to 1 bar Adiabatically
4.4.2.3 Biomass feed preparation section
The biomass was fed to the biomass feed preparation section as shown in figure 4.11.
Biomass is reduced the particle size for suitable operating before entering the reactor. The
description and input data of the equipment in the biomass feed preparation section are shown in
table 4.11.
Figure 4.11 The process flow diagram of the biomass feed preparation section in the companion
29
Table 4.11 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass feed preparation section
in the companion coal gasification process [8]
Model in
ASPEN Plus
K-201 Crusher -
size of biomass diameter: 2 mm
4.4.2.4 Biomass pyrolysis section
In the biomass pyrolysis section, biomass was converted to produce bio-oil by using heat
from the coal gasification section. After that, the effluent of the reactor (R-201) was separated the
bio-vapor and char at the cyclone (S-201) which it was sent back to the coal gasification section.
The process flow diagram of the biomass pyrolysis section is shown in figure 4.12 and the
description and input data of the equipment in the biomass pyrolysis section are shown in table
4.12.
Figure 4.12 The process flow diagram of the biomass pyrolysis section in the companion coal
30
Table 4.12 The description and input data of the equipment of the biomass pyrolysis section in the
companion coal gasification process [6]
Model in
ASPEN Plus
Pyrolysis Produce bio-oil Pressure: 1 bar
R-201 RYield
reactor from biomass Temperature: 500°C
Method: Leith-Licht
Separate bio-vapor
from char
Diameter: 3 m
4.4.2.5 Bio-oil purification section
For the bio-oil purification section in figure 4.13, both coolers (E-201 and E-202) were
used to cool down the bio-vapor from S-201. Then, it was sent to the flash vessel (V-201) which
separated the bio-oil as a product from the gas mixture. The gas mixture which consisted of syngas
and other gas was sent to the syngas purification section. The description and input data of the
equipment in the bio-oil purification section are shown in table 4.13.
Figure 4.13 The process flow diagram of the bio-oil purification section in the companion coal
31
Table 4.13 The description and input data of the equipment of the bio-oil purification section in
the companion coal gasification process [12]
Model in
ASPEN Plus
Produce HP steam and
Heat Cold stream outlet
E-201 HeatX decrease temperature of bio-
exchanger vapor fraction: 1
vapor
Heat Decrease temperature of bio- Hot stream outlet
E-202 HeatX
exchanger vapor from 243°C to 60°C temperature: 60°C
Separate bio-oil from gas Pressure: 1 bar

mixture Adiabatically
4.4.2.6 Syngas purification section
In the syngas purification section in figure 4.14, The separation column (T-201) was used
to separate the syngas from the waste gas. The description and input data of the equipment in the
bio-oil purification section are shown in table 4.14.
Figure 4.14 The process flow diagram of the syngas purification section in the companion coal
32
Table 4.14 The description and input data of the syngas purification section in the companion coal
gasification process [12]
Model in
Unit Equipment Description Input Data
ASPEN Plus
Separate syngas from Split fraction of each
T-201 Separation column Sep2
waste gas stream
4.4.2.7 Mass and energy balance
The result of the process simulation of the companion coal gasification process by ASPEN
Plus V8.8 was performed in mass and energy balance. Mass balance of the companion coal
gasification process is shown in figure 4.15. 10,000 kg/hr of wet biomass feed, 2,336 kg/hr of coal,
1,261 kg/hr of water, and 2,243 kg/hr of oxygen were fed to the process. Outlet stream contained
411 kg/hr of ash that was removed, 906 kg/hr of purge gas, 6,924 kg/hr of waste gas, 1,101 kg/hr
of syngas, and 6,500 kg/hr of bio-oil product. The mass of each stream and heat duty required for
each equipment are shown in table 4.15 and table 4.16, respectively.
Figure 4.15 The mass balance of the companion coal gasification process
33
4.4.2.8 Stream summary
K-101 P-101 C-101 R-101 S-101 SP-101 VL-101 K-201 R-201

Crusher Pump Compressor Gasifier Cyclone Splitter Valve Crusher Pyrolysis reactor
S-201 E-201 E-202 V-201 T-201

Cyclone Heat exchanger Heat exchanger Flash vessel Separation column
Figure 4.16 The overall process flow diagram of the companion coal gasification process
34
Table 4.15 The stream summary of the companion coal gasification process
Stream 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Pressure (bar) 1.0 1.0 3.0 41.0 41.0 3.0 41.0 41.0
Temperature (°C) 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.4 33.4 25.0 766.7 1,350.0
Biomass 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
H2O 0.00 0.00 1,261.47 1,261.47 2,753.33 0.00 0.00 1,128.81
Char 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 411.75 0.00 0.00 411.75
Bio-oil 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,037.26
CO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,337.89
CH4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.09
H2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 214.83 0.00 0.00 395.71
C2H6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C3H8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C4H10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
n-C5H12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
O2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 734.00 2,242.62 2,242.62 0.00
N2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.23 0.00 0.00 49.23
C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,003.12 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coal 2,336.06 2,336.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.66 0.00 0.00 17.68
SO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 90.12
35
Table 4.15 The stream summary of the companion coal gasification process (Cont.)
Stream 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pressure (bar) 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Temperature (°C) 1,350.0 1,350.0 1,350.0 1,350.0 1,352.0 25.0 25.0 500.0
Total flow rate (kg/hr) 410.75 9,060.79 906.08 8,154.71 8,154.71 10,002.00 10,002.00 1,8156.71
Biomass 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00
H2O 0.00 1,128.81 112.88 1,015.93 1,015.93 5,000.00 5,000.00 1,815.67
Char 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3,631.31
Ash 410.75 1.00 0.10 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.29
Bio-oil 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7,262.70
CO2 0.00 1,037.26 103.73 933.53 933.53 0.00 0.00 2,412.12
CO 0.00 6,337.89 633.79 5,704.1 5,704.1 0.00 0.00 986.82
CH4 0.00 3.09 0.31 2.78 2.78 0.00 0.00 469.90
H2 0.00 395.71 39.57 356.14 356.14 0.00 0.00 78.31
C2H6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 587.39
C3H8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 430.68
C4H10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 340.62
n-C5H12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 140.90
O2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N2 0.00 49.23 4.92 44.31 44.31 0.00 0.00 0.00
C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coal 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
S 0.00 17.68 1.31 16.37 16.37 0.00 0.00 0.00
SO2 0.00 90.12 9.47 80.65 80.65 0.00 0.00 0.00
36
Stream 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Pressure (bar) 1.0 1.0 40.0 40.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Temperature (°C) 500.0 500.0 30.0 249.7 243.3 30.0 35.3 60.0
Biomass 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
H2O 0.00 1,815.67 3,000.00 3,000.00 1,815.67 270,229.00 270,229.00 1,815.67
Char 3,631.10 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.21
Ash 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bio-oil 0.00 7,262.70 0.00 0.00 7,262.70 0.00 0.00 7,262.70
CO2 0.00 2,412.12 0.00 0.00 2,412.12 0.00 0.00 2,412.12
CO 0.00 986.82 0.00 0.00 986.82 0.00 0.00 986.82
CH4 0.00 469.90 0.00 0.00 469.90 0.00 0.00 469.90
H2 0.00 78.31 0.00 0.00 78.31 0.00 0.00 78.31
C2H6 0.00 587.39 0.00 0.00 587.39 0.00 0.00 587.39
C3H8 0.00 430.68 0.00 0.00 430.68 0.00 0.00 430.68
C4H10 0.00 340.62 0.00 0.00 340.62 0.00 0.00 340.62
n-C5H12 0.00 140.90 0.00 0.00 140.90 0.00 0.00 140.90
O2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coal 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
SO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
37
Stream 25 26 27 28
Pressure (bar) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Temperature (°C) 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0
Total flow rate (kg/hr) 6,500.23 8,025.09 6,924.47 1,100.62
Biomass 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
H2O 64.96 1,750.71 1,733.24 17.47
Char 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Bio-oil 6,414.74 847.96 847.95 0.03
CO2 3.69 2,408.43 2,384.34 24.09
CO 0.14 986.68 9.87 976.81
CH4 0.19 469.71 465.01 4.70
H2 0.01 78.30 0.78 77.52
C2H6 1.18 586.21 586.21 0.00
C3H8 2.62 428.06 428.06 0.00
C4H10 5.57 335.05 335.05 0.00
n-C5H12 6.92 133.98 133.98 0.00
O2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coal 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
SO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
38
Table 4.16 The heat duty required for each equipment in the companion coal gasification process
Unit Equipment Duty (kW)

K-101 0.0
Crusher
K-201 0.0
R-101 4,323.6
Reactor
R-201 51,958.0
E-201 -2,361.8
Heat exchanger
E-202 -1,784.5
V-201 Flash vessel 0.0
T-201 Separation column -823.1
P-101 Pump 2.0
C-101 Compressor 470.3
S-101 0.0
Cyclone
S-102 0.0
39
Chapter 5
Size and cost estimation
In this chapter, sizing, and costing of all main equipment in both processes were estimated.
The equipment sizing was calculated from ASPEN Plus V8.8 and ASPEN Exchanger Design &
Rating (EDR) V8.8 to determine appropriate sizes before considering the installed costs.
5.1 Equipment analysis
All main equipment in both processes were sized and analyzed individually based on its
purposes. The equipment of both processes is shown in table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Summary of equipment sizing
Equipment Direct conversion process Companion coal gasification process

Crusher 1 2
Cyclone 2 2
Flash vessel 2 1
Reactor 2 2
Heat exchanger 3 2
Separation column 0 1
Pump 0 1
Compressor 0 1
Total 10 12
5.1.1 Crusher
The direct conversion process has one crusher, and the companion coal gasification process
has two crushers. The sizing of crusher requires the power that uses in costing. The power
requirement is estimated at 50 kWh/ton for the biomass materials [14] and for the coal can be
estimated by Bond’s Third Theory of Comminution [15]. The results are shown in table 5.2.
40
Table 5.2 The crusher sizing results
Direct conversion process Companion coal gasification process

Data
K-101 K-101 K-201
Raw material Biomass Coal Biomass
Type Ring granulator Ring granulator Ring granulator
Flow rate (kg/hr) 22,048.0 2,575.0 11,025.0
Product size (mm) <2 <1 <2
Power (kW) 1,342.0 501.6 551.3
Material of
Carbon steel Carbon steel Carbon steel
construction (MOC)
5.1.2 Cyclone
Each process of the bio-oil production has two cyclones. The parameters that are used in
sizing are gas flowrate, gas viscosity, gas density, solid density, and we must select one standard
geometry or K ratios. Then, the cyclone diameter was modified until cut off diameter reaches target
and low pressure drop that the solver tool can optimize in Excel. The results from sizing are shown
in table 5.3.
Table 5.3 The cyclone sizing results

Data
S-101 S-102 S-101 S-201
Gas flow rate (m3/hr) 21,355.0 349,594.0 1,698.0 21,646.0
Cyclone diameter (m) 1.9 4.5 0.9 1.9
Cut-off diameter (μm) 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
Volume (m3) 18.0 239.7 2.0 18.3
Pressure drops (bar) 0 0 0 0
Material of Stainless
Carbon steel Carbon steel Stainless steel
construction (MOC) steel
5.1.3 Vessel
The size of the vessel was calculated by using liquid density, vapor density, liquid flow
rate, and vapor flow rate that were obtained from the ASPEN Plus V8.8. The results are shown in
table 5.4.
41
Table 5.4 The vessel sizing results

Data
V-101 V-102 V-201
Type Horizontal Vertical Horizontal
Diameter (m) 2.6 2.4 2.6
Height (m) 14.9 4.9 14.9
Volume (m3) 79.4 23. 79.4
Operating pressure
1.0 1.0 1.0
(bar)
Operating temperature
60.0 30.0 60.0
(oC)
Material of Stainless Stainless
Stainless steel
construction (MOC) steel steel
5.1.4 Reactor
A pyrolysis reactor and a combustion reactor were used in the direct conversion process to
produce bio-oil by using pine wood chip as a raw material. In contrast, a gasifier and a pyrolysis
reactor were used in the companion coal gasification process. Sizing of all reactors was estimated
by using volumetric flow rate and residence time. The results are shown in table 5.5.
Table 5.5 The reactor sizing results

Data
R-101 R-102 R-101 R-102
Reaction type Pyrolysis Combustion Gasification Pyrolysis
Volume (m3) 47.5 145.7 22.1 48.1
Operating pressure
1.0 1.0 41.0 1.0
(bar)
500.0 1,650.0 1,350.0 500.0
(oC)
Material of Stainless
Carbon steel Carbon steel Stainless steel
construction (MOC) steel
42
5.1.5 Heat exchanger
In sizing of the heat exchangers, heat transfer area and its dimension were calculated by
ASPEN EDR V8.8. The table 5.6 represents heat transfer area and utility placement in each heat
exchanger which obtained from ASPEN EDR V8.8.
Table 5.6 The heat exchangers sizing results

Data
E-101 E-102 E-103 E-201 E-202
Type BEM BEM BKU BEM BEM
Counter Counter Counter
Flow type Counter current Counter current
current current current
Duty (kW) 2,362.0 1,783.0 35,710.0 2,362.0 1,785.0
Heat transfer area
12.0 38.8 477.8 12.0 38.8
(m2)
Overall heat
transfer coefficient 850.0 500.0 250.0 850.0 500.0
(W/m2·K)
Material of
Stainless Stainless Carbon
construction Stainless steel Stainless steel
steel steel steel
(MOC)
5.1.6 Separation column
The size of the separation column was calculated by using the vessel as a model which
liquid density, vapor density, liquid flow rate, and vapor flow rate were obtained from the ASPEN
Plus V8.8. The results are shown in table 5.7.
43
Table 5.7 The separation column sizing results
Companion coal gasification process

Data
T-201
Type Vertical
Diameter (m) 4.4
Height (m) 17.8
Volume (m3) 277.4
Operating pressure
1.0
(bar)
60.0
(oC)
Material of
Carbon steel
construction (MOC)
5.1.7 Pump
The pump was chosen by using capacity and discharge pressure which obtained from
ASPEN Plus V.8.8 as shown in table 5.8.
Table 5.8 The pump sizing results

Data
P-101
Type Centrifugal
Flow rate (m3/hr) 1.5
NPSH required (m) 19.4
Pump efficiency 0.8
Shaft work (kW) 2.0
Pressure change (bar) 38.0
Material of construction
Carbon steel
(MOC)
5.1.8 Compressor
The power of the compressor was calculated by ASPEN Plus V.8.8. The compression ratio,
volumetric efficiency (%), and minimum RPM required were used for selecting type and also used
for calculating the cost of the compressor. The results are shown in table 5.9.
44
Table 5.9 The compressor sizing results

Data
C-101
Type Centrifugal
Compression ratio 13.7
Volumetric efficiency (%) 63.2
Minimum RPM required 247.4
Power (kW) 470.3
Pressure change (bar) 40.0
Material of construction
Carbon steel
(MOC)
5.2 Costing calculation
Cost of main equipment and installation in both processes were estimated by Bare module
cost estimation which considered the capacity of each equipment, material of construction, and
operating pressure. Cost of main equipment and installation is shown in table 5.10 and table 5.11.
Table 5.10 The equipment cost and installation cost in the direct conversion process
Equipment cost Installation cost Total cost

Unit Equipment
(USD) (USD) (USD)
K-101 Crusher 617,439 512,469 1,129,908
S-101 224,045 416,724 640,769
Cyclone
S-102 1,419,997 2,641,196 4,061,193
V-101 62,582 325,553 388,135
Flash vessel
V-102 31,821 219,312 251,133
R-101 55,848 384,903 440,751
Reactor
R-102 146,659 497,298 643,957
E-101 24,837 89,862 114,699
E-102 Heat exchanger 30,349 109,803 140,152
E-103 1,661,121 3,803,966 5,465,087
Total 4,274,698 9,001,086 13,275,784
45
Table 5.11 The equipment cost and installation cost in the companion coal gasification process
Equipment cost Installation cost Total cost

Unit Equipment
(USD) (USD) (USD)
K-101 352,821 292,841 645,662
Crusher
K-201 370,462 307,483 677,945
S-101 66,288 123,294 189,582
Cyclone
S-201 225,953 420,271 646,224
V-201 Flash vessel 62,593 325,608 388,200
R-101 56,462 173,338 229,800
Reactor
R-201 30,980 213,513 244,493
E-201 24,709 89,397 114,105
Heat exchanger
E-202 29,810 107,845 137,665
T-201 Separation column 269,312 2,304,475 2,573,787
P-101 Pump 4,112 21,363 25,475
C-101 Compressor 244,224 439,604 683,828
Total 1,737,726 4,819,040 6,556,766
46
Chapter 6
Economic analysis
In this chapter, the economics of the direct conversion process and the companion coal
gasification process were estimated to determine the feasibility of the investment. To consider
profitability criteria, the payback period, internal rate of return, equivalent annual operating costs,
total capital investment, and cost of manufacturing were calculated. As a result, the total capital
investment and cost of manufacturing is discussed before evaluating the economics.
6.1 Total capital investment
Total capital investment (TCI) referred to the costs associated with construction of a new
plant or modifications to an existing chemical manufacturing plant. TCI can be estimated by using
ratio as shown in the table 6.1.
Table 6.1 Plant costs estimated from delivered equipment cost [16]
Costs Fluid processing

Direct cost
Total equipment and installation cost 147
Instrumentation 18
Piping 66
Electrical system 11
Building (with services) 18
Land improvements 10
Service facilities 70
Land 6
Indirect cost
Engineering, supervision 33
Construction expenses 41
Subtotal
Contractor’s fee 21
Contingency 42
Working capital
Working capital 86
Grand total 569
47
Table 6.2 Total capital investment summary of both processes
Cost in the direct Cost in the companion

Type conversion process coal gasification process
(USD) (USD)
Direct cost
Total equipment and installation cost 13,276,000 6,531,000
Instrumentation 1,626,000 800,000
Piping 5,966,000 2,932,000
Electrical system 993,000 489,000
Building (with services) 1,626,000 800,000
Land improvements 903,000 444,000
Service facilities 6,322,000 3,110,000
Land 542,000 267,000
Indirect cost
Engineering, supervision 2,980,000 1,466,000
Construction expenses 3,703,000 1,822,000
Subtotal
Contractor’s fee 1,897,000 933,000
Contingency 3,793,000 1,866,000
Working capital
Working Capital 7,767,000 3,821,000
Grand total 51,387,000 25,279,000
6.2 Cost of manufacturing
There are many elements that influenced the cost of manufacturing (COM). The COM is
divided into three categories.
6.2.1 Direct costs
These costs represent operating expenses which vary with the production rate. When the
product demand dropped, the production rate is cut off to less than the normal capacity. These
reductions might be directly proportional to the production rate.
48
6.2.2 Fixed costs
These costs are independent of change in the production rate. They consist of property
taxes, insurance, and depreciation, which are charged at constant rates even when the plant is not
in the operation.
6.2.3 General expenses
These costs represent an overhead burden that is necessary to carry out business functions.
They comprise of management, sales, financing, and research functions.
COM is estimated from the summation of the direct costs, the fixed costs, and the general
expense. The list of factors and values which are used in the calculation of COM are shown in
table 6.3.
Table 6.3 List of the cost of manufacturing
Cost item Typical range of multiplying factor Value used

1. Direct manufacturing cost
a. Raw material CRM CRM
b. Waste treatment CWT CWT
c. Utilities CUT CUT
d. Operating labor COL COL
e. Direct supervisory and clerical
(0.1-0.25)COL 0.18COL
labor
f. Maintenance and repair (0.02-0.1)FCI 0.06FCI
g. Operating supplies (0.1-0.2) Line 1.F 0.009FCI
h. Laboratory charges (0.1-0.2)COL 0.15COL
i. Patents and royalties (0-0.006)COM 0.03COM
Total DMC CRM + CWT + CUT + 1.33COL + 0.03COM + 0.069FCI
2. Fixed manufacturing cost

a. Depreciation 0.1FCI 0.1FCI
b. Local taxes and insurance (0.014-0.05)FCI 0.032FCI
(0.5-0.7)(Line 1.D + Line 1.E + Line 0.708COL +
c. Plant overhead costs
1.F) 0.036FCI
Total FMC 0.708COL + 0.068FCI + Depreciation
49
Table 6.3 List of the cost of manufacturing (Cont.)
Cost item Typical range of multiplying factor Value used

3. General expense
a. Administration costs (0.15)(Line 1.D + Line 1.E + Line 1.F) 0.177COL + 0.009FCI
b. Distribution costs (0.02-0.2)COM 0.11COM
c. Research and development costs 0.05COM 0.05COM
Total GE 0.177COL + 0.009FCI + 0.16COM
Generally, COM is determined by estimating the following parameters:
1. Fixed capital investment (FCI): FCI can be estimated from TCI without working capital.
So, the FCI equal to 43,620,000 and 21,458,000 USD for the direct conversion process and the
companion coal gasification process, respectively.
2. Cost of operating labor (COL)
3. Cost of utilities (CUT)
4. Cost of waste treatment (CWT)
5. Cost of raw materials (CRM)
- Cost of operating labor (COL)
The operating labor requirement for the chemical processing plants is given by the
following equation.
NOL = ( 6.29 + 31.7P 2 + 0.23Nnp )

0.5
Equation 6.1
When NOL is the number of operators per shift

P is the number of processing steps involving the handling of particulate solids
N np is the number of nonparticulate processing steps.
50
Generally, the value of Nnp is given by
Nnp =  ( Equipment ) Equation 6.2
Additionally, the above equation counts only compressors, reactors, vessels, cyclones, heat
exchangers, crushers, pump, and separation column.
Note that: NOL is the number of operators required per shift. The number of
operators need per shift was 4.5 operators and the average hourly wage of an operator was
1,300 USD/month.
Table 6.4 Determination of the operating labor requirement of both processes

Equipment type
Number of equipment Nnp Number of equipment Nnp
Compressor - - 1 1
Reactor 2 2 2 2
Vessel 2 - 1 -
Cyclone 2 - 2 -
Heat exchanger 3 3 2 2
Crusher 1 - 2 -
Pump - - 1 -
Separation column - - 1 1
Total 9 5 12 6
Example calculation of the direct conversion process
Therefore, the number of operating labors required per shift was 17.11 (from equation 6.1)
and operating labor was 76.99 which is rounded up to 77 operators.
As a result, the number of people required to operate this plant was 77 people. The salary
was assumed to be 1,300 USD/month. Therefore, the COL was 1,201,200 USD/yr.
51
Table 6.5 Number of operating labors and operating labors cost of both processes
Process Nnp P Number of operators COL (USD/yr)

Direct conversion
5 3 77 1,201,200
process
Companion coal
6 4 103 1,606,800
- Cost of utilities (CUT)
For the CUL, it was calculated based on usage of utilities in Aspen Plus V8.8. The detailed
CUL was showed in Appendix D. The total CUL is shown in table 6.6.
Table 6.6 Utility cost of both processes
CUT (USD/yr)
Utility
Electricity 1,061,000 1,205,000
Natural gas 7,918,000 4,489,000
Cooling water 30,000 26,000
Total 9,009,000 5,721,000
- Cost of waste treatment (CWT)
As environmental regulations continue to tighten, the problems and costs associated with
the treatment of waste chemical streams will increase. In recent years, there has been a trend to try
to reduce or eliminate the volume of these streams through waste minimization strategies.
Strategies involve utilizing alternative process technology or using additional recovery steps in
order to reduce or eliminate waste streams.
According to the costs of utilities provided, the CWT was calculated using waste flowrate
as shown in table 6.7.
52
Table 6.7 Ash disposal cost of both processes
Waste flowrate Disposal cost

Process CWT (USD/yr)
(kg/yr) (USD/kg)
Direct conversion
3,038,000 1.00 3,038,000
process
Companion coal
3,286,000 1.00 3,286,000
- Cost of raw material (CRM)
For the CRM, it was calculated based on mass flow rate of raw material which was obtained
from ASPEN Plus V8.8. This cost is shown in table 6.8.
Table 6.8 Raw material cost of both processes
CRM (USD/yr)
Component
Wood chip 2,400,000 1,200,000
Water 543,000 87,000
Oxygen - 783,000
Coal - 1,252,000
Total 2,943,000 3,323,000
Table 6.9 Total cost of all parameters for calculating cost of manufacturing

Cost
(USD/yr) (USD/yr)
Fixed capital
43,620,000 21,458,000
investment
Operating labor
1,201,200 1,606,800
cost
Utility cost 9,009,000 5,721,000
Waste treatment 3,038,000 3,286,000
Raw material cost 2,943,000 3,323,000
53
Hence, the equation that was used for calculating the COMd without depreciation is shown
below [17]
COMd = 1.23 ( CRM + CWT + CUT ) + 2.73COL + 0.18FCI Equation 6.3
The equation showed that CRM, CWT, CUT, COL, and FCI were required for calculating the
COM. Finally, the COM was calculated from equation 6.3 which equal to 29,569,000 USD and
23,415,000 USD for the direct conversion process and the companion coal gasification process,
respectively.
6.3 Economic evaluation
- Project cash flow
Project cash flow consists of 5 parts.
1. Expenses: the cost of production operations and depreciation.
Expenses = COMd + d Equation 6.4
2. Revenue (R): revenue from product sale
3. Income tax: income tax can be calculated from net income multiply by tax rate
(t = 21%) [18].
Income tax = ( R - COMd - d )  t Equation 6.5
4. After tax cash flow: due to depreciation is not direct income. Therefore, after tax income
can be calculated by
After tax cash flow = ( R - COMd - d )  (1- t ) + d Equation 6.6
54
5. Discounted cash flow
Cash flow
Discounted cash flow = Equation 6.7
(1 + i )n
When n is number of years

i is discounted rate, can be calculated from
Discounted rate = (1 + real interest rate)  (1 + inflation rate ) -1 Equation 6.8
When real interest rate is estimated from average last 3 years of the 5 years government
bonds interest rate. The inflation rate is estimated from average last 3 years of the inflation rate in
the United States.
Table 6.10 Discounted rate [19]
2018 2019 2020 Average

5 years government
0.38% 1.62% 2.83% 1.61%
bonds interest rate
Inflation rate 1.20% 2.30% 1.90% 1.80%
Discounted rate 6.317%
- Depreciation
Depreciation cost (d) can be calculated by the ratio of the FCI. In calculation, the modified
accelerated cost recovery system (MACRS) was used to calculate for 10 years and the equipment
life was 20 years. The MACRS’s ratio that uses in these production processes is shown in the table
below.
55
Table 6.11 MACRS’s ratio for calculate depreciation cost
k dk [MACRS]
1 10
2 18
3 14.4
4 11.52
5 9.22
6 7.37
7 6.55
8 6.55
9 6.56
10 6.55
11 3.28
- Profitability analysis
The way to do profitability analysis is discounted profitability criteria.
1. Cash basis: can be analyzed from the net present value (NPV)
NPV = Cummulative discounted cash position end of the project Equation 6.9
2. Time basis: can be analyzed from the payback period (PBP)
PBP = Year after start - Up to year that recover FCI Equation 6.10
3. Interest basis: can be analyzed from internal rate of return (IRR). In this production
process, IRR must higher than 15% (minimum acceptable rate of return, MARR)
IRR = Interest or discount rate for which the NPV is equal to zero Equation 6.11
6.3.1 Cash flow diagram
The cash flow diagram was created in the following consideration. It was divided into two
periods of time. The first period was construction period. In this period, the cash flow in each year
was negative value. This amount of money was paid for the construction.
56
In this case, the construction period was divided into two years, but TCI was paid for 5
years. 20 percent of the TCI was paid at the end of the first five year, and after 2nd year operation
was begun.
The second period was operating stage. The cash flow was positive value because it gained
the profit.
The income and depreciation that got after the construction was completed in the second
year. The lifetime of this production process was 20 years. Furthermore, the income tax was 21%
and the interest rate was 6.317%.
57
Table 6.12 Cash flow analysis of the direct conversion process
After tax cash flow Discounted cash flow Cumulative discounted

Year TCI (USD) d (USD) FCI-∑d (USD) R (USD) COM (USD) P/F*
(USD) (USD) cash flow (USD)
1 10,277,444 - - - - -10,277,444 0.94 -9,666,763 -9,666,763

2 10,277,444 - 43,620,435 - - -10,277,444 0.88 -9,092,367 -18,759,130
3 10,277,444 4,362,044 39,258,392 38,201,062 29,568,581 -383,492 0.83 -319,113 -19,078,243

4 10,277,444 7,851,678 31,406,713 38,201,062 29,568,581 349,331 0.78 273,414 -18,804,828
5 10,277,444 6,281,343 25,125,371 38,201,062 29,568,581 19,561 0.74 14,400 -18,790,428
6 - 5,025,074 20,100,297 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,874,925 0.69 5,452,830 -13,337,598
7 - 4,021,804 16,078,492 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,664,239 0.65 4,991,608 -8,345,990

8 - 3,214,826 12,863,666 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,494,773 0.61 4,591,197 -3,754,793
9 - 2,857,139 10,006,528 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,419,659 0.58 4,275,110 520,316
10 - 2,857,139 7,149,389 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,419,659 0.54 4,021,084 4,541,401
11 - 2,861,501 4,287,889 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,420,575 0.51 3,782,620 8,324,021
12 - 2,857,139 1,430,750 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,419,659 0.48 3,557,419 11,881,440

13 - 1,430,750 - 38,201,062 29,568,581 7,120,117 0.45 3,210,955 15,092,394
14 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.42 2,892,715 17,985,109

15 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.40 2,720,831 20,705,940
16 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.38 2,559,160 23,265,101
17 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.35 2,407,096 25,672,197
18 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.33 2,264,067 27,936,264
19 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.31 2,129,537 30,065,802

20 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.29 2,003,001 32,068,803
21 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.28 1,883,984 33,952,786
22 - - - 38,201,062 29,568,581 6,819,660 0.26 1,772,038 35,724,825
*Factor being used in convert a future value to present value
58
Figure 6.1 Discounted cumulative cash flow diagram of the direct conversion process
From the data in table 6.12 of the direct conversion process, the NPV at the end of project
was 35,724,825 USD. The PBP was calculated by considering the cash flow diagram which was
counted since the plant operated. So, the PBP was equal to 8 years and 11 months.
IRR was calculated by using solver in excel datasheet by setting the NPV equal to zero and
varying interest rate. From the excel datasheet, IRR equals to 18.60%.
59
Table 6.13 Cash flow analysis of the companion coal gasification process
After tax cash flow Discounted cash flow Cumulative discounted

Year TCI (USD) d (USD) FCI-∑d (USD) R (USD) COM (USD) P/F*
(USD) (USD) cash flow (USD)
1 5,055,853 - - - - -5,055,853 0.94 -4,755,437 -4,755,437

2 5,055,853 - 21,458,499 - - -5,055,853 0.88 -4,472,870 -9,228,307
3 5,055,853 2,145,850 19,312,649 36,228,143 23,414,754 6,579,082 0.83 5,474,609 -3,753,698

4 5,055,853 3,862,530 15,450,119 36,228,143 23,414,754 6,939,585 0.78 5,431,468 1,677,769
5 5,055,853 3,090,024 12,360,095 36,228,143 23,414,754 6,777,359 0.74 4,989,305 6,667,075
6 - 2,472,019 9,888,076 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,641,702 0.69 7,368,628 14,035,703
7 - 1,978,474 7,909,603 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,538,057 0.65 6,863,285 20,898,987

8 - 1,581,491 6,328,111 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,454,691 0.61 6,404,402 27,303,390
9 - 1,405,532 4,922,580 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,417,739 0.58 6,002,564 33,305,954
10 - 1,405,532 3,517,048 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,417,739 0.54 5,645,894 38,951,848
11 - 1,407,678 2,109,370 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,418,190 0.51 5,310,647 44,262,495
12 - 1,405,532 703,839 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,417,739 0.48 4,994,875 49,257,370

13 - 703,839 - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,270,384 0.45 4,631,628 53,888,998
14 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.42 4,293,723 58,182,721

15 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.40 4,038,592 62,221,314
16 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.38 3,798,621 66,019,934
17 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.35 3,572,908 69,592,842
18 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.33 3,360,607 72,953,450
19 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.31 3,160,921 76,114,371

20 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.29 2,973,101 79,087,472
21 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.28 2,796,440 81,883,912
22 - - - 36,228,143 23,414,754 10,122,578 0.26 2,630,277 84,514,189
*Factor being used in convert a future value to present value
60
Figure 6.2 Discounted cumulative cash flow diagram of the companion coal gasification process
From the data in table 6.13 of the companion coal gasification process, the NPV at the end
of project was 84,514,189 USD. The PBP was calculated by considering the cash flow diagram
which was counted since the plant operated. So, the PBP was equal to 3 years and 9 months.
IRR was calculated by using solver in excel datasheet by setting the NPV equal to zero and
varying interest rate. From the excel datasheet, IRR equals to 58.70%.
6.3.2 Equivalent annual operating cost
Both capital cost and cash flow were rearranged into yearly cash covering 20 years of
project. The calculation of the R, COM, capital cost annuity (CCA) and EAOC were explained in
Appendix D.7.
61
Table 6.14 EAOC of both processes
R COMd CCA EAOC

Process
(USD/yr) (USD/yr) (USD/yr) (USD/yr)
Direct
38,201,062 29,568,581 4,613,540 -4,018,941
conversion
Companion coal
36,228,143 23,414,754 2,269,570 -10,543,820
gasification
The EAOC was equal to -4,018,941 USD/yr and -10,543,820 USD/yr for the direct
conversion process and the companion coal gasification process, respectively. This means both
two plants were profitable plant. However, the EAOC of the companion coal gasification process
has more negative than the EAOC of the direct conversion process. As a result, the companion
coal gasification process has more profitability than the direct conversion process.
62
Chapter 7
Conclusion and suggestion
This chapter shows the conclusion and suggestion of the direct conversion process and the
companion coal gasification process.
7.1 Conclusion
The objectives of this project were to evaluate the simplified of bio-oil production from
biomass by using the direct conversion and the companion coal gasification process and to
compare the cost-saving and profitability of both processes. From the simulation by using ASPEN
Plus V8.8 and used PR-BM as a thermodynamic method, 50,000 tons/yr of bio-oil was produced
from 143,750 tons/yr and 79,200 tons/yr of wet biomass which were used as a raw material for the
direct conversion and the companion coal gasification process, respectively. Economic analysis
was performed to consider the feasibility of this project. The total capital investment (TCI), fixed
capital investment (FCI), and cost of manufacturing (COM) of both processes were 51,387,000
USD, 43,620,000 USD, and 29,568,581 USD/yr for the direct conversion process, respectively
and 25,279,000 USD, 21,458,000 USD, and 23,414,754 USD/yr for the companion coal
gasification process, respectively. Payback period (PBP) of both processes was 8 years and 11
months and 3 years and 9 months for the direct conversion and the companion coal gasification
process, respectively with 20 years of plant life. Internal rate of return (IRR) was 18.60% and
58.70% for the direct conversion and the companion coal gasification process, respectively which
were higher than the minimum acceptable rate of return (MARR). Equivalent annual operating
cost (EAOC) was -4,018,941 USD/yr and -10,543,820 USD/yr for the direct conversion and the
companion coal gasification process, respectively which implied a profitable investment. As a
result, the companion coal gasification process has less the payback period, and more the internal
rate of return. Therefore, the companion coal gasification process has more the feasibility to invest.
7.2 Suggestion
1. In fact, there are pyrolysis reactions used in both production processes which are very
complex. On the contrary, this report used only product yields from the literature to simulate both
production processes; therefore, the product compositions might inaccurate when compared to the
real process.
63
2. From the process description, boilers that produce steam in both processes are assumed
to be a simple heat exchanger; as a result, the sizing of heat exchangers was not the correct value.
Because of the incorrect sizing of heat exchangers, results from costing were incorrect too.
3. From the problem statement, the biomass feed to processes is slurry feed, but there is no
necessary to use the slurry feed. So, the dry feed can be used in both production processes.
4. In the companion coal gasification process, the simple separation block was used to
separate the syngas from the waste gas. Instead of using a simple separation block, two separation
columns which use the monoethanolamine (MEA) as the absorbent must be used to get the correct
cost and size of the equipment.
64
References
[1] Energy Information Administration, “U.S. energy facts explained,” 2020. [Online].
Available: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/. [Accessed: 30-Aug-
2020].
[2] M. Crocker, Thermochemical Conversion of Biomass to Liquid Fuels and Chemicals, 1st
ed. London: Royal Society of Chemistry, 2010.
[3] L. Rosendahl, Direct Thermochemical Liquefaction for Energy Applications. New York:
Woodhead Publishing, 2018.
[4] O. L. Ki, A. Kurniawan, C. X. Lin, Y. H. Ju, and S. Ismadji, “Bio-oil from cassava peel: A
potential renewable energy source,” Bioresour. Technol., vol. 145, pp. 157–161, 2013.
[5] IEA Bioenergy, “Bio-oil,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://task34.ieabioenergy.com/bio-

oil/. [Accessed: 17-Nov-2020].
[6] AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL ENGINEER, “National Student Design

Competition 2013,” p. 6, 2013.
[7] M. I. Jahirul, M. G. Rasul, A. A. Chowdhury, and N. Ashwath, “Biofuels production

through biomass pyrolysis-A technological review,” Energies, vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 4952–
5001, 2012.
[8] M. Ringer, V. Putsche, and J. Scahill, “Large-Scale Pyrolysis Oil Production: A

Technology Assessment and Economic Analysis,” Assessment, 2006.
[9] J. Haydary, Chemical Process Design and Simulation, 1st ed. New York: Wiley, 2019.
[10] Ö. Ç. Mutlu and T. Zeng, “Challenges and Opportunities of Modeling Biomass

Gasification in Aspen Plus: A Review,” Chem. Eng. Technol., vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 1674–
1689, 2020.
[11] Aspen Technology, “Aspen Physical Property System,” Engineering, pp. 2–18, 2001.
[12] A. Eicher, “Direct Conversion vs. Companion Coal Gasification,” New Hampshire, 2013.
65
[13] G. Yu, Y. Wang, and Y. Xu, “Modeling analysis of shell, Texaco gasification
technology’s effects on water gas shift for Fischer-Tropsch process,” Adv. Mater. Res.,
vol. 608–609, pp. 1446–1453, 2013.
[14] BioMat NET, “Scaling up and operation of a flash pyrolysis system for biooil production
and applications on basis of the rotating cone technology,” 2017. [Online]. Available:
http://www.nf2000.org/secure/Fair/F538.html. [Accessed: 22-Oct-2020].
[15] D. Michaud, “Bond Impact Crushing Work Index -Procedure and Table of Crushability,”
2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.911metallurgist.com/blog/bond-impact-crushing-
work-index-procedure-and-table-of-crushability. [Accessed: 20-Oct-2020].
[16] R. A. Griskey, Chemical Engineers’ Portable Handbook, 1st ed. New York, U.S.A.:
McGraw-Hill, 2000.
[17] R. Turton, R. C. Bailie, W. B. Whiting, and J. A. Shaeiwitz, Analysis, synthesis, and

design of chemical processes, 3rd ed. Boston: Prentice Hall PTR, 1995.
[18] TRADING ECONOMICS, “Thailand Corporate Tax Rate,” 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://tradingeconomics.com/thailand/corporate-tax-rate. [Accessed: 02-Sep-2020].
[19] ธนาคารแห่งประเทศไทย, “แผนภูมิขอ้ มูลเศรษฐกิจที่สาคัญ,” 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.bot.or.th/Thai/Statistics/Graph/Pages/Main3.aspx. [Accessed: 02-Sep-2020].
[20] King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, “CHE655–Plant Design Project #3

Summer 2020,” vol. 28, no. 2, 2015.
[21] Blackmer, “Steps To Compressor Selection & Sizing,” Sel. Proper Compress., p. 17,
1999.
[22] Bohnet, “Cyclone design,” 1997. [Online]. Available:

https://powderprocess.net/Equipments html/Cyclone_Design.html. [Accessed: 15-Oct-
2020].
[23] H. P. Loh, J. Lyons, and Charles W. White, “Process Equipment Cost Estimation, Final
Report,” Pittsburgh, 2002.
66
[24] R. K. Sinnott, Coulson and Richardson’s Chemical Engineering, 3rd ed. New York:
Butterworth-Heinemann, 1999.
67
Appendix A
Cost and selling price
Table A.1 The price of raw materials, products, and utility [20]
Raw materials and products

Wood chip 0.03 USD/kg
Water 1.00 USD/m3
Oxygen 0.04 USD/kg
Coal 0.07 USD/kg
Bio-oil 0.66 USD/kg
High pressure steam 5.66 USD/GJ
Syngas 0.10 USD/m3
Waste disposal
Ash 1.00 USD/kg
Utility
Cooling water 0.35 USD/GJ
Electricity 0.10 USD/kW
Natural gas 3.00 USD/GJ
Other data
Annual operating hours 8,000 hours (330 days)
68
Appendix B
Equipment sizing and costing
B.1 Pump
B.1.1 Pump sizing
The information of the pump which required in the companion coal gasification process is
shown in table B.1.
Table B.1 Information of the pump
Inlet pressure Outlet pressure Inlet temperature Mass flow rate

Pump
(Pa) (Pa) (°C) (kg/s)
P-101 300,000.0 4,100,000.0 25.0 0.35
Determine the type of the pump by using the volumetric flow rate (1.49 m3/hr) and outlet
pressure (41.0 bar) which can be found in figure B.1.
Figure B.1 Type of the pump selection [17]
69
From table B.1, the size of the pump can be calculated as follow.
1. Calculate the pump head (Hp) from equation B.1.
P1 V P V
+ Z1 + 1 = 2 + Z 2 + 2 + H p + h f Equation B.1
g 2 g g 2 g
When P1 and P2 is pressure inlet and pressure outlet, respectively (Pa)
Z1 and Z 2 is height levels of fluid inlet and outlet, respectively (m)

V1 and V2 is mass flow rate of fluid inlet and outlet, respectively (kg/s)
 is density of fluid (kg/m3)
g is gravitational force (m/s2)
hf is friction head (m)
For turbulent flow and laminar flow,  is equal 1 and 0.5, respectively.
2. Calculate the pump power ( Ws ) which shows the ability to push fluid up to a few meters.
However, the value of Ws does not depend only on the Hp but also on the mass flow rate of the
substance. The Ws can be calculated from the following relationship as shown in equation B.2.
Ws = mgH p Equation B.2
When Ws is hydraulic power (kW)
3. Calculate the pump efficiency and break horsepower (BHP) or shaft work of the pump.
Hydraulic power
Break horsepower ( BHP ) = Equation B.3
Efficiency
70
4. Calculate the saturated pressure from Antoine’s equation and net positive suction head at
operating condition (NPSH0).
B
log10 Psat (bar ) = A − Equation B.4
T (C ) + C
P1 − Psat
NPSH0 = Equation B.5
g
Example calculation size of P-101
From P-101, mass flow rate is 0.35 kg/s and density of fluid is 848.67 kg/m3.
1. Calculate Hp from equation B.1.
Assume Z1 = Z2 (No change of elevation)
V1 = V2 (No mass flow rate change)
hf =0 (No friction loss)
P1 P
= 2 − Hp
g g
300,000 Pa 4,100,000 Pa
= −H
( 848.67 kg / m3 )( 9.81 m / s 2 ) ( 848.67 kg / m3 )( 9.81 m / s 2 ) p
Hp = 456.4 m
2. Calculate Ws from equation B.2.
Ws = ( 0.35 kg / s ) ( 9.81 m / s 2 ) ( 456.4 m )
Ws = 1,567.1 W = 1.567 kW
*** From the flow rate and head pump, we can choose the size of pump.
71
3. Calculate BHP of the pump from equation B.3 which assume the pump efficiency is 80%.
1.567 kW
Break horsepower ( BHP ) = = 1.96 kw
0.8
4. Calculate Psat and NPSH0.
- Calculate Psat of water at temperature 25.0°C from equation B.4.
Table B.2 The Antoine’s equation constants of water
Constant values Water

A 8.10765
B 1,750.286
C 235.000
1,750.286
log10 Psat (bar ) = 8.10765 −
25.0 + 235.000
Psat = 1.378 bar = 137,800 Pa
- Calculate NPSH0 from equation B.5.
300,000 Pa − 137,800 Pa
NPSH0 =
( 848.67 kg / m3 )( 9.81 m / s 2 )
NPSH0 = 19.48 m
- Material selection of the pump
In the selection of materials used for the pump was determined by the temperature and
pressure used in the operation. Therefore, carbon steel was chosen because it is strong, able to
support high pressure, and still cheaper when compared to other materials.
72
B.1.2 Pump costing [17]
Cost of the pump can be calculated from equation B.6.
CBM = CP 0  FBM Equation B.6
When C BM is cost of equipment and installation
C P0 is cost of equipment
FBM is Bare module cost factor

Bare module cost factor can be calculated from equation B.7 as shown below.
FBM = B1 + B2FMFP Equation B.7
When B1 and B2 is a constant for each equipment
FM is material of construction factor
FP is pressure factor
Table B.3 The constants for Bare module factor of the pump [17]
73
Table B.4 The identification number of the pump [17]
Figure B.2 Material factors of the pump [17]
74
Pressure factor can be calculated from equation B.8 as shown below.
log10 ( FP ) = C1 + C2 log10 ( P ) + C3 log10 ( P )

2
Equation B.8
When P is gauge pressure (barg)
C1 , C 2 and C 3 is constant for each equipment

Table B.5 Pressure factors of the pump [17]
Cost of equipment can be calculated from equation B.9 as shown below
log10 ( CP 0 ) = K1 + K 2 log10 ( A ) + K 3 log10 ( A )

2
Equation B.9
When A is a capacity of each equipment
K1 , K 2 and K 3 is constant for each equipment

Table B.6 Equipment cost data of the pump [17]
75
Equipment and installation cost must be considered about the location and year that use in
calculation. Equipment and installation cost can be calculated as shown in the equation B.10.
C L
C20 xx , B = C2001, A  I , 20 xx  I , B Equation B.10
C I , 2001 LI , A
When C 20xx, B is cost in year 20xx and in country B
C 2001, A is cost in 2001 and in country A
CI is cost index
LI is location index (1 for USA and 1.12 for South-East Asia)
Example calculation cost of P-101
From P-101, the BHP was 1.96 kW, and operate under the design pressure which equal to
43.43 bars.
From equation B.9 can be calculate cost of the pump (in year 2001) as shown in
log10 ( CP 0 ) = ( 3.3892 ) + ( 0.0536 )log10 (1.96 kW ) + ( 0.1538 )log10 (1.96 kW )

2
CP 0 = 2,618.2 USD
The material used for P-101 was carbon steel which has a FM equal to 1. Then the Fp can
be calculated FP as follow in equation B.8.
log10 ( FP ) = ( −0.3935 ) + ( 0.3957 )log10 ( 43.43 barg ) + ( −0.00226 )log10 ( 43.43 barg )
2
FP = 1.772
76
Therefore, that it can be determined the FBM by equation B.7.
FBM = (1.89 ) + (1.35 )(1.8 )(1.772 )
FBM = 6.20
CBM is calculated by equation B.6.
CBM = ( 2,618.2 USD )  ( 6.20 )
CBM = 16,232.8 USD

Cost in year 2019 can be determined by equation B.10 which CI, 2019 equal to 619.2 and
CI, 2001 equal to 394.3.
619.2 1
C2019 = (16,232.8 USD )   = 25,475.0 USD
394.3 1
B.2 Simple separation column

B.2.1 Simple separation column sizing
In the companion coal gasification used the vessel model to estimate size of the simple
separation column.
Table B.7 Information of the simple separation column
Temperature Pressure Volumetric flow rate Residence time

Filter
(°C) (bar) (m3/hr) (hr)
T-201 60.0 1.0 8,323.43 0.033
From table B.7, the simple separation column volume can be calculated from equation
B.11.
Volume of reactor = (Volumetric flow rate ) ( Residence time ) Equation B.11
77
Calculate the diameter and length of the simple separation column from equation B.12.
 D2L
V = Equation B.12
4
Example calculation size of the simple separation column (vertical vessel)
For T-101, volumetric flow rate was 8,323.43 m3/hr, and the residence time was 0.033 hr.
V = ( 8,323.43 m3 / hr ) ( 0.033 hr ) = 277.4 m3
For the vertical process vessel, length (L) to diameter (D) ratio is between 3-5. It was fixed
at 4:1.
 D2L
V = = 277.4 m3
4
 D2 ( 4D )
277.4 m =
3
→ D = 4.4 m, L = 17.6 m
4
- Thickness of the simple separation column
The thickness of longitudinal stress and the thickness of hoop stress can be calculated by
equation B.13 and equation B.14, respectively.
PD
tlongitudinal = i i
Equation B.13
4 SE + 0.8Pi
PD
thoop = i i
Equation B.14
2 SE − 1.2Pi
When Pi is pressure in column (psi)
Di is diameter of column (inch)
S is maximum allowable stress
E is welded joint efficiency
78
Table B.8 Maximum allowable stress of the simple separation column [17]
Table B.9 Welded joint efficiency of the simple separation column [17]
79
Table B.10 Minimum practical wall thickness of the simple separation column [17]
Example calculation the thickness of T-201
Data of T-201 is P = 14.7 psi, D = 175.3 inches, S = 12,900 psi, and E = 0.85
(14.7 psi ) (175.3 inches )

tlongitudinal = = 0.059 inches = 0.0015 m
4 (12,900 psi ) ( 0.85 ) + 0.8 (14.7 psi )
(14.7 psi ) (175.3 inches )

thoop = = 0.118 inches = 0.0030 m
2 (12,900 psi ) ( 0.85 ) − 1.2 (14.7 psi )
From the maximum thickness which received from calculation we had to add 5 mm
(0.005 m) to protect the simple separation column from corrosion.
Table B.11 Thickness of the simple separation column
Hoop stress Longitudinal stress Total thickness

Simple separation column
(m) (m) (m)
T-201 0.0015 0.0030 0.0095
- Material selection of the simple separation column
In the selection of materials used for the simple separation column was considered by
temperature, pressure, and physical property of component. Therefore, stainless steel that high
corrosive resistance was chosen.
80
B.2.2 Simple separation column costing [17]
The price of the simple separation column can be calculated from the relation of the Bare
module factor in according with the following equation as shown in below. Vertical vessel model
was used in calculated cost of the simple separation column.
CBM = CP 0  FBM
For the Bare module cost factor can be calculated from equation as shown below.
FBM = B1 + B2FMFP
Table B.12 Constants for Bare module factor of the simple separation column [17]
Table B.13 The identification number of the simple separation column [17]
81
Figure B.3 Material factors of the simple separation column [17]
For pressure factor (FP ) can be calculated by these equation
FP = 1 for t  0.0063 m and P  − 0.5 barg

 ( P + 1) D 
 1,699.2 − (1.2P ) + 0.00315 
FP =   for t  0.0063 m and P  − 0.5 barg
0.0063
FP = 1.25 for P  − 0.5 barg Equation B.15
According to calculate cost of equipment, it can be used equation as shown in below.

2
82
Table B.14 Equipment cost data of the simple separation column [17]
The calculation of the equipment cost, and installation cost depend on the place of
operation and cost in the year used for calculations which can be calculated following equation.
C L
C20 xx , B = C2001, A  I , 20 xx  I , B
C I , 2001 LI , A
Example calculation cost of T-201
For T-201 has V = 277.4 m3, D = 4.4 m, L = 17.6 m, P = 1.0 bar
log10 ( C P 0 ) = ( 3.5565 ) + ( 0.3776 ) log10 ( 277.4 m3 ) + ( 0.0905 ) log10 ( 277.4 m3 )
2
CP 0 = 171,495.2 USD
FM = 3.1 because we select stainless steel. From our data t > 0.0063 m and P > -0.5 barg,
so FP = 1.34.
Find FBM
FBM = ( 2.25 ) + (1.82 )( 3.1)(1.34 )

FBM = 9.81
Find CBM
C BM = (171,495.2 USD )( 9.81)
CBM = 1,682,367.9 USD

So, cost of the simple separation column T-201 in year 2019 was equal to
619.2 1
C2019 = (1,682,367.9 USD )   = 2,641,953.3 USD
394.3 1
83
B.3 Compressor
B.3.1 Compressor sizing
The information of the compressor which required in the companion coal gasification
process is shown in table B.15.
Table B.15 Information of the compressor
Suction pressure Discharge pressure Volumetric flow rate Specific heat ratio
Pump
(bar) (bar) (m3/hr) (at 300 K)
C-101 3.0 41.0 1,735.92 1.395
Knowledge of the gas, required capacity, suction pressure, suction temperature, and
discharge pressure will enable the proper compressor to be sized [21]. The basics steps involved
are:
1. Calculate the compression ratio.
Compression ratio (R) is the ratio of discharge pressure to suction pressure.
Pd
R = Equation B.16
Ps
When Pd is discharge pressure (bar)
Ps is suction pressure (bar)
2. Choose between a single-stage or two-stage compressor.
The choice of the proper number of compression stages is largely based on the compression
ratio. Discharge temperatures and the duty cycle could also be considered when determining the
number of stages to use. Some guidelines for choosing the proper number of stages are shown in
table B.16.
84
Table B.16 The guidelines for choosing the proper number of stages [21]
3. Determine the volumetric efficiency.
Volumetric efficiency is the ratio of the amount of gas compressed versus the physical size
of the compressor’s cylinder volume. For estimating purposes, the following formulas can be used:
VE % = 89 − R − 7.8 ( R1/2 n − 1) Equation B.17
When n is specific heat ratio of gas
4. Determine the required piston displacement.
Piston displacement (PD) is a measure of the compressor’s size and is depends on the size,
number, and type of cylinders, and compressor RPM. Required piston displacement (PDR) is a
calculated number that will determine how large a compressor will be required to handle the
specified capacity.
PDR = ICFM / VE or PDR = (Im3 / hr ) / VE Equation B.18
When ICFM is capacity (m3/hr)

VE is capacity (ft3/min)
Im3 / hr is capacity (m3/hr)
85
5. Determine the minimum RPM required of the selected compressor.
With the compressor model and PDR known, the minimum RPM required can be
calculated.
RPMmin = 100PDR / PD100 Equation B.19
When PD100 is piston displacement per 100 RPM
Table B.17 Piston displacement per 100 RPM for each compressor model [21]
Example calculation size of C-101
1. Calculate R from equation B.16.
41.0 bar
R = = 13.67
3.0 bar
2. Choose between a single-stage or two-stage compressor.
When R = 13.67, from table B.16 we selected the compressor type is two-stage compressor
model for the process.
86
3. Determine VE% from equation B.17.
( )
VE % = 89 − 13.67 − 7.8 13.671/( 21.395) − 1 = 63.22%
4. Determine PDR from equation B.18.
PDR = (1,735.92 m3 / hr ) / 0.6322 = 2,745.84 m3 / hr
*** From the compressor model and PDR, we obtained the size code is 613 from the size code
Blackmer compressor.
5. Determine RPMmin from equation B.19.
RPMmin = 100 ( 2,745.84 m3 / hr ) / (11.1 m3 / hr ) / (100 rpm ) = 247.37 RPM minimum
- Material selection of the compressor
In the selection of materials used for the compressor was determined by the temperature
and pressure used in the operation. Therefore, carbon steel was chosen because it is strong, able to
support high pressure, and still cheaper when compared to other materials.
B.3.2 Compressor costing [17]
The price of the compressor can be calculated from the relation of the Bare module factor
in according with the following equation as shown in below.
CBM = CP 0  FBM
For the Bare module cost factor can be determined from figure B.4.
87
Table B.18 The identification number of the compressor [17]
Figure B.4 Bare module cost factors of the compressor [17]
Cost of equipment can be calculated from equation as shown in below.

2
88
Table B.19 Equipment cost data of the compressor [17]
The calculation of the equipment cost and installation cost depend on the place of operation
and cost in the year used for calculations which can be calculated following equation.
C L
C20 xx , B = C2001, A  I , 20 xx  I , B
C I , 2001 LI , A
Example calculation cost of C-101
From ASPEN Plus V8.8, the BHP was 470.34 kW.
log10 ( C P 0 ) = ( 2.2897 ) + (1.3604 )log10 ( 470.34 kW ) + ( −0.1027 )log10 ( 470.34 kW )

2
CP 0 = 155,519.5 USD
From the figure B.4, the material used for C-101 was carbon steel which has a FBM equal
to 2.80.
Find CBM
CBM = (155,519.5 USD )  ( 2.80 )

CBM = 435,454.6 USD
Therefore, cost of the compressor C-101 in year 2019 was equal to
619.2 1
C2019 = ( 435,454.6 USD )   = 683,828.3 USD
394.3 1
89
B.4 Cyclone
B.4.1 Cyclone sizing
This design guide is based on the works published by Bohnet in 1997 [22]. The steps of
cyclone sizing are divided to 8 steps.
1. Calculate K ratios
For design of new cyclone, chose one of the standard geometries in table B.20 and assume
a diameter Dc.
Table B.20 Standard cyclone geometries for a tangential inlet [22]
2. Calculate the following geometrical dimensions
Ae 4 KBKH
= Equation B.20
Ai  K i2
Ri Ki
= Equation B.21
re 1 − KB
Ae Ri 4 KH KB
= Equation B.22
Ai re  Ki 1 − KB
Af K 1
= −1 + 4 S + 2 1 + 4 K L + 2 K Z (1 + K S )  Equation B.23
Ai Ki Ki
90
When Ae is product inlet section area (m2)
Ai is gas outlet section area (m2)
Ri is radius of gas outlet pipe (m)
re is average radius of the fluid vein (m)
Af is area of friction of powder on the sides of the cyclone (m2)
3. Calculate inlet and outlet velocities

Vc
uCe = Equation B.24
K B K H Dc2
4Vc
uCi = Equation B.25
K  Dc2
i
2
When Vc is volumetric flow of the continuous phase (gas) (m3/s)
uCe is inlet velocity (m/s)
uCi is outlet velocity (m/s)
Dc is diameter of the cyclone (m)
4. Calculate friction coefficients
 K i2  1/3
C e = 1 −  0.680 − 0.151  KB Equation B.26
 K K
B H 
uCC
= ( 0.889 − 0.408K B )
−1
Equation B.27
uCe
c uCC Dc
Rec = Equation B.28
c
144
C f = ( 2.5  10-3 ) + Equation B.29
Rec
91
When C e is coefficient of contraction at inlet
uCe is inlet velocity (m/s)
uCC is cyclone walls velocity (m/s)
Rec is Reynolds number
c is viscosity of the continuous phase (gas) (Pa.s)
Dc is diameter of the cyclone (m)
c is density of the continuous phase (kg/m3)
Cf is friction coefficient
5. Calculate the characteristics velocities
Vc
uCri = Equation B.30
 D K ( KL + K Z − K S )
2
c i
−1
uC i  A R A Ri 
= Ce e i + C f f  Equation B.31
uCi  Ai re Ai re 
When uCri is gas velocity at the radius ri (m/s)
Vc is volumetric flow of the continuous phase (gas) (m3/s)
uC i is (m/s)
uCi is outlet velocity (m/s)
C e is coefficient of contraction at inlet
Ae is product inlet section area (m2)
92
Ai is gas outlet section area (m2)
R i is radius of gas outlet pipe (m)
re is average radius of the fluid vein (m)
Cf is friction coefficient
Af is area of friction of powder on the sides of the cyclone (m2)
6. Calculate the cut off diameter (dc)
Particles having a diameter equal to the cut off diameter are captured with an efficiency of
50%. It means that the cyclone will capture 50% of the particles having this diameter in the gas
stream and will let through the other 50%.
uCri c K i Dc
dc = 2.846 Equation B.32
 uC2 i
When  is difference in densities (kg/m3)
7. Calculate the efficiencies
The efficiencies are calculated relatively to the cut off diameter. Bigger particles will lead
better efficiencies. Smaller particles to lower efficiencies. A factor Г is used in the calculation and
is usually in the order of 3 (+/- 1).
  d 
 ln   i  
d  1 1 d
  i  = + cos   −  2c   with  usually = 3
ln (  ) 
Equation B.33
 dc  2 2 
 
 
When d i is particle of diameter i for which the efficiency is calculated (m)
dc is cut off diameter (m)
93
8. Calculate the pressure drop
Af 1
= 1 − K i2 + 4 ( K i K S + K L ) + 2K Z (1 + K S )  Equation B.34
 Ri Rc Ri K i
3/2
1
Pc = c c uCi2 Equation B.35
2
c = Ce + Ci Equation B.36
−2
R  Af uC i    u 2
c = i  1 − C f  − 1 
C i
 Equation B.37
Rc   Ri Rc Ri uCi    uCi 
  uC i 
4/3
 uC i  
2
Ci = C fi 2 + 3   +    Equation B.38

  uCi   uCi  
When Pc is cyclone pressure drop (Pa)
c is total pressure drop coefficient of the cyclone
Ce is pressure drop coefficient in the inlet and inside the cyclone
Ci is pressure drop coefficient in the outlet of the cyclone
C fi is 0.70 to 0.75
Example calculation size of S-101
The above step to design a cyclone can be calculated by Excel program. The user must
input gas flowrate, gas viscosity, gas density, solid density, and select one standard geometry or K
ratios. Then, the user modifies the cyclone diameter until cut off diameter reaches target and low
pressure drop that the solver tool in Excel can optimize.
94
Table B.21 Input data of the cyclone
Data Value
Gas flowrate (m3/hr) 21,354.98
Gas viscosity (Pa·s) 3.13x10-5
Gas density (kg/m3) 0.6799
Solid density (kg/m3) 1,595
Table B.22 Control panel of the cyclone
Data Value
Cyclone diameter, Dc (m) 1.909
Cut off diameter (µm) 10.0
Pressure drops (Pa) 411.0
Table B.23 Calculations of the dimensions of the cyclone
Chosen geometry
Hc/Dc = KH 0.5
Bc/Dc = KB 0.2
Sc/Dc = KS 0.5
Di/Dc = Ki 0.5
Lc/Dc = KL 1.5
Zc/Dc = KZ 2.5
DS/Dc = KD 0.375
Calculation of the other dimensions
Hc (m) 1.0
Bc (m) 0.4
Sc (m) 1.0
Di (m) 1.0
Lc (m) 2.9
Zc (m) 4.8
DS (m) 0.7
95
Table B.23 Calculations of the dimensions of the cyclone (Cont.)
Geometrical ratio calculations

Ae/Ai 0.5
Ri/re 0.6
Ae/Ai*Ri/re 0.3
Af/Ai 61.0
Inlet and outlet velocities
uce (m/s) 16.3
uci (m/s) 8.3
Striction and friction coefficient
Ce 0.8
ucc/uce 1.2
Rec 835,577
Cf 0.0
Figure B.5 Dimensions of the cyclone [22]
96
- Material selection of the cyclone
In the selection of materials for the cyclone was considered by temperature, pressure, and
physical property of component. Therefore, stainless steel that high corrosive resistance was
chosen because bio-oil is acidic (pH = 2).
B.4.2 Cyclone costing [17]
The price of the cyclone can be calculated from the relation of the Bare module factor in
according with the following equation.
CBM = CP 0  FBM
For the Bare module cost factor can be determined from table B.24.
Table B.24 Bare module cost factors of the cyclone [17]

2
97
Table B.25 Equipment cost data of the cyclone [17]
The calculation of the equipment cost and installation cost depend on the place of operation
and cost in the year used for calculations which can be calculated following equation.
C L
C20 xx , B = C2001, A  I , 20 xx  I , B
C I , 2001 LI , A
Example calculation cost of S-101
The volume of the cyclone S-101 is 18.04 m3.
log10 ( C P 0 ) = ( 4.5007 ) + ( 0.4182 ) log10 (18.04 m3 )  + ( 0.0813 ) log10 ( 18.04 m3 ) 

2
CP 0 = 142,669.0 USD
98
From the table B.24, FBM = 2.86.
Find CBM
C BM = (142,669.0 USD )  ( 2.86 )

CBM = 408,035.0 USD
Therefore, cost of the compressor S-101 in year 2019 was equal to
619.2 1
C2019 = ( 408,035.0 USD )   = 640,769.0 USD
394.3 1
B.5 Crusher
B.5.1 Crusher sizing
The feed handling section has several pieces of equipment, (e.g., conveyors) which are not
modeled in ASPEN Plus V8.8. In fact, one of the most significant energy demands is the feedstock
crusher. The power requirements to cut the wood chips to < 2 mm are estimated at 50 kWh/ton
[14]. The coal can be estimated by Bond’s Third Theory of Comminution which the work/energy
input is proportional to the new crack tip length created during particle breakage and equivalent to
the work represented by the product-the feed [15].
The equation that Bond developed for a calculation was
 1 1 
W = 10  Wi  −  Equation B.39
 P F
When W is predicted mill energy consumption (kWh/ton)
Wi is work Index (kWh/ton)
P is 80 % passing sizes of product (µm)
F is 80 % passing sizes of feed (µm)
99
Figure B.6 Summary of crushing work index tests [15]
Example calculation size of the wood chips crusher K-101
The wood chips fresh feed to K-101 is 20,007.46 kg/hr. Therefore, the power is required:
kg kWh   1 ton 
W =  20,007.46    50  = 1,004 kW or 1,342 hp
 hr   ton   1,000 kg 
Example calculation size of the coal crusher K-101
The coal fresh feed to K-101 is 2,575.06 kg/hr. 80 % passing sizes of feed and product are
10,000 and 1,000 µm, respectively. Therefore, the power is required:
  1 1   kWh   kg   1 st 
W =  10  5.72  −      2,575.6     = 501.6 kW or 673 hp
  10,000 1,000   st   hr   6.35 kg 
- Material selection of the crusher
All the crushers are operated at 1.0 bar and 25.0°C and the feed stream is not corrosive
substances. Therefore, carbon steel is used for the material of construction.
100
B.5.2 Crusher costing [23]
The cost of the crusher is not estimated by Bare module method, but it can be estimated by
NETL cost curve. The design basis is first quarter 1998 dollars and the materials are A285C (Low
and intermediate strength carbon steel plates for pressure vessels). The solid feed is coal and wood
chips. Therefore, the ring granulator crusher that use for primary and secondary crushing of
bituminous and subbituminous coals, lignite, gypsum, and some medium hard minerals is selected.
Figure B.7 The cost curve of the crusher [23]
Example calculation cost of the wood chips crusher K-101
The power requirement of the wood chips crusher K-101 was 1,342 hp. From figure B.8,
at 1,342 hp and ring granulator line provided the purchased cost at 350,000 USD.
The installation factor of the wood chips crusher K-101 is 1.83. Therefore, the equipment
and installation cost of the wood chips crusher K-101 was 640,500 USD.
Therefore, cost of the wood chips crusher K-101 in year 2019 was equal to
619.2 1
C2019 = ( 640,500.0 USD )   = 1,129,908.0 USD
394.3 1
101
B.6 Reactor
B.6.1 Reactor sizing
In both processes used the vessel model to estimate size of the reactor. The basic
information of reactor which was obtained from ASPEN Plus V8.8 as shown in the table B.26.
Table B.26 Information of the reactor

Data
R-101 R-102 R-101 R-201
Type Pyrolysis Combustor Gasifier Pyrolysis
Volumetric flow rate
5.932 97.110 6.013 14.761
(m3/s)
Residence time (s) 8.0 1.5 8.0 1.5
From table B.26, the reactor volume can be calculated from this equation.
Volume of reactor = (Volumetric flow rate ) ( Residence time )
Calculate the diameter and length of the reactor from this equation.
 D2L
V =
4
Example calculation size of the pyrolysis R-101 in direct conversion process
For R-101, volumetric flow rate was 5.932 m3/s, and the residence time was 8.0 s.
V = ( 5.932 m3 / s ) ( 8.0 s ) = 47.45 m3
From the literature, length and diameter was fixed by L:D ratio was 4:1 (vertical vessel).
 D2L
V = = 47.45 m3
4
 D2 ( 4D )
47.45 m3 = → D = 2.47 m, L = 9.89 m
4
102
- Thickness of the reactor
The thickness of longitudinal stress and the thickness of hoop stress can be calculated in
PD
tlongitudinal = i i
4 SE + 0.8Pi
PD
thoop = i i
2 SE − 1.2Pi
Table B.27 Maximum allowable stress of the reactor [17]
103
Table B.28 Welded joint efficiency of the reactor [17]
Table B.29 Minimum practical wall thickness of the reactor [17]
Example calculation the thickness of the pyrolysis R-101 in direct conversion process
Data of R-101 is P = 14.7 psi, D = 97.2 inches, S = 12,900 psi, and E = 0.85
(14.7 psi ) ( 97.2 inches )

4 (12,900 psi ) ( 0.85 ) + 0.8 (14.7 psi )
(14.7 psi ) ( 97.2 inches )

thoop = = 0.065 inches = 0.0017 m
2 (12,900 psi ) ( 0.85 ) − 1.2 (14.7 psi )
104
(0.005 m) to protect the reactor from corrosion.
Table B.30 Thickness of the reactor

Reactor
(m) (m) (m)
R-201 0.0017 0.0008 0.0025
- Material selection of reactor
In the selection of materials used for the vessels was determined by the temperature,
pressure, and nature of chemicals. Therefore, stainless steel was chosen for R-101 from direct
conversion process and R-201 in companion coal gasification process because there are many
substances that is acid. Stainless steel can support high corrosive substances. And carbon steel was
chosen for others 2 reactors.
B.6.2 Reactor costing [17]
The price of the reactor can be calculated from the relation of the Bare module factor in
CBM = CP 0  FBM
FBM = B1 + B2FMFP
105
Table B.31 Constants for Bare module factor of the reactor [17]
Table B.32 The identification number of the reactor [17]
Figure B.8 Material factors of the reactor [17]
106

 ( P + 1) D 
 1,699.2 − (1.2P ) + 0.00315
0.0063
FP = 1.25 for P  − 0.5 barg

According to calculate cost of equipment, it can be used equation as shown in below

2
Table B.33 Equipment cost data of the reactor [17]
C L
C20 xx , B = C2001, A  I , 20 xx  I , B
C I , 2001 LI , A
Example calculation cost of the pyrolysis R-101 in direct conversion process
For R-101 has V = 47.45 m3, D = 2.47 m, L = 9.89 m, P = 1.0 bar
log10 ( C P 0 ) = ( 3.4974 ) + ( 0.4485 ) log10 ( 47.45 m3 ) + ( 0.1074 ) log10 ( 47.45 m3 )
2
CP 0 = 35,563.3 USD
FM = 3.1 because we select stainless steel. From our data t < 0.0063 m, FP is also 1 too.
107
Find FBM
FBM = ( 2.25 ) + (1.82 )( 3.1)(1)

FBM = 7.89
Find CBM
CBM = ( 35,563.3 USD )( 7.89)
CBM = 280,665.4 USD

So, cost of the reactor R-101 in year 2019 was equal to
619.2 1
C2019 = ( 280,665.4 USD )   = 440,750.8 USD
394.3 1
B.7 Heat exchanger

B.7.1 Heat exchanger sizing
Table B.34 Preliminary data of the heat exchanger
Hot side Cold side

Heat duty U
Unit Tin Tout Fluid Tin Tout Fluid
(kW) (kW/ m2·°C)
(°C) (°C) type (°C) (°C) type
Direct conversion process
E-101 2,362.0 500.0 243.2 Fuel oil 30.0 249.7 DI water 0.85
Cooling
E-102 1,783.0 243.2 60.0 Fuel oil 30.0 35.3 0.50
water
E-103 35,710.0 1,648.0 43.6 Gasses 30.0 249.7 DI water 0.25
E-201 2,362.0 500.0 268.4 Fuel oil 30.0 249.7 DI water 0.85
Cooling
E-202 1,785.0 268.4 60.0 Fuel oil 30.0 36.5 0.50
water
***DI water = Deionized water
108
- Heat transfer area
Heat transfer area can be estimated from the equation B.40.
Q = U  A  ( F  Tlm ) Equation B.40
When Q is amount of heat transferred (W)
U is overall heat transfer coefficient (W/m2·°C)
A is heat transfer area (m2)
F is temperature correction factor
Tlm is log mean temperature different (°C)
Example E-101
According to data in table B.34, it can be drawing temperature driving force profile in
figure B.9. In figure B.9 show that there was no phase change in the heat exchanger because there
was no constant temperature in the graph. So, it can be determined the temperature different by
log mean temperature different as shown in equation B.41.
600.0
500
500.0
Temperature (⁰C)
400.0
243.179
300.0
200.0
249.669
100.0 30
0.0
0.0 500.0 1,000.0 1,500.0 2,000.0 2,500.0
Heat duty (kW)
Figure B.9 Temperature driving force profile for E-101
109
T1 − T2
Tlm = Equation B.41
 T 
ln  1 
 T2 
When T1 is temperature different between Thot, out and Tcold, in (°C)
T2 is temperature different between Thot, in and Tcold, out (°C)
For example, is substitute the data in equation B.41.
( 243.2°C − 30.0°C ) − ( 500.0°C − 249.7°C )

Tlm = = 231.1°C
 243.2°C − 30.0°C 
ln  
 500.0°C − 249.7°C 
Substitute ∆Tlm and temperature correction factor (assume F = 1) and overall heat transfer
coefficient (0.85 kW/m2·°C) in equation B.40
2,362.0 kW = ( 0.85 kW / m2  °C )  A  (1  231.1°C )
A = 12.02 m2
The estimated heat transfer area calculation is shown in table B.35. There is the heat
transfer area for no fouling in the heat exchanger.
Table B.35 Estimated heat transfer area (No fouling factor)
Overall heat transfer

Heat duty Heat transfer area
Unit coefficient estimated ∆Tlm
(kW) estimated (m2)
(W/ m2·°C)
E-101 2,362.0 0.85 231.26 12.02
E-102 1,783.0 0.50 91.90 38.81
E-103 35,710.0 0.25 299.03 477.67
E-201 2,362.0 0.85 244.29 11.37
E-202 1,785.0 0.50 98.70 36.16
110
- Type of heat exchanger
Estimated heat transfer area is important for choosing types of heat exchanger in the
system. If the estimated heat transfer area is in range of 1-10 m2, it will appropriate with double
pipe heat exchanger. For the estimated heat transfer area more than 10 m2, it appropriates with
shell and tube heat exchanger. But, in this report, shell and tube heat exchanger was used for all
heat exchangers. Type of each the heat exchanger as shown in table B.36.
Table B.36 Type of each heat exchanger
Heat transfer area estimated Type of heat

Unit
(m2) exchanger
E-101 12.02 Shell and tube
In the other hand, the fouling in heat exchanger will occur and make equipment has lower
capability to transfer heat such as decrease thermal efficiency, and heat flux. The net effect of these
accumulations on heat transfer is represented by a fouling factor (Rf). Fouling factor depends on
the type of fluid in heat exchanger. So, the calculation the heat transfer area must include the
fouling factor.
- Heat transfer area in case of having a fouling
From equation B.40, it can be calculated the overall heat transfer coefficient by this
equation.
1 1 do R f , i
= + + Rf, o Equation B.42
UD UC di
111
When U is overall heat transfer coefficient (W/m2·°C)
d is tube diameter (m)
Rf is fouling factor (m2·°C/W)
o is outer surface of tube

i is inner surface of tube
Table B.37 Fouling factor [24]
Heat transfer coefficient Fouling factor

Fluid
(W/ m2·°C) (m2·°C /W)
River water 3,000-12,000 0.0003-0.0001
Sea water 1,000-3,000 0.001-0.0003
Cooling water (towers) 3,000-6,000 0.0003-0.00017
Town water (soft) 3,000-5,000 0.0003-0.0002
Town water (hard) 1,000-2,000 0.001-0.0005
Steam condensate 1,500-5,000 0.00067-0.0002
Steam (oil free) 4,000-10,000 0.0025-0.0001
Steam (oil traces) 2,000-5,000 0.0005-0.0002
Refrigerated brine 3,000-5,000 0.0003-0.0002
Air and industrial gases 5,000-10,000 0.0002-0.0001
Flue gases 2,000-5,000 0.0005-0.0002
Organic vapors 5,000 0.0002
Organic liquids 5,000 0.0002
Light hydrocarbons 5,000 0.0002
Heavy hydrocarbons 2,000 0.0005
Boiling organics 2,500 0.0004
Condensing organics 5,000 0.0002
Heat transfer fluids 5,000 0.0002
Aqueous salt solutions 3,000-5,000 0.0003-0.0002
From estimated heat transfer area of E-101 is 12.02 m2. But if it includes fouling factor of
fuel oil and water which were Rf = 0.0002 m2·°C /W and 0.0002 m2·°C /W, respectively. For
E-101, the outside dimeter (do = 0.01905 m) and inside dimeter (di = 0.01351 m) from Tubular
112
Exchanger Manufacture’s Association (TEMA) program. Therefore, the overall heat transfer
coefficient is changed which calculated by equation B.42.
1
=
1
+
( 0.01905 m  0.0002 m2  °C / kW )
+ 0.2 m2  °C / kW
UD 0.85 kW / m  °C
2
0.01351 m
UD = 0.603 kW / m2  °C
Combine correction factor and overall heat transfer coefficient in case of having a fouling
to find a correct heat transfer area. The overall heat transfer coefficient is substituted, it obtains
from equation B.42. So, the actual area can be calculated by equation B.40.
2,3620.0 kW = ( 0.603 kW / m2 °C )  A  (1  231.1°C )
A = 16.95 m2
Table B.38 Overall heat transfer coefficient and heat transfer area
Overall heat transfer coefficient Heat transfer area

Unit
(kW/m2·°C) (m2)
E-101 0.603 16.94
E-102 0.372 52.11
E-103 0.207 578.24
E-201 0.603 16.03
E-202 0.372 48.55
- Material selection of reactor
Temperature of hot and cold stream, corrosive and solid particle were considered while
selecting the materials of heat exchanger. The materials for heat exchangers are shown in table
B.39.
113
Table B.39 Material of the heat exchanger
Unit Tube side Shell side

E-101 Stainless steel Carbon steel
E-103 Carbon steel Carbon steel
B.7.2 Heat exchanger costing [17]
Cost of heat exchanger can be calculated from Bare module factor.
CBM = CP 0  FBM
Bare module cost factor can be calculated from equation as shown below.
FBM = B1 + B2FMFP
Table B.40 Constants for Bare module factor of the heat exchanger [17]
114
Table B.41 Identification number of the heat exchanger [17]
Figure B.10 Material factors of the heat exchanger [17]
115
Pressure factor can be calculated from equation B.8 as shown below.
log10 ( FP ) = C1 + C2 log10 ( P ) + C3 log10 ( P )

2
Table B.42 Pressure factors of the heat exchanger [17]

2
Example calculation cost of E-101
E-101 has heat transfer area at 16.95 m2 which come from Tubular Exchangers
Manufacturers Association Sheet at pressure 3.0 barg.
log10 ( C P 0 ) = ( 4.3247 ) + ( −0.3030 ) log10 (16.95 m2 )  + ( 0.1634 ) log10 (16.95 m2 )

2
CP 0 = 15,816.2 USD
The material used for E-101 was stainless steel. From figure B.11, FM = 1.8 and can be
calculated FP as follow
log10 ( FP ) = ( 0 ) + ( 0 )log10 ( 5.0 barg ) + ( 0 )log10 ( 5.0 barg )

2
FP = 1
116
Find FBM
FBM = (1.63 ) + (1.66 )(1.8 )(1)

FBM = 4.62
Find CBM
C BM = (15,816.2 USD )  ( 4.62 )
CBM = 73,039.4 USD

Therefore, cost of heat exchanger E-101 in year 2019 was equal to
619.2 1
C2019 = ( 73,039.4 USD )   = 114,699.4 USD
394.3 1
B.8 Vessel
B.8.1 Vessel sizing
Flash drums are considered as vessel, sizing of vessel is required some parameter involving
density of both phases (vapor-liquid, liquid-liquid), mass flow rate, volumetric flow rate, pressure,
temperature from ASPEN Plus V8.8 and the corrosive of the component to choose the optimum
material. Finding the diameter and length of the vessel is estimated from these equations.
 L − V
VPerm = K Equation B.43
V
When VPerm is permitted vapor velocity (m/s)
K is empirical constant of each drum (m/s), K = 0.02 (recommended value.)
L is density of liquid stream (kg/m3)
V is density of vapor stream (kg/m3)
117
- Diameter of vessel is calculated by:
4 AC 4WV
D = = Equation B.44
 ( 3, 600 )( ) ( 0.75 VPerm )( V )
When D is diameter of vessel (m)
WV is mass flow rate of vapor phase (kg/hr)
0.75VPerm is 0.75 times of theoretical permitted vapor velocity as a safety face (m/s)
- Length of vessel is calculated by:
L = HV + HF + HL Equation B.45
When L is length of vessel (m)

HV is height of vapor phase (m)
HF is height from liquid surface to feed inlet (m)
H L is height of liquid phase (m)
4t
HL = Qliq  2  Equation B.46
D 
HV = 0.9144 + 0.5DZ Equation B.47
HF = 0.3048 + 0.5DZ Equation B.48
118
Diameter of nozzle of feed stream (Dz)
 60 
UF =  0.5  Equation B.49
 F 
4F
Dz = Equation B.50
UF  F
When Qliq is volume flow rate of liquid (m3/min)
UF is velocity of feed (m/s)
F is density of feed stream (kg/m3)
D z is diameter of nozzle of feed stream (m)

F is feed stream (kg/s)
t is residence time (s), vapor-liquid separation: 2-9 min.
liquid-liquid separation: 10 min.
Example calculation size of the vessel V-101 in direct conversion process
Table B.43 Data of sizing vessel V-101
ρV ρL ρF WV F QL
Equipment
(kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/hr) (kg/s) (m3/min)
V-101 0.9688 805.4641 1.7522 8,020.075 4.0334 0.1345
1. Find permitted velocity:
805.4641 − 0.9688
VPerm = ( 0.02 ) = 0.5763 m / s
0.9688
119
2. Find a diameter of vessel:
4 ( 8, 020.075 )
D= = 2.6026 m
( 3, 600 )( )( 0.75 0.5769 )( 0.9688 )
3. Find velocity of feed and diameter of nozzle of feed stream:
 60 
UF =   = 45.3274 m / s
 (1.7522 )
0.5

4 ( 4.0334 )
Dz = = 0.0647 m
( 45.3274 )(1.7522 )( )
4. Find a length of vessel:
 4 ( 9  60 ) 
HL = 0.1345   = 13.6519 m
  ( 0.548 )
2

HV = 0.9144 + 0.5 ( 0.0647 ) = 0.9323m
HF = 0.3048 + 0.5 ( 0.0647 ) = 0.3371 m
L = 0.9323 + 0.3371 + 13.6519 = 14.9214 m
L / D = 14.9214 / 2.6026 = 5.7332

*** When L/D > 5, it is horizontal vessel.
- Thickness of the vessel
The thickness of longitudinal stress and the thickness of hoop stress can be calculated in
PD
tlongitudinal = i i
4 SE + 0.8Pi
PD
thoop = i i
2 SE − 1.2Pi
120
Table B.44 Maximum allowable stress of the vessel [17]
Table B.45 Welded joint efficiency of the vessel [17]
121
Table B.46 Minimum practical wall thickness of the vessel [17]
Example calculation the thickness of the vessel V-101 in direct conversion process
Data of V-101 is P = 14.7 psi, D = 102.5 inches, S = 12,900 psi, and E = 0.85
(14.7 psi ) (102.5 inches )

4 (12,900 psi ) ( 0.85 ) + 0.8 (14.7 psi )
(14.7 psi ) (102.5 inches )

thoop = = 0.069 inches = 0.0018 m
2 (12,900 psi ) ( 0.85 ) − 1.2 (14.7 psi )
(0.005 m) to protect the reactor from corrosion.
Table B.47 Thickness of the vessel

Vessel
(m) (m) (m)
V-101 0.0018 0.0009 0.0027
- Material selection of vessel
In the selection of materials used for the vessels was determined by the temperature,
pressure, and nature of chemicals. Therefore, stainless steel was chosen because there are many
substances that is acid. Stainless steel can support high corrosive substances.
122
B.8.2 Vessels costing [17]
The price of the vessels can be calculated from the relation of the Bare module factor in
according with the following equation as shown in below.
CBM = CP 0  FBM
FBM = B1 + B2FMFP
Table B.48 Constants for Bare module factor of the vessel [17]
Table B.49 The identification number of the vessel [17]
123
Figure B.11 Material factors of the vessel [17]

 ( P + 1) D 
 1,699.2 − (1.2P ) + 0.00315
0.0063
FP = 1.25 for P  − 0.5 barg

According to calculate cost of equipment, it can be used equation as shown in below.

2
Table B.50 Equipment cost data of the vessel [17]
124
C L
C20 xx , B = C2001, A  I , 20 xx  I , B
C I , 2001 LI , A
Example calculation cost of the vessel V-101 in direct conversion process
For V-101 has V = 79.3825 m3, D = 2.6026 m, L = 14.9214 m, P = 1.0 bar
log10 ( C P 0 ) = ( 3.5565 ) + ( 0.3776 ) log10 ( 97.3826 m3 ) + ( 0.0905 ) log10 ( 97.3826 m3 )
2
CP 0 = 39,851.7 USD
FM = 3.1 because we select stainless steel. From our data t < 0.0063 m, FP is also 1 too.
Find FBM
FBM = (1.49 ) + (1.52 )( 3.1)(1)

FBM = 6.20
Find CBM
CBM = ( 39,851.7 USD )( 6.20 )

CBM = 247,160.2 USD
So, cost of the vessel V-101 in year 2019 was equal to
619.2 1
C2019 = ( 247,160.2 USD )   = 388,134.8 USD
394.3 1
125
Appendix C
Utility costs
Table C.1 Determination of the utilities cost in the direct conversion process
Unit Utility used Annual used USD/Unit Annual cost (USD)
K-101 Electricity 10,736,000 kW 0.10 1,061,000

R-101 Natural gas 2,639,000 GJ 3.00 7,918,000
E-102 Cooling water 51,000 GJ 0.35 18,000
V-102 Cooling water 35,000 GJ 0.35 12,000
Total 9,009,000
Table C.2 Determination of the utilities cost in the companion coal gasification process
Unit Utility used Annual used USD/Unit Annual cost (USD)
K-101 Electricity 4,013,000 kW 0.10 396,000

K-201 Electricity 4,410,000 kW 0.10 436,000
R-201 Natural gas 1,496,000 GJ 3.00 4,489,000
P-101 Electricity 16,000 kW 0.10 1,600
C-101 Electricity 3,763,000 kW 0.10 372,000
E-202 Cooling water 51,000 GJ 0.35 18,000
T-201 Cooling water 24,000 GJ 0.35 8,300
Total 5,720,900
126
Appendix D
Economic calculation
D.1 Depreciation
In this report, the depreciation method called Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System
(MACRS) was selected. The MACRS method used a double declining balance method and
switches to a straight-line method when the straight-line method yields a greater depreciation
allowance for that year. The depreciation schedule for equipment with a 20-year class life and 10-
year recovery period is shown in the table below.
Table D.1 Depreciation schedule for MACRS’s method
Depreciation allowance
Year
(% of Capital investment)
1 10
2 18
3 14.4
4 11.52
5 9.22
6 7.37
7 6.55
8 6.55
9 6.56
10 6.55
11 3.28
After that, depreciation was calculated as shown in table D.2 and table D.3.
127
Table D.2 Determination of depreciation by MACRS’s method of the direct conversion process
Depreciation allowance FCI Depreciation

Year
(% of Capital investment) (USD) (USD)
1 10 43,620,000 4,362,000
2 18 43,620,000 7,852,000
3 14.4 43,620,000 6,281,000
4 11.52 43,620,000 5,025,000
5 9.22 43,620,000 4,022,000
6 7.37 43,620,000 3,215,000
7 6.55 43,620,000 2,857,000
8 6.55 43,620,000 2,857,000
9 6.56 43,620,000 2,862,000
10 6.55 43,620,000 2,857,000
11 3.28 43,620,000 1,431,000
Table D.3 Determination of depreciation by MACRS’s method of the companion coal gasification
process
Depreciation allowance FCI Depreciation

Year
(% of Capital investment) (USD) (USD)
1 10 21,458,000 2,146,000
2 18 21,458,000 3,863,000
3 14.4 21,458,000 3,090,000
4 11.52 21,458,000 2,472,000
5 9.22 21,458,000 1,978,000
6 7.37 21,458,000 1,581,000
7 6.55 21,458,000 1,406,000
8 6.55 21,458,000 1,406,000
9 6.56 21,458,000 1,408,000
10 6.55 21,458,000 1,406,000
11 3.28 21,458,000 704,000
128
D.2 Revenue
The revenue of the production processes was calculated using the current price in the
market. The products of plant were bio-oil, high pressure steam, and syngas.
Table D.4 Revenue of the direct conversion process
Product Amount/yr USD/amount USD/yr

Bio-oil 52,000,000 kg 0.66 35,320,000
High pressure steam 685,700 GJ 5.66 3,881,000
Table D.5 Revenue of the companion coal gasification process
Product Amount/yr USD/amount USD/yr

Bio-oil 52,000,000 kg 0.66 35,320,000
High pressure steam 685,700 GJ 5.66 241,000
3
Syngas 16,674,000 m 0.10 1,667,000
D.3 Taxation, cash flow and profit
Assume the taxation rate for this plant was 21%. Then, cash flows and profits were
evaluated in terms of revenue, cost of manufacturing, depreciation, and tax rate.
Table D.6 Evaluation of cash flow
Description Formula
Expenses = Manufacturing costs + Depreciation = COMd + d
Income tax = (Revenue - Expenses)(Tax rate) = (R - COMd - d)(t)
After - Tax (Net) profit = Revenue - Expenses - Income tax = (R - COMd - d)(1 - t)
After-Tax cash flow = Net profit + Depreciation = (R - COMd - d)(1 - t) + d
Variables
t Tax rate
COMd Cost of manufacturing excluding depreciation

d Depreciation
R Revenue
129
D.4 Discount factors
Discount factors represented simple ratios and was multiplied or divided by each other to
give additional discount factors.
Table D.7 Commonly used factors for cash flow diagram calculations
Conversion Symbol Formula

P to F (F/P, i, n) (1+i)n
F to P (P/F, i, n) 1/(1+i)n
A to F (F/A, i, n) ((1+i)n-1)/i
F to A (A/F, i, n) i/((1+i)n-1)
P to A (A/P, i, n) (i(1+i)n)/( (1+i)n-1)
A to P (P/A, i, n) ((1+i)n-1)/ (i(1+i)n)
When P is the present value
F is the future value
A is the annuities
i is the interest rate
n is the period of year
D.5 Payback period
Payback period (PBP) was the time required to recover total capital investment, TCI, which
was performed by the interpolation on the year that TCI was totally recovered.
For the direct conversion process, TCI was returned when cumulative cash flow was equal
to -3,754,794 that was between year 8th to year 9th. The calculation was represented by the equation
below.
0 − ( −3,754,794 )
Payback period = 8 + = 8.88 or 8 years 11 months
520,316 − ( −3,754,794 )
130
For the companion coal gasification process, TCI was returned when cumulative cash flow
was equal to -3,753,698 that was between year 3rd to year 4th. The calculation was represented by
the equation below.
0 − ( −3,753,698 )
Payback period = 3 + = 3.69 or 3 years 9 months
1,677,770 − ( −3,753,698 )
D.6 Internal rate of return
Internal rate of return (IRR) was interest or discount rate for which the net present value of
the project was equal to zero. IRR was calculated by using Solver in Excel datasheet.
Table D.8 Cumulative discounted cash flow of the direct conversion process
Year Cash flow (USD) Disc cash flow (USD) Cumulative disc cash flow (USD)
1 -10,277,444 -9,666,763 -9,666,763
2 -10,277,444 -9,092,367 -18,759,130
3 -383,492 -319,113 -19,078,243
4 349,331 273,414 -18,804,829
5 19,561 14,400 -18,790,429
6 7,874,925 5,452,830 -13,337,599
7 7,664,239 4,991,608 -8,345,991
8 7,494,773 4,591,197 -3,754,794
9 7,419,659 4,275,110 520,316
10 7,419,659 4,021,084 4,541,400
11 7,420,575 3,782,620 8,324,020
12 7,419,659 3,557,419 11,881,439
13 7,120,117 3,210,955 15,092,394
14 6,819,660 2,892,715 17,985,109
15 6,819,660 2,720,831 20,705,940
16 6,819,660 2,559,160 23,265,100
17 6,819,660 2,407,096 25,672,196
18 6,819,660 2,264,067 27,936,263
19 6,819,660 2,129,537 30,065,800
20 6,819,660 2,003,001 32,068,801
131
Table D.8 Cumulative discounted cash flow of the direct conversion process (Cont.)
21 6,819,660 1,883,984 33,952,785
22 6,819,660 1,772,038 35,724,823
From calculation in the table D.8, IRR was equal to 18.60%.
Table D.9 Cumulative discounted cash flow of the companion coal gasification process
1 -5,055,853 -4,755,437 -4,755,437
2 -5,055,853 -4,472,870 -9,228,307
3 6,579,082 5,474,609 -3,753,698
4 6,939,585 5,431,468 1,677,770
5 6,777,359 4,989,305 6,667,075
6 10,641,702 7,368,628 14,035,703
7 10,538,057 6,863,285 20,898,988
8 10,454,691 6,404,402 27,303,390
9 10,417,739 6,002,564 33,305,954
10 10,417,739 5,645,894 38,951,848
11 10,418,190 5,310,647 44,262,495
12 10,417,739 4,994,875 49,257,370
13 10,270,384 4,631,628 53,888,998
14 10,122,578 4,293,723 58,182,721
15 10,122,578 4,038,592 62,221,313
16 10,122,578 3,798,621 66,019,934
17 10,122,578 3,572,908 69,592,842
18 10,122,578 3,360,607 72,953,449
19 10,122,578 3,160,921 76,114,370
20 10,122,578 2,973,101 79,087,471
21 10,122,578 2,796,440 81,883,911
22 10,122,578 2,630,277 84,514,188
From calculation in the table D.9, IRR was equal to 58.70%.
132
D.7 Equivalent annual operating cost
Equivalent annual operating cost (EAOC) was one of the cash criteria that lump both
capital cost and yearly operating cost into a single cash fund. To consider the worth of production
plant’s investment, EAOC was needed to be considered and represented as negative value. EAOC
was defined using the equation below.
EAOC = - ( Pr oduct value - Cos t of manufacturing - Cos t annuity )
The capital cost annuity was an annual cost which derived from fixed capital cost of plant
construction and installation.
The capital cost was defined as follows:
i (1 + i )
n
Capital Cost Annuity (CCA) = FCI

(1 + i ) −1
n
When FCI is fixed capital investment
i is the interest rate
n is the plant life
Example calculation EAOC of the direct conversion process
This project life was assumed to be 10 years but after first 10 years will be invested again
for 10 years. Moreover, the interest rate was assumed to be 15 %.
- Product value = 38,201,062 USD/yr
- COMd = 29,568,581 USD/yr
The fixed capital investment (FCI) was paid in first five years at 20% of FCI. In calculation,
we focus on the end of the construction year (2nd year). FCI must be adjusted to become a capital
cost annuity.
133
Capital cost at the end of construction year
= 10, 277, 444 ( F / P, 6.32%, 2 ) + 10, 277, 444 ( F / P, 6.32%, 1) + 10, 277, 444
+ 10, 277, 444 ( P / F , 6.32%, 1) + 10, 277, 444 ( P / F , 6.32%, 2 )
= 10, 277, 444 (1.13) + 10, 277, 444 (1.06) + 10, 277, 444 + 10, 277, 444 ( 0.94 )
+ 10, 277, 444 ( 0.88)
= 51,580,259 USD
Capital cost annuity = 51,580, 259 ( A / P, 6.32%, 20 )
= 51,580, 259 ( 0.09 )
= 4,613,540 USD / yr
EAOC was calculated from equation as shown below.
EAOC = − ( 38, 201,062 − 29,568,581 − 4,613,540 )
= - 4,018,941 USD / yr
134

Comparison of Biomass To Bio-Oils Reactor Systems Direct Conversion vs. Companion Coal Gasification

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparison of Biomass To Bio-Oils Reactor Systems Direct Conversion vs. Companion Coal Gasification

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHE 656: Process Analysis and Modeling I

Comparison of Biomass to Bio-oils Reactor Systems: Direct Conversion vs. Companion

Pothiwan Lakonpon 63070700109

Technical Advisor: Asst. Prof. Dr. Hong-Ming Ku

English Advisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Asawin Meechai

The Chemical Engineering Practice School

King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi

1.1 Background of bio-oil

Figure 1.1 World petroleum consumption [1]

1.2 Use of bio-oil

Figure 1.4 The bio-oil applications [3]

5. Economic evaluation is performed to analyze and determine a profit of both production

2.1 Definition and properties of the bio-oil

- Contains water up to 20 to 30% and higher density than water.

Table 2.1 ASTM D7544 physicochemical properties of bio-oil [4]

Properties ASTM D7544

2.2.1 Direct conversion process

2.3 Pyrolysis of biomass

Component Yield (kg/kgBiomass)

Table 2.3 Pseudo-components defined in the biomass pyrolysis process [7]

Mass fraction Average boiling point Average density

Table 2.4 Pyrolysis process comparison [7]

2.4.2 Pyrolysis reactor comparison [8]

2.4.3 Typical parameters of gasifiers [9]

Table 2.6 Typical parameters of gasifiers [9]

3.1.2 Improve the preliminary process flowsheet and perform simulation

3.1.4 Perform an economic evaluation

EAOC = - ( Product value - Cost of manufacturing - Cost annuity ) Equation 3.1

Capital Cost Annuity (CCA) = FCI Equation 3.2

3.2 Work plan

Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week

4.1 Types of the operation

4.2 Input-output structure

4.2.1 Direct conversion process

Component Classification Destination code

4.2.2 Companion coal gasification process

Component Classification Destination code

4.3 Property methods selection

Biomass is defined as a non-conventional compound due to its heterogeneous nature. Thus,

4.4 Simulation of the process

4.4.1 Direct conversion process

4.4.1.2 Biomass pyrolysis section

4.4.1.3 Bio-oil purification section

Heat Decrease temperature of bio- Hot stream outlet

Separate bio-oil from gas Pressure: 1 bar

Separate water from exhaust Pressure: 1 bar

4.4.1.4 Heat recovery section

4.4.1.5 Mass and energy balance

Figure 4.7 The mass balance of the direct conversion process

K-101 R-101 S-101 E-101 E-102 V-101 V-102

R-102 S-102 E-103

Unit Equipment Duty (kW)

4.4.2 Companion coal gasification process

4.4.2.1 Coal feed preparation section

Increase pressure Outlet pressure: 3 bar

4.4.2.2 Coal gasification section

Increase pressure Outlet pressure: 41 bar

Produce syngas Pressure: 41 bar

Split the stream into Split fraction of

Decrease pressure Outlet pressure: 1 bar

4.4.2.3 Biomass feed preparation section

4.4.2.4 Biomass pyrolysis section