194 Int. J. Oil, Gas and Coal Technology, Vol. 1, Nos.

1/2, 2008

Copyright 2008 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.











Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised
bed: 12 variables that affect the effectiveness
of the biomass gasifier
Jos Corella,* Jos-Manuel Toledo and
Gregorio Molina
Department of Chemical Engineering,
University Complutense of Madrid,
Madrid 28040, Spain
Fax: +34-91-394-4164
E-mail: narvaez@quim.ucm.es
*Corresponding author
Abstract: Biomass gasification in fluidised bed with pure steam has already
generated a 60 vol.%, dry basis, H
2
rich gas that was increased to 7080 vol.%
H
2
by using a CO
2
sorbent in the gasifier bed. A tar content as low as
0.25 g/Nm
3
has also been reported when an active catalyst is used in the
gasifier bed. Biomass gasification in fluidised bed with pure steam, therefore,
has some potential interest for the production of a very rich in H
2
clean gas.
This work shows in detail 12 operational variables that have already
demonstrated a clear influence on the product distribution from the gasifier.
Among all the products originating from the gasifier, this study concentrates on
the hydrogen and tar contents in the raw gasification gas.
Keywords: biomass; gasifier; hydrogen production; renewable energies;
biomass gasification; steam gasification; hydrogen; fluidized bed.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Corella, J., Toledo, J-M.
and Molina, G. (2008) Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised
bed: 12 variables that affect the effectiveness of the biomass gasifier,
Int. J. Oil, Gas and Coal Technology, Vol. 1, Nos. 1/2, pp.194207.
Biographical notes: Jos Corella received a PhD in Chemical Engineering in
1969. He is a full-time Professor of Chemical Engineering since May 1972.
He started to work in fluidised beds in 1965 and in biomass gasification in
1982. This means that he has more than 40 years of experience in fluidisation
technologies and 25 years in advanced gasification of biomass. He has
published around 200 papers. According to Webs of Science and/or
Knowledge

his Hirschs (h) index is 23.
Jos-Manuel Toledo received a PhD in Chemical Engineering in 2003 and has
10 years working experience on advanced gasification of biomass in fluidised
bed, and has published 22 papers. Even though he is a young person, his
Hirschs (h) index is 7.
Gregorio Molina received an MS in Chemistry in 2003, and has 3 years
working experience on advanced gasification and catalytic hot gas cleaning
with monoliths.










Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised bed 195













1 Introduction
Biomass gasification in fluidised bed is quite a well known process going back to the
mid-1980s when several institutions in the USA (PNL in Richland, WA,
Battelle-Columbus, Universities of Arizona State, Missouri-Rolla and Kansas State, etc.)
and in Spain, among other countries, published many papers on it. This process generates
an interesting H
2
-rich, nitrogen free and medium heating value gasification gas. Biomass
contains on average only a 6 weight% of hydrogen and by itself would not be a valuable
or interesting source of hydrogen. Nevertheless, some extra H
2
can be added to the
gasification gas from the molecule of H
2
O if this species is used as gasifying agent.
But to crack the molecule of H
2
O requires much energy and so the gasification with pure
steam becomes a highly endothermic process.
To solve this problem, a possibly good solution could be to couple the endothermal
steam gasifier with an exothermal reactor where the char is combusted and to use a solid
heat carrier between the two reactors, in a very similar way to FCC Units in oil refineries.
This circulating system between two reactors, sometimes called Dual Fluidised Bed
(DFB), already reached the demo scale in Burlington, Vermont, USA 10 years ago. Since
this approach is complex and expensive, several research activities and plants based on
this concept were stopped in the 1990s or even more recently, as happened to the
FERCOs plant in Burlington. Nevertheless, very recently there has been an explosion
of interest in hydrogen as a non-contaminant source of energy. Consequently, there has
also been a renewed interest in the biomass gasification with pure steam, as a process to
produce H
2
. In fact, Aznar et al. (2006) have already obtained 140 g H
2
/kg biomass daf
operation parameters that affect the gas is an interesting yield. For this reason, this study
is aimed at reviewing the design and operation parameters, which affect the gas
composition and gas quality in biomass gasification with pure steam. In this review, the
key component concerning gas composition will be the H
2
-content and the key
component concerning gas quality will be the tar-content in the gasification or produced
raw gas.
It should be pointed out that this short review is only concerned with:
1 Gasification with pure steam. Only a few references to other gasifying agents
will be made due to their relevance for this study.
2 Papers published after the late 1980s. Papers before that date, although some of
which are relevant, such as those by Walawender and Fan in USA, were already
reviewed in Corella et al. (1991) and Herguido et al. (1992).
3 Gasification of biomass only in Bubbling Fluidised Beds (BFBs). Gasification
in DFBs, with and without simultaneous CO
2
capture, has been recently
analysed in another work (Corella et al., 2007a and 2007b). Due to their
relevance for this study, very few references (Fushimi et al., 2003; Pfeifer et al.,
2004a,b) will be made to other types of gasifier.
4 Gasification at atmospheric pressure, or slightly above. The effect of the total
pressure on the product distribution at the gasifier exit is already known, but it
has not been studied yet.
We then show the design and operation variables which have already demonstrated in
experiments to affect the product distribution in biomass gasification in fluidised bed
with pure steam.









196 J. Corella, J-M. Toledo and G. Molina













2 Variables that affect the product distribution
The variables discussed here are not ranked by importance because
1 all are important
2 most of them are interrelated
3 the key operation variable may be one or another depending on the values used
for the remaining variables of operation.
These variables will be outlined briefly. For more details, the reader is kindly referred to
the papers discussing the relevant variable.
2.1 Temperature in the bed of the gasifier (T
b
)
The effect of T
b
on product distribution has been extensively studied, as given in Table 1,
and is well known today. From the point of view of low tar content, T
b
should be as high
as possible. Nevertheless, in biomass gasification with pure steam, it is not easy to reach
750C, it is difficult to reach and work at 800C850C and it is very difficult to work in
the gasifier above 900C.
As Table 1 gives, and with a bed of silica sand, the highest H
2
-content obtained has
been 60 vol.%, dry basis (Corella et al., 1994, 2001). With in-bed additives and/or
catalysts, tar content as low as 0.9 (Wei et al., 2006, 2007) and 1.5 g/Nm
3
(Pfeifer et al.,
2004a,b) have been obtained in the gasification gas.
It has to be pointed out that T
b
is not an independent variable in a BFB gasifier but it
depends on a lot of true independent variables such as the moisture of the biomass, the
external energy provided to the gasifier, the Steam to Biomass (S/B) ratio, etc.
2.2 Steam to biomass fed ratio (S/B)
The S/B ratio [(kg H
2
O/h)/(kg biomass, as received, fed/h), dimensionless] is another
variable studied by many authors (see Table 1) and whose effect is well known. The
range most studied for the S/B ratio is between 0.20 and 2.0. At low (0.200.40) values
for S/B there could not be enough steam to fluidise the bed. At T
b
= constant, on
increasing S/B the tar yield decreases and the product distribution from the gasifier is
improved. Nevertheless, it has also to be remembered that the steam flow rate has to be
heated to the temperature of the bed (800C850C) and it consumes energy and costs
money. Besides, by increasing the S/B ratio, the conversion of the H
2
O in the gasifier
progressively decreases, which is an important fact and problem in this process. It has
already been reported (Gil et al., 1997; Puchner et al., 2005) how for (S/B) >1 the gas at
the gasifier exit contains more than 60 vol.%, wet basis, of unreacted H
2
O. In other
words, as Pfeifer et al. (2004a) have reported, the conversion of the steam in the BFB
gasifier (X
H2O
) is as low as 1.58.8% and 5.07.1%. Other authors (Fiorenza et al., 2007;
van der Meijden et al., 2007; Xu, 2007), and ourselves, have also found H
2
O conversions
in the gasifier less than 10%. This means that more than 90% of the steam used to
fluidise the BFB gasifier is not used in it. Unreacted H
2
O can be separated, by
condensation, from the raw gasification gas and recycled to the gasifier, but it must be
noted that in this cooling, condensation and further recycling of the H
2
O (with their
corresponding vaporisation and reheating till 800C850C) a lot of energy is lost









Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised bed 197













(Pfeifer et al., 2006). The thermal efficiency of the overall gasification process becomes
very low because of the very low values for X
H2O
. This is a weakness of the gasification
with pure steam which remains to be solved. Those working with this process should
always report detailed heat balances in the whole plant which often are missed in
relevant papers.
To conclude this point, values for (S/B) higher than 1.21.5 are not recommended.
The most promising interval or range for (S/B) would be between 0.40 and 1.0, although
van der Meijden et al. (2007) reported that they were working well at S/B of 0.28.
Table 1 Effect of the temperature in the bed (T
b
) and of the steam/biomass (S/B)
ratio in biomass gasification in fluidised bed with pure steam.
Variable Interval
studied
Ref. H
2
content
Volume.%,
dry basis
Tar content
[g/Nm
3
,
dry basis]
LHV
[MJ/Nm
3
,
dry basis]
X
H2O
(%)
T
b
(C)
570770 Singh et al.
(1986)
3149 11.512.6
650820 Corella et al.
(1991)
45 12.6
650775 Corella et al.
(1994)
5060 70
700810 Corella et al.
(2001)
5060 40
650800 Wei et al. (2006,
2007)
40.7 1.567
650780 Herguido et al.
(1992)
3557 2070 11.813.8
725900 Franco et al.
(2003)
3545
750900 Pfeifer et al.
(2004a,b)
4145 0.94.5 1.58.8*
750880 van der Meijden
et al. (2007)
1626 2443
S/B 0.402.6 Corella et al.
(1991)
5060 70
(kg/kg
d.a.f.)
0.401.5 Corella et al.
(1994)
4560 40
0.201.2 Wei et al. (2006,
2007)
3645 1.5
0.402.6 Herguido et al.
(1992)
5060 1060 1014
0.450.80 Franco et al.
(2003)
2135
0.280.90 Pfeifer et al.
(2004a,b and
2006)
4145 57.1**
0.401.2 Wang et al.
(in press)
2054 1114.7
*Figure 10 in Pfeifer et al. (2004a).
**Figure 9 in Pfeifer et al. (2004a).









198 J. Corella, J-M. Toledo and G. Molina













Table 2 Effect of the bed composition and of space time of the gas (
g
) in the bed
Variable Interval
studied
Ref. H
2
content
Vol.%, dry
basis
Tar
content
[g/Nm
3
,
dry
basis]
LHV
[MJ/Nm
3
,
dry basis]
X
H2O

(%)
Bed
composition.
Presence of
catalysts or
FCC catalyst,
dolomite in
bed
Corella
et al.
(1988b)
4052 5.5 11.513.4
additives in
the bed of
the gasifier
Olivine and
impregnated
olivines
Rapagn
et al. (2000,
2002)
4552 0.251.4
CaO Dalai
et al. (2003)

Limestone,
olivine,
dolomite
Wei
et al. (2006,
2007)
9.411.2
Co/MgO Tasaka
et al. (2006,
2007)

Two olivines Rauch
et al. (2006)
3440 0.81.5 1213.5
Ni-olivine Pfeifer
et al.
(2004a,
2006)
3845 1.2 4.47.2
Fe-
impregnated
alumina
Matsuoka et
al. (2006)

iron oxides Ross
et al. (in
press)

Clay brick

Space time
of the gas in
the bed (s)
0.31.5 Corella
et al. (1991,
2001)
48 40
0.72.7 Wei et al.
(2006)
2550 0.754 127*
* These data are in Figure 13 of Wei et al. (2006). The gasifier used was a downdraft
moving bed (not a BFB).
2.3 Bed composition: presence of additives and/or catalysts in the bed of the
gasifier
This variable has been studied by many authors, as indicated in Table 2. The pioneering
work done in gasification with steam was made with silica sand as fluidising solid or bed
material. However, even in 1988 a study was published with the detailed effects of









Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised bed 199













two additives to the gasifier bed, dolomites and commercial and in equilibrium (once
used in FCCUs) FCC catalysts (Corella et al., 1988b). Since then, many authors have
studied different catalysts to be used in the bed of the gasifier. Most of them showed very
positive results concerning gas composition and quality. Nevertheless, the following
facts need mentioning:
1 Some of the proposed catalysts would be very expensive even more for a
process like this one in which both feedstock and product (gas) are very cheap
and the economic benefits are very low.
2 They do not yet succeed at commercial scale. This research has been mostly
carried out at small scale, with small amounts of catalysts.
3 The life of the catalyst is usually not reported.
4 Some heavy metals, as nickel, in the catalyst are transferred by erosion to the
particles of char in the bed, converting it into a contaminated residue which is
not easy (at least not cheap) to dispose of.
5 Many gasification tests were carried out at very low throughputs in the gasifier.
Publications are still awaited on the performance of some proposed catalysts
under high, above 750 kg/h m
2
, throughputs, those of interest at commercial
scale.
Leaving aside the nickel in olivine that has provided good results, but is expensive and
may transfer some nickel to the char too, the best results to date have been obtained with
olivine. A tar content with olivine as low as 0.25 g/Nm
3
, dry basis, was reported by
Rapagn et al. (2002).
Unfortunately, there are very few quarries of olivine in Europe and the transport of
the olivine to different countries could make this additive unacceptably expensive in
some scenarios. So, for these authors and for many scenarios, the optimal or, at least, a
good additive remains still to be found.
2.4 Space time of the gas (
g
) in the bed
This variable, often incorrectly called averaged or mean residence time of the gas, has
not been much studied in an explicit way. The only two teams that have studied it are
given in Table 2.
Based on the authors own experience, and in particular on the Corella et als model
for BFB biomass gasifiers with pure steam (Corella et al., 2001), a value for
g
of 1.2 sec
is proposed. Higher values would increase the tar cracking in the bed (Corella et al.,
1991, 2001) which is a positive or wanted effect. However, if the superficial gas velocity
at the inlet of the bed (u
0
) is typically 1.0 m/s, for
g
= 1.20 sec, the total height of the bed
should be 1.2 m, which is a value often found in BFBs. Heights higher than 1.2 m are
possible as well but the p across the bed would become high and perhaps unacceptable.
If the p in a given BFB gasifier is not a problem,
g
could be increased to values higher
than 1.2 sec.









200 J. Corella, J-M. Toledo and G. Molina













2.5 Space velocity for the biomass (WHSV) in the gasifier (h
1
)
This variable can also be handled as the throughput (TR) of the gasifier. Given that these
important operation variables are not yet very popular, definitions are given below:
WHSV = Weight Hourly Space Velocity for the biomass, [kg biomass fed a.r.
/h]/[kg solids inventory in the BFB]
TR = kg biomass a.r. fed to the gasifier/hm
2
of cross sectional area of the
gasifier (at the bed bottom if there is a troncoconical section)
Both variables are interrelated by the height and density of the bed of the gasifier.
Although there are not many published data for these variables in fluidised bed gasifiers
of biomass with pure steam, these authors consider, from their own experience, that a
good value of reference for the throughput of these BFB gasifiers is 750 kg
biomass/hm
2
. For a bed in a BFB of 1.2 m height and a density of 1200 kg/m
3
, this
throughput is equivalent to a WHSV for the biomass of 0.50 h
1
. Notice that this value is
26 times lower than those used in circulating fluidised bed biomass gasifiers operated
with air (Sanz and Corella, 2006).
It should be pointed out that some studies carried out at small scale work, use very
low throughputs which means very soft conditions. Testing in-bed catalysts under
throughputs as low as 100150 kg/hm
2
provide results which most probably could be
very far from those that would be obtained at commercial scale with TR 750 kg/hm
2
.
2.6 Temperature, volume, topology and hydrodynamics in the freeboard
Only a few authors, as given in Table 3, have studied the effect of the freeboard and of
the pipes and vessels located downstream from the fluidised bed in a gasifier operated
with pure steam. If that volume above the bed is at a high temperature (above approx.
600C), there would be some tar cracking and steam reforming in it, as demonstrated by
Sanz and Corella (2006). Consequently, the H
2
-content, the tar-content, the LHV of the
produced gas and the overall conversion of the H
2
O in the gasification gas would change.
Some examples have been reported by Corella et al. (1989, 1991), Hoveland et al. (1985)
and Fiorenza et al. (2007). The freeboard has, therefore, to be taken into account when
reporting or calculating the product distribution at the gasifier exit.
2.7 Type of biomass (feedstock)
The effects of the type of biomass used as feedstock are quite well known. Some authors
who have studied it are given in Table 3. It is known how:
The content in alkali (K and Na) species has a strong influence on
the reactivity of the biomass, which affects the throughput of the gasifier
on the melting of the ash (char) generated in the gasification and then in the
possible problems of agglomeration in the bed, walls and even gas
distributor plate (Corella et al., 2006).
A high content in alkalis in the biomass limits (lowers) the maximum allowable
gasification temperature (Arvelakis et al., 2003; hman et al., 2003; Paisley, 2002),
therefore increasing the tar and decreasing the H
2
in the gasification produced gas









Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised bed 201













The content in N-containing species in the biomass determines the NH
3
content
in the raw gasification gas. This may become a problem with some types of
biomass.
The size and shape of the biomass may determine the type and location of the
feeding point.
Nevertheless, and as authors own opinion, if the gasifier has an optimal design and
operation, and for most types of biomass, this variable is not a key or determining factor
on the H
2
- and tar-contents in the raw gasification produced gas.
Table 3 Effect of the temperature at the freeboard and of type of biomass (feedstock)
Variable Interval
studied
Ref. H
2
content
[volume.%,
dry basis]
Tar content
[g/Nm
3
,
dry basis]
LHV
[MJ/Nm
3
, dry
basis]
Freeboard:
a) empty
400900C
Corella et al.
(1991)
55
10


T
bed
+ 83C
Hoveland
et al. (1985)
= 2 to 10

= +0.2 2.0
b) with
silica sand
(with
thermal
cracking
downstream
from the
gasifier)
0.280.85
[kg
sandh/Nm
3
]
Corella et al.
(1991)
55
10


600900C
Corella et al.
(1989)
810
Type of
biomass
(feedstock)
Four different
types of
biomass
Herguido
et al. (1992)
3560 1070 1014
Pine sawdust
and legume
straw
Wei et al.
(2007)
2741 14.366.6
Pine wood,
holm-oak,
eucalyptus
Franco et al.
(2003)
41
Six different
types of
biomass
Prasad et al.
(1988)
2042
2.8 Moisture of the biomass (feedstock)
In biomass gasification with pure steam, the detailed effect of the moisture content in the
feedstock has not, as far as these authors are aware, been published until now.
Nevertheless, it is well known from biomass gasification with air how this moisture
affects the temperature of the bed of the gasifier, T
b
(Sanz and Corella, 2006). Since this
T
b
greatly affects the H
2
- and tar-contents, it can be said that the biomass moisture has an









202 J. Corella, J-M. Toledo and G. Molina













indirect effect on these top important results. It has to be added that the water content of
the feedstock clearly affects or influences the amount of auxiliary fuel that has to be used
in the overall gasification process as demonstrated recently by Murakami et al. (2007),
having therefore, a clear influence on the chemical efficiency (Puchner et al., 2005) and
the economical feasibility of the overall gasification process.
Finally, it has to be remembered that to calculate the total [H
2
O/biomass] ratio, the
H
2
O entering with the biomass as its moisture has to be added to the H
2
O used as
fluidising gas in the gasifier.
2.9 Type and location of the biomass feeding point
Already in 1988, it was demonstrated how the location of the feeding point to the gasifier
influences the product distribution (Corella et al., 1988a). This is due to the different
heating rate of the biomass which depends on the location where it is fed. Some authors
who have studied the feed location are given in Table 4. If possible, the biomass should
be directly fed into the bed, and not from the top of the gasifier.
2.10 Bed design gasifier topology
Ross et al. (2007), for example, have found how some details concerning the design of
the fluidised bed gasifier, such as the gas (steam) distributor plate, have an influence on
the product distribution.
The (u/u
mf
) ratio also has an effect on the yields of H
2
and tar. According to the well
known principles of Chemical Reaction Engineering, as the (u/u
mf
) ratio increases, the
bubbling also increases and then the deviation from the ideal plug or piston flow.
It therefore affects the yields of all products from the steam gasification of biomass.
Another interesting parameter is the slope or inclination of the gas (steam) distributor
plate; a slope that is not zero in some gasifiers such as the one(s) in Austria (Pfeifer et al.,
2004a,b, 2006). In this (these) gasifier(s), the biomass is fed directly into the bed. The
char produced would go towards the upper zone of the bed because of its low density,
according to the well known (Aznar et al., 1989) and important segregation in a fluidised
bed gasifier with a horizontal gas distributor plate (slope = 0). With an inclined gas
distributor plate there is a revolving circulation of the mixture of the solids in the bed.
The revolving flow introduces both the charred biomass and the char towards the bottom
part of the fluidised bed (This is the well known principle and/or technology in the
Japanese EBARAs revolving fluidised beds). Such introduction of the charred biomass
benefits its further gasification in the bed and also the exit of the char at the bottom bed
towards the next combustor, as in the case of the DFB gasifier in Gssing, Austria.
Facing these two benefits by the inclined gas distributor plate, there is one simultaneous
drawback: The residence time or the space-time of the H
2
O in the bed is quite different
from one side to another side of the gasifier. The H
2
O flow, where the height of the bed
is very low will have a small residence time (space-time) and its conversion will be low.
Therefore, the averaged (across the diameter of the gasifier bed) or overall conversion of
the H
2
O in that gasifier will be low. In fact, Pfeifer et al. (2004b, 2006) have reported
very low H
2
O overall conversions, as given in Table 1, in their gasifier with an inclined
gas distributor plate.









Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised bed 203













Table 4 Effect of the type and location of the biomass feeding point, of the gasifier topology
and of the circulating rate of bed material
Variable Interval studied Ref. H
2
content
[volume.
%, dry
basis]
Tar
content
[g/Nm
3
,
dry basis]
LHV
[MJ/Nm
3
,
dry basis]
In-bed
from the top
Corella
et al. (1988a)
3558 20150 11.613.0 Type and
location of the
biomass feeding
point (derived:
heating rate of
the biomass)
1, 10 and
100 K/s
Fushimi et al.
(2003)

two locations of
the feed
injection point
Ross et al.
(in press)


Bed design or
gasifier
topology
Cylindrical and
conical base
sections
Ross et al.
(in press)


Circulating rate
of bed material
(C/B)
2040 Wei et al.
(2006)
3742 24.2
530 Puchner et al.
(2005)
7074 0.34.5
280 Corella et al.
(2006)

1025 Hayashi
et al. (2006)

40 van der
Meijden
et al. (2007)

1030 Pfeifer et al.
(2007)
6668 0.92.1
2.11 Simultaneous CO
2
capture
A promising new technology is appearing to gasify biomass (or coal) with pure steam in
a BFB and with simultaneous CO
2
capture, for example, with CaO. This is generating
new DFB systems. Their description is beyond the scope of this study; besides, it is being
reviewed in a separate work (Corella et al., 2007a and 2007b). Nevertheless, this variable
has to be mentioned in this review here because it is already a proven method or way to
increase the H
2
-content in the gasification gas to values above 70 vol.%, dry basis (Florin
and Harris, 2007), and to obtain very low tar content in the gasification gas. In this
DFB-based technology, a key parameter, as demonstrated by Corella et al. (2006) and by
Pfeifer et al. (2007), is the Circulation rate (C/B) ratio. This is defined as: [kg circulating
solid (i.e. silica sand + CaO + olivine or other in-bed additive/catalyst + char)/h]/[kg
biomass a.r. fed to the gasifier/h]. It is dimensionless, and has to have a value above 10.









204 J. Corella, J-M. Toledo and G. Molina













Table 4 has some references and some interesting results concerning the gasification gas
generated when in the gasifier there is a simultaneous (in-bed) capture of CO
2
.
2.12 The experience of the operator of the BFB biomass gasifier
Last but not the least, the experience of the operator of the BFB biomass gasifier has
proved to have a clear, even important, influence on the product distribution at the
gasifier exit. This variable is most often neither reported nor taken into account, but it
really affects the composition and tar content of the produced gas. This experience may
be considered as a 12th operating variable or may be considered only as the correct
addition of the previously reported eleven variables. The experience of the operator is
not a veritable non-subjective variable, but it affects the process results.
Corella et al. (1993) studied the influence of the operator on the product distribution.
A gasification index (I
tar
) for a biomass gasifier with pure steam was defined as:
tar
(char yield) (tar yield)
(steam/biomass)
= I
This I
tar
index is an evaluation of the quality of the gasification. A higher I
tar
value means
a worse gasification. Corella et al. (1993) observed how this index, other experimental
conditions being the same, slowly decreased from experiment to experiment along the
years of performing gasification tests. This fact was attributed to the increasing
experience of the operator of that gasifier but this checking was then not well
disseminated.
The experience of the operator, as well as of the designer of the BFB gasifier,
should always be taken into account to understand the results published by some
researchers.
3 Summary
In typical BFB biomass gasifiers a gasification gas with a H
2
-content as high as
60 vol.%, dry basis, and a tar content as low as 1.4 g/Nm
3
, dry basis, has already been
obtained. These two key data have been further improved to 7080 vol.% H
2
, dry basis,
and to only 0.250.30 g tar/Nm
3
when:
1 the BFB gasifier is coupled to a combustor of the char generated in the gasifier
2 a CO
2
-sorbent (CaO) and a catalyst (to eliminate most of the tar generated
in-bed) are used in the bed
3 the circulating or cycling rate (C/B) ratio is high in a DFB.
Acknowledgement
This work was carried under project ref. ENE2006-15425 of the Spanish Ministry of
Educacin y Ciencia. The authors are grateful for the financial aid received for this
work.









Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised bed 205













References
Arvelakis, S., Gehrmann, H., Beckmann, M. and Koukios, E.G. (2003) Agglomeration problems
during fluidized bed gasification of olive-oil residue, Fuel, Vol. 82, pp.12611270.
Aznar, M.P., Garcia-Gorria, F.A. and Corella, J. (1989) Segregation in the fluidization of silica
sand with different types of biomass. Longitudinal profiles in the fluidized bed, Anales De
Qumica, Madrid, Vol. 85, pp.100108.
Aznar, M.P., Caballero, M.A., Corella, J., Molina, G. and Toledo, J.M. (2006) Hydrogen
production by biomass gasification with steam-O
2
mixtures followed by a catalytic steam
reformer and a CO-shift system, Energy and Fuels, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp.13051309.
Corella, J., Aznar, M.P., Cebrin, N., Iglesias, J.I. and Martnez, M.P. (1989) Steam gasification of
biomass in fluidized bed with a secondary catalytic bed.-I. Results with the secondary reactor
empty and with sand, in G.L. Ferrero, K. Maniatis, A. Buekens and A.V. Bridgwater (Eds).
Pyrolysis and Gasification, London, UK: Elsevier Applied Science, pp.624628.
Corella, J., Herguido, J. and Alday, F.J. (1988a) Pyrolysis and steam gasification of biomass in
fluidized beds. Influence of the type and location of the biomass feeding point on the product
distribution, in A.V. Bridgwater and J.L. Kuester (Eds). Research in Thermochemical
Biomass Conversion, [Edited papers from the Intern. Conference in Phoenix, Arizona, USA
(April 1998)], London, UK: Elsevier Applied Science, pp.384398.
Corella, J., Aznar, M.P., Delgado, J. and Aldea, E. (1991) Steam gasification of cellulosic wastes
in a fluidized bed with downstream vessels, Industrial and Engineering Chemical Research,
Vol. 30, pp.22522262.
Corella, J., Delgado, J. and Aznar, M.P. (1993) Index for estimating gas product quality variation
caused by perturbations in the biomass gasifier, Proceedings of 6th Mediterranean Congress
on Chemical Engineering, Barcelona, Spain, October, pp.769770.
Corella, J., Herguido, J., Gonzlez-Siz, J., Alday, F.J. and Rodrguez-Trujillo, J.L. (1988b)
Fluidized bed steam gasification of biomass with dolomite and with a commercial FCC
catalyst, in A.V. Bridgwater and J.L. Kuester (Eds). Research in Thermochemical Biomass
Conversion, [Edited papers from the Intern. Conference in Phoenix, Arizona, USA (April
1998)], London, UK: Elsevier Applied Science, pp.754765.
Corella, J., Herguido, J. and Gonzalez-Saiz, J. (1994) Modelling a bubbling fluidized bed steam
gasifier of biomass in stationary state, in D.O. Hall, G. Grassi and H. Scheer (Eds). Biomass
for Energy and Industry, [7th EC Conference (Florence, Italy, October 1992)], Bochum,
Germany: Ponte Press Verlags, pp.848856.
Corella, J., Toledo, J.M. and Molina, G. (2006) Steam gasification of coal at low-medium
(600800C) temperature with simultaneous CO
2
capture in fluidized bed at atmospheric
pressure: The effect of inorganic species. 1. Literature review and comments, Industrial and
Engineering Chemical Research, Vol. 45, No. 18, pp.61376146.
Corella, J., Herguido, J., Toledo, J.M. and Gmez-Cvicos, J.I. (2001) Modeling fluidized bed
biomass gasifiers. Part II: Gasification with steam in a bubbling fluidized bed, in S. Kyritsis
and A.A.C.M. Beenackers (Eds). 1st World Conference on Biomass for Energy and Industry,
[11th EC and 1st World Conference (Sevilla, Spain, 59 June 2000)], London, UK: James &
James (Science Publishers) Ltd., Vol. 2, pp.19711975.
Corella, J., Toledo, J.M. and Molina, G. (2007a) On the design and operation of dual fluidized bed
biomass gasifiers, Presented at the 15th European Conference on Biomass for Energy
Industry and Climate Protection, held in Berlin, Germany, 711 May, Ref. No. V2.2.I.5.
Corella, J., Toledo, J.M. and Molina, G. (2007b) A review on dual fluidized bed biomass
gasifiers, Industrial and Engineering Chemical Research, Vol. 46, pp. 68316839.
Dalai, A.K., Sasaoka, E., Hikita, H. and Ferdous, F. (2003) Catalytic gasification of sawdust
derived from various biomas, Energy and Fuels, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp.14561463.
Fiorenza, G., Canonaco, J., Amelio, M. and Braccio, G. (2007) An advanced model for biomass
steam gasification processes, Presented at the 15th European Conference on Biomass for
Energy Industry and Climate Protection, held in Berlin, Germany, 711 May,
Ref. No. V2.1.I.32.









206 J. Corella, J-M. Toledo and G. Molina













Florin, N.H. and Harris, A.T. (2007) Enhanced hydrogen production from biomass with in situ
carbon dioxide capture using calcium oxide sorbents, Chemical Engineering Science, doi:
10.1016/j.ces.2007.09.011.
Franco, C., Pinto, F., Gulyurtlu, I. and Cabrita, I. (2003) The study of reactions influencing the
biomass steam gasification process, Fuel, Vol. 82, pp.835842.
Fushimi, C., Araki, K., Yamaguchi, Y. and Tsutsumi, A. (2003) Effect of heating rate on steam
gasification of biomass. 1. Reactivity of char, Industrial Engineering Chemical Research,
Vol. 42, No. 17, pp.39223928.
Gil, J., Aznar, M.P., Caballero, M.A., Francs, E. and Corella, J. (1997) Biomass gasification in
fluidized bed at pilot scale with steam-oxygen mixtures. Product distribution for very different
operating conditions, Energy and Fuels, Vol. 11, No. 6, pp.11091118.
Hayashi, J-I., Hosokai, S. and Sonoyama, N. (2006) Gasification of low-rank solid fuels with
thermochemical energy recuperation for hydrogen production and power generation, Trans
IChemE, Part B: Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 84, No. B6, pp.409419.
Herguido, J., Corella, J. and Gonzlez-Siz, J. (1992) Steam gasification of lignocellulosic
residues in a fluidized bed at a small pilot scale. Effect of the type of feedstock, Industrial
Engineering Chemical Research, Vol. 31, pp.12741282.
Hoveland, D.A., Walawender, W.P. and Fan, L.T. (1985) Steam gasification of pure cellulose. 2.
Elevated freeboard temperature, Industrial and Engineering Chemical Process Design and
Development, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp.818821.
Matsuoka, K., Shimbori, T, Kuramoto, K., Hatano, H. and Suzuki, Y. (2006) Steam reforming of
woody biomass in a fluidized bed of iron oxide-impregnated porous alumina, Energy and
Fuels, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp.27272731.
Murakami, T., Xu, G.W., Suda, T., Matsuzawa, Y., Tani, H. and Fujimori, T. (2007) Some process
fundamentals of biomass gasification in dual fluidized bed, Fuel, Vol. 86,
pp.244255.
hman, M., Nordin, A., Lundholm, K., Bostrm, D. and Lundberg, M. (2003) Ash transformations
during combustion of meat-, bonemeal, and RDF in a (bench-scale) fluidized bed combustor,
Energy and Fuels, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp.11531159.
Paisley, M.A. (2002) Biomass gasification system and method, Internal Patent no. WO 02/50214
A2, 27 June.
Pfeifer, C., Rauch, R. and Hofbauer, H. (2004a) In-bed catalytic tar reduction in a dual fluidized
bed biomass steam gasifier, Industrial and Engineering Chemical Research, Vol. 43, No. 7,
pp.16341640.
Pfeifer, C., Rauch, R. and Hofbauer, H. (2004b) Hydrogen-rich gas production with a catalytic
dual fluidized bed biomass gasifier, in M. Van Swaaij, T. Fjllstrm, P. Helm and A. Grasi
(Eds). 2nd World Conference on Biomass for Energy, Industry and Climate Protection, Rome,
1014 May, W.P., ETA-Florence, Florence, Italy, ISBN: 88-89407-01-2, pp.11681171.
Pfeifer, C., Rauch, R., Hofbauer, H., Swierczyn ski, D., Courson, C. and Kiennemann, A. (2006)
Hydrogen-rich gas production with a Ni-catalyst in a dual fluidized bed biomass gasifier, in
A.V. Bridgwater and D.G.B. Boocock (Eds). Proceedings of the International Conference
Science in Thermal and Chemical Biomass Conversion, Newbury Berks, UK: CPL Press,
Vol. 1, ISBN: 1-872691-97-8, pp.677690.
Pfeifer, C., Puchner, B. and Hofbauer, H. (2007) In-situ CO
2
-absorption in a dual fluidized bed
biomass steam gasifier to produce a hydrogen rich syngas, International Journal of Chemical
Reactor Engineering, Vol. 5, No. A9.
Prasad, B.V.R.K. and Kuester, J.L. (1988) Process analysis of a dual fluidized bed biomass
gasification system, Industrial and Engineering Chemical Research, Vol. 27, No. 2,
pp.304310.
Puchner, B., Hfberger, E., Rauch, R. and Hofbauer, H. (2005) Biomass gasification with a CO
2
-
absortive bed material to produce a hydrogen rich gas, in L. Sjunnesson, J. E. Carrasco,
P. Helm and A. Grassi (Eds). ETA-Florence, Florence, Italy, [ISBN: 88-89407-07-7],
Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Biomass for Energy Industry and Climate
Protection, Paris, France, 1721 October, pp.631634.









Biomass gasification with pure steam in fluidised bed 207













Rapagn, S., Jand, N., Kiennemann, A. and Foscolo, P.U. (2000) Steam gasification of biomass in
a fluidized-bed of olivine particles, Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 19, pp.187197.
Rapagn, S., Jand, N., Kiennemann, A. and Foscolo, P.U. (2002) Development of catalysts
suitable for hydrogen or syn-gas production from biomass gasification, Biomass and
Bioenergy, Vol. 22, pp.377388.
Rauch, R., Bosch, K., Hofbauer, H., Swierczyn ski, D., Courson, C. and Kiennemann, A. (2006)
Comparison of different olivines for biomass steam gasification, in A.V. Bridgwater and
D.G.B. Boocock (Eds). Proceedings of the International Conference Science in Thermal and
Chemical Biomass Conversion, Newbury Berks, UK: CPL Press, Vol. 1, [ISBN: 1-872691-
97-8], pp.799809.
Ross, D., Noda, R., Horio, M., Kosminski, A., Ashman, P. and Mullinger, P. (2007) Axial gas
profiles in a bubbling fluidized bed biomass gasifier, Fuel, Vol. 86, pp.14171429.
Sanz, A. and Corella, J. (2006) Modelling circulating fluidized bed biomass gasifiers. Results from
a pseudo-rigorous 1-dimensional model for stationary state, Fuel Processing Technology,
Vol. 87, pp.247258.
Singh, S.K., Walawender, W.P. and Fan, L.T. (1986) Steam gasification of cottonwood (branches)
in a fluidized bed, Wood and Fiber Science, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp.327344.
Tasaka, K., Furusawa, T. and Tsutsumi, A. (2006) Hydrogen production by biomass steam
gasification in fluidized bed reactor with Co catalyst, 16th World Hydrogen Energy
Conference, [Intern. Conference in Lyon, France (1316 June 2006)], International
Association for Hydrogen Energy, USA, p.8.
Tasaka, K., Furusawa, T. and Tsutsumi, A. (2007) Steam gasification of cellulose with cobalt
catalysts in a fluidized bed reactor, Energy and Fuels, Vol. 21, pp.590595.
van der Meijden, C.M., van der Drift, A. and Vreugdenhil, B.J. (2007) Experimental results from
the allothermal biomass gasifier Milena, Presented at the 15th European Conference on
Biomass for Energy Industry and Climate Protection, held in Berlin, Germany, 711 May,
Ref. OA 4.2.
Wang, L.Q., Song, X., Zhou, H.S., Tang, H., Wang, T.Z. (Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang) (in press)
Development study on co-gasification of biomass and coal in fluidized bed gasifier. II.
Producing medium-heating value fuel gas with steam as gasifying agent, Acta Energiae
Solaris Sinica (in Chinese).
Wei, L., Xu, S., Liu, J., Lu, C., Liu, S. and Liu, C. (2006) A novel process of biomass gasification
for hydrogen-rich gas with solid heat carrier: preliminary experimental results, Energy and
Fuels, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp.22662273.
Wei, L., Xu, S., Zhang, L., Liu, C., Zhu, H. and Liu, S. (2007) Steam gasification of biomass for
hydrogen-rich gas in a free-fall reactor, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 32,
pp.2431.
Xu, G.W. (2007) (formerly at IHI Co., Yokohama, Japan), Private communication, March.