Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Biomass Gasifiers for Energy Supply to Agriculture and Small Industry

Author(s): Björn Kjellström
Source: Ambio, Vol. 14, No. 4/5, Energy in Developing Countries (1985), pp. 267-274
Published by: Allen Press on behalf of Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4313161
Accessed: 25/08/2010 11:37

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=acg.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Allen Press and Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Ambio.

http://www.jstor.org
 Biomass Gasifiers
fo
Energy Supplyto
Agriculture and Small
I nd us try BY BJORNKJELLSTROM

Table 1. Examples of possible applications of

biomass gasifiers in the agricultural sector of de-
Manufacturing and operatingcosts of biomassgasifierscan veloping countries.
be competitivein situationswherea countrycan not afford Appicaion00S3000:00
Energy0
fi0 ouWtptkW
thera It
to importpetroleumfuels. Unfortunately, mostdeveloping
countrieshave not allotedsufficientresourcesto the f Crop
d200000000000fg000fW00fSft
ryer kW70
00 -50:00 S
(X00t)
developmentof appropriatetechnology.Increasedcom- combustio.n
Gasfor

mittmentfromgovernmentsand financialand technical Gastas fuel for I terna

assistancefromdevelopmentorganizationsand banksis Waterprcssn
Crop pupn.-50kW(in)
:
Y0000 5-1
00;X kW
f (in)SS00:
(irgain dOmstICuse)
necessary.
(milln,grnig
Elctrcpower.
generation 10-500 kW (e)
(lgting,as.energy
to'mills,pumps~,et.
c.arriJer
After the fuel crises of 1973 and 1979, the Biomass gasifiers can be used to gener- Fartmtractors 300kW(n
fatal effects of the high and rising oil prices ate a combustible gas, "producer gas,"
on the economies and development efforts which can serve as a substitute for light Trnsportatio frd
ucsandsupPlie 30-10W(n
of oil-importing developing countries be- petroleum fuels like gasoline, kerosene, or
came apparent. As a result, interest in- diesel oil in most applications where such
creased in indigenous, renewable energy fuels are used today, i.e., in furnaces or Table 2. Examplesof possible applicationsof
sources, such as biomass in the form of internal combustion engines. biomassgasifiersforindustryindevelopingcoun-
wood or agricultural residue. The list of possible applications for gasi- tries.
Biomass can be used as a direct substi- fiers in agriculture and industry in de-
tute for fuel oil in boiler plants. Here, veloping countries therefore includes al- Aplction Enryoutput kW
?V00X fXi1 f;I f t0tv ;g ff
however, an alternative use of biomass as most every device using petroleum fuels
nCfff
.7 tkW
a petroleum fuel substitute is examined, today (Tables 1 and 2). Biomass gasifiers
namely, gasification of the biomass and are functionally infeasible when compact- iombussio
gsfengorineustr ndvlpn on
utilization of the gas as fuel. ness and weight are extremely important, asfOr.
cobsion
Forging furnalces 50-50k (t)
In developing countries, internal com- as in small hand-held machines (chain-
bustion engines burning diesel oil, saws, cultivators, and the like). It should Lime k Ins -ceramic 500-10,OOkW(t)
kerosene, or gasoline are used not only for be added that although an application may
vehicles but often also for electric power be possible, it is not necessarily feasible or Boiler retrofits 00 5d00-;0: kW(t)
generation, operation of pumps and mills, desirable. This will often depend on Gsafuel for InterAl
and other stationary applications. Thus, specific conditions that may vary among
the structure of the energy system differs countries, villages, and individuals. Sawmills 30-00 kW(in)
markedly from that in industrialized coun- Competing technologies, like direct General mec an cal
bX000tS0 0f
S j2X 0 t00tf
tries, where electricity generated in large combustion of the biomass for heat gener-
central power stations is available almost ation and steam power plants or Stirling
everywhere (1-3). genera Ion 10 500:k (e)
engines using biomass fuels for generation
Several countries in the Third World are of mechanical or electrical energy, must Trnprain. of prod
cTsandsup d........30-00 kW(i)
either introducing small biomass gasifiers also be considered. bargteskW
(trucks,su
or are seriously evaluating the technology.

AMBIO, 1985 267

GASIFIEREQUIPMENT COSTS The estimated total capital investment, operationin Sweden. The gasifiersystem
Ten years ago it would have been difficult including all the cost items discussed is the same as that shownin Figure1. The
to buy a biomass gasifier system suitable above, is about 150 percent of the equip- experience cannot necessarily be gen-
for smallinstallations.Today the situation ment cost estimated from Table 3. When eralizedbecauseit was the firstconversion
is quite different. There are at least 20 marginalcosts for gasifierpowerplantsare of this type of vehicle and because the
manufacturersofferinggasifierequipment estimated, the cost for a larger engine conversion included replacement of the
on commercial terms. Many more have comparedto a power plant operated on engine and adaptations of the engine
built test or demonstrationplants and are liquidfuel mustalso be included.This cost support and transmissionsystem. Much
offeringtheir technologyto interestedcus- can be estimatedfromTable 4, assuminga more time was spent for planning the
tomers. power reduction of 40 percent for spark purchase of equipment and fitting than
Most of the companiesmanufacturethe ignition engines and 20 percent for com- would be needed in most cases. It is pos-
gasifier equipment in small series or as pressionignitionengines, when the engine sible, however,to makeroughestimatesof
single units. Industrialproductionhas be- is operatedon producergas instead of li- the productioncosts under different cir-
gun only in the Philippines and Brazil. quid fuel. cumstanceson the basis of these data. The
Processequipmentcosts for completeelec- Table 5 shows some economic data on gasifier,cooler, and filter were all manu-
tric power plants and for the gasifier and conversionof a Ford D-truckto wood gas facturedby methodsthat could be used in
gas treatment systems only are given in
Table3, whichis based on quotationsfrom
eight companies (costs as of January,
1984). These quotations show that the
specificequipmentcost decreaseswith in- Table 3. Process-equIpment cost for producer-gas power plants (cost level: Jan. 1984). The higher cost
creasingpower output (economyof scale); applies In the lower end of the power range, the lower cost at the upper end.
automatic fuel handling leads to much
higher equipmentcosts (the differencein Complete power plant Gasilfer and gas treatment
specific costs is U.S. $400 to 600 per system only
kilowatt(kW); and there are large differ-
ences among the manufacturers'quota- Manualfuel
tions (the differencesmay be explainedby charging 10-100 kW 2,000-850 US$/kW 350-100 US$/kW
differing"quality,"and by differencesin Automaticfuel
manufacturingtechniques). charging 50-7,000 kW 1,500-1,000 US$/kW 850-400 US$/kW
For the economic comparisonswith pe-
troleumfuel alternatives,it is sufficientto
considerthe marginalcost for the gasifier
equipment. The data in Table 3 may be
Table 4. Capital Investment In US$/kW for Inter-
used for rough estimates of the costs for nal-combustion engines using differentfuels.
purchasedequipmentif quotationsare not
available. Up to 25-kW output, they are
valid for charcoalgasifiers.Above 25 kW, Power output In kW 5 15 50 100
the data apply to wood gasifiers. Wood Spark ignition engines:
gasifiersystemsmay cost 30 percent more Light duty
thancharcoalsystemsat 15 kW. At 50 kW gasoline 115 80 50 35
there is virtuallyno difference. producer gas 165 115 65 50
Heavyduty
For installationswithout gas cleaning, naturalgas 255 170 95 65
i.e., for generationof fuel gas for furnaces, producer gas 340 225 120 90
the equipmentcost may be estimatedfrom Compression ignition engines:
Table 3, assuming that the gas cleaning gas oil. 255 170 95 65
producer gas 285 195 105 75
and cooling cost about 50 percent of the
marginalequipment cost for a manually
fueled gasifier.
Producer-gaspower plantsin the power
range of up to 1,500 kW built in develop-
ing countriesare usuallyplaced on a con- TableS. Breakdownof cost for equipping a Ford0-truck with a wood gasifier. (Maximumpower:about 60
crete floor and covered by a simple sheet- kW.)'This cost does not appear unreasonable In comparison with costs reportedfor somewhat sImpler
metal roof on pillars.Most manufacturers systems manufacturedIn Brazil($750-$2,000) and Sri Lanka($1,000).
deliver the equipment mounted on skids
or, when required, equipped with plat- Man-hours Materialcost (USS)
forms for operation. The costs are in-
cludedin the equipmentcosts. The cost for Gasifier,gas cooler, gas filter, fitting
of equipment to the vehicle 542 900
the shelter and the concrete floor varies.
Here the cost is estimatedat 20 percentof Starting fan 245
the cost of the process equipment. Costs Engine (a renovated V8 gasoline
for design, freight, insurance, customs, engine cylinder volume 7.5 dm3) 750
assembly and commissioningdepend on Fittings, valves, gaskets, controls,
the circumstances.Here these costs are auxiliaries 990
estimatedby standardfactors as follows: 542 2,885
D-esign, supervision,commissioning Estimated total cost for Labor Material Total Specific cost, US$/kW
six percent of costs for process equip- different situations cost cost cost Including Excluding
ment and buildings; US$ US$ US$ engine engine
Site installation Laborwages $15/h 8,130 2,885 11,015 185 172.5
eight percentof costs for processequip- No additional cost on materials
ment and buildings; Laborcost $2/h 2,170 3,100 5,270 90 77.5
Freight,insurance,customs Double time required. 10 percent
10 percent of cost for process equip- extra cost on materials other than
new engine
ment;
Interestduringconstruction Laborcost $0.5/h 540 3,100 3,640* 60 47.5
Double time required. 10 percent
Below 500 kW - zero percent, 500 extra cost on materials other than
kW-5,000 kW = four percent of costs new engine
for processequipmentand buildings.
268 AMBIO VOL. 14 NO. 4-5
 a well equipped small workshop in a de-
velopingcountry.
As can be seen from Table 5, materials
and components, including the electric
starting fan and various fittings, valves,
and gaskets for this type of system, but
excludingthe renovatedengine, cost about
$2,150in Sweden. It is equal to about $35
per kW, which may be considered a
minimumcost for a gasifiersystem of this
design.
Bearingin mind that the data in Table 5
may not be representative of the cost
breakdownfor other designs and that the
labor input is probably larger than
necessary (for reasons explained above),
.....RG
d.
....
~~Aoheiuatlc ftb w~~~~~~Od~SUs
ytwu. t:eau o
*tStJE*
0
AMBIO, 1985
they may still be used to make a rough
estimateof the manufacturingcost in vari-
ous countries. The lower part of Table 5
shows the estimated manufacturingcosts
for Sweden (i.e., a labor cost of $15 per
hour) and for countries with lower labor
costs (i.e., $2 per hour and $0.5 per hour).
For these countriesit is assumedthat the
laborinputis twice that in Swedenbecause
of less well-equippedworkshop facilities.
It is also assumedthat materialcosts are 10
percent higher because of transportation
distances.
The specific cost for manufacturingin
Swedenfalls slightlyabove the costs given
in Table 3, for commercial equipment
hSei ro~b
available at present. The estimated costs
for manufacturingin countrieswith lower
wages fall far below these data. The esti-
mates in Table 5 indicate that it may be
possibleto manufacturesingle gasifiersys-
tems in developingcountriesat 30-50 per-
cent of the cost in Sweden. For mass pro-
duction, the cost differences will be less,
but the fact remains that gasifier systems
could be made available in developing
countries for a cost that is less than one
half that for availablecommercialsystems
made in the United States or Western
Europe.
MANUFACTURING CAPABILITIES
Manufacturingof the special components
of a gasifiersystem-gasifier, gas-cleaning
system, and gas cooler-does not require
sophisticatedmachinesor special skills. A
well equipped mechanicalworkshopwith
facilitiesfor rollingand cuttingsteel sheets
two to three mm thick and for arc and
torch welding and that has a lathe and a
table drillingmachineis sufficientfor man-
ufacturinggasifiersfor engineswith a pow-
er output of up to about 100 kW. How-
ever, the skills of the workerswill need to
be higher for less well-equipped work-
shops. In most developing countries, the
introductionof gasifiersystemsfor genera-
tion of mechanicalor electrical power or
heat will depend on the importof most of
the materialsand components needed to
build the systems.
The construction materials, engines,
electricgenerators,and valves, fans, nuts,
etc., are all availableon the international
market,but balance-of-paymentproblems
may lead to difficultiesin importingthem.
However, if use of imported petroleum
fuels for the same purpose is the alterna-
tive, imported gasifiers or gasifier mate-
rials and componentswill often be favor-
able to the balance of payments.
With an import cost of about $300 per
ton for diesel fuel, the fuel importper kW
outputof mechanicalor electricalpoweris
about $0.1 per operating hour. The
operating time required to make the
gasifiersystem more favorablein terms of
a savingson foreign currencydepends on
whetherthe entire gasifiersystemat about
$200 per kW, or just the materials and
some components, at about $40 per kW,
are imported (see Table 6). As shown in
the table, a high load factor (above 0.5) or
a long annualoperatingtime (above 2,000
hours)are requiredif the foreigncurrency
spent on import of the complete equip-
ment will be regained duringthe lifetime
of the gasifier.The situationis muchmore
favorableif the foreign currencyspent on
the gasifiersystem is less-for example, if
only materialsand some componentsare
imported.
It appears that with the assumptions
made here, only water pumps and some
well-utilizedelectricpowerplantswill ben-
efit the foreign exchange if the complete
gasifier system is imported. With only
materialsand componentsimported,there
is also a possible benefit for road vehicles
used more than one hour per day.
There are probably50 to 100 different
gasifiersystemsthat have been designedin
a developing country (2, 3). Often the
basic shape and dimensionshave been de-
269
termined as a result of prior research (4-8) Table 6. Foreign exchange balance for gasifier systems. Diesel oil import cost assumed at U.S. $300/ton.
and original solutions have been applied
when information available from other SpecifIc foreign Total: full powerAnnual Ti r
re o re eforeIn exchange.
sources has not been sufficient or could cuolrrecycost9 t neded
:hours oprating
Thismustbecompred to theexpected 0500
not be applied because of limited manufac-
turing capabilities or access to materials. 01425qrd,0.5r~. 1.0 n,
ho veic le Welatilzd
This~Roa Wtrpm
For many of these designs, durability and : ,PM.0fff _ UrS --ao-d
0 f ;00ff;; ft000 ;f tr0 X toAh00 0000 f00t
performance are inferior to those offered ff:05 ~ ~ Load;
~ ~ : ~ ffi0000X:00000S0Ft00000:PP000
~ ~ La fato Loa fato factor
commercially. It is, however, simply a
matter of time, research resources, and
commercial incentives before gasifier sys- 2 h00 $W n 00f0 h 00 0 0y 10 s
tems designed and manufactured in de- (impotrtedcomplete 50; 005 X0 fL4XLyears
:?:09Q SS0;S00:S16nXfP;VS0>;:0; 8 yoars
W fyear
veloping countries will be similar in quality sstm)
2aiier $1000 22 8yas 4 yoars years,:5:.
2,000 4years 2yoars 1 year
to the best systems available from Europe 19 months
and the United States. 0 f: t0 ;0f 0 :f 0 f0 0 :t::X;
00 5,Q000;:f ::monthis:;000f1Q000 months::;: ::00
&5
::040*UJS$/kW 40:X00000 V XQ;:f00X: 20000900 8 yearrs 4years 2
years
The process can be expedited by train- (materal some fj0ff 50000
antd;3r* 19t2;ff 53 years
months0000e
5,000 onths a fff:rs
2months 100months
ot 0
ing programs and joint ventures. f Such
00;ttX:00;0;: comS00 : f$0dI 40t;000:V0fX5wt0f:000|0mhs00024
0lponfrents:
f0d0gX :V1.;S:0
0 S(00:0 W ; i0j0
0r0nm0 ; b|:19S nDR;
Xmonths
n : 0 f}::
1SfS0
mon VthsV ;5 months
0sS XDE ::: f : r g f
0 :S : S : ; :F:i
1 yarf;
arrangements should be of interest to de- ximported)40;S0V:0 : :00002,:0::?;0010 months05
f:3
months0:;:00 002monhs00:(::U
velopment assistance agencies, commer-
cial companies in industrialized and de-
veloping countries, and governments in
developing countries. Possible resistance
from commercial companies in industri-
alized countries should disappear when
they realize that the manufacture of com-
plete systems for export has a small market
(chiefly gifts from development assistance The capital investment for stationary wood chipper with a reasonable utilization
agencies). power plants can be estimated as indicated of the chipper, i.e., at least 100 hours per
earlier. Because a comparison is made year.
with diesel engine operation, the marginal The maintenance and service cost is esti-
ECONOMIC
EVALUATION engine cost must be calculated for heavy- mated at five percent of the capital invest-
duty gas engines, whose cost is similar to ment for each 1,000 operating hours.
The economic evaluations made here, will that given for diesel engines in Table 4. No For stationary applications, the fuel
be restricted to comparison between costs building is assumed necessary for a small costs for the gasifier system are estimated
for operation of gasifier systems and sys- plant of five kW. The estimated specific on the basis of total average efficiencies (at
tems sing diesel oil as fuel for the same marginal capital investment for power 50 percent load). The corresponding cost
purpoie. It is then sufficient to consider plants with manual fuel feeding is shown in for diesel oil is estimated assuming a
the differences in costs between the sys- Table 7. gasifier efficiency of 70 percent and a 10
tems. The savings on diesel fuel costs ob- The capital investment for vehicle instal- percent better engine efficiency as a result
tained when a biomass gasifier is used will lations is estimated (for an output of about of the higher compression ratio for the
be compared to the sum of the additional 60 kW) on the basis of Table 5. The capital diesel engine.
capital costs, operator costs, maintenance cost can be calculated as constant The system efficiency is assumed to be
costs, and costs for the solid fuel. annuities, which for a six-year lifetime and 80 percent of the efficiency at the rated
The following discussion is limited to a real interest rate of eight percent, will load for a load factor of 0.5, and 50 per-
gasifier systems manufactured in a de- give an annuity factor of 0.216. cent of the efficiency at the rated load for a
veloping country (except for some sensitiv- Because very few producer-gas power load factor of 0.25.
ity studies in which more expensive im- plants seem to have operated commercial- For vehicle applications, recorded data
ported equipment is considered) because ly for long periods in recent decades, it is for fuel consumption in dual fuel operation
local manufacturing makes the most sense very difficult to estimate maintenance and are used in the estimate of biomass fuel
from a foreign-currency-spending point of operating costs. However, a producer-gas consumption.
view. Except for some sensitivity studies, plant is expected to require more labor
the following baseline conditions are than a plant operating on liquid fuel.
assumed (the emphasis is on the inter- Diesel power plants can be operated auto- PRODUCERGAS FOR POWER
mediate conditions): matically with very little supervision. GENERATION
In a producer-gas plant, the handling of One way of comparing the economies of
Interest rate the solid fuel will require either frequent generating mechanical or electrical power
(in real terms) 8 percent manual feeding or fairly frequent supervi- with a conventional diesel plant and a
Gasifier system sion of the fuel-feeding system. The clean- gasifier plant is to calculate the price of
lifetime 6 years ing of filters and draining of condensates diesel fuel at which the costs for both op-
Wages and fuel costs- will also require some operator time. tions are equal. This price can then be
European conditions (Sweden): It should be recognized that the start-up compared to the price actually paid. If the
Wages $15/h of a producer gas plant will take 10 to 30 break-even price is higher than the actual
Wood fuel $3.5/GJ minutes, depending on size, design, and price, gasifiers are not economical. If it is
Diesel fuel $8.5/GJ ($320/m3) the status of the plant before start-up. lower, gasifiers will be more economical
Start-up and shut-down both require than conventional diesel plants. Such a
Wages and fuel costs- operator action. comparison is made in Table 8 for gasifier
Intermediate conditions A reasonable estimate for the extra systems of different sizes, between 15 and
(used as a base case here): labor involved in operation of a gasifier 100 kW; for two fuels, wood and charcoal;
Wages $2/h and for different operating and load condi-
system with manual fuel feeding appears
Wood fuel $2/GJ tions.
to be 0.3 hours per operating hour for a 50
Charcoal $5.5/GJ to 100-kW plant. It may be slightly less for The numbers presented must not be re-
Diesel fuel $8.5/GJ very small units. garded as absolute because they are valid
Wages and fuel costs- The costs for fuel preparation are only for the assumptions under which they
Favorable conditions for producer gas: assumed to be included in the fuel costs have been generated. Capital investment,
Wages $0.5/h used in the evaluation. They assume either lifetime, efficiency, labor needs, and
Wood fuel $0.5/GJ a simple fuel preparation, like cross-cut- maintenance requirements will vary
Charcoal $2.5/GJ ting with a circular saw only, or among gasifier system designs. Economic
Diesel fuel $16/GJ mechanized fuel production, such as a conditions may differ from those assumed

270 AMBIO VOL. 14 NO. 4-5

here. Nonetheless, the economic compari- tially by irrigation. The acceptable cost for not always mean that it is economical to
sons presented in Table 8 illustrate some irrigation depends on the market price of install a gasifier to save on diesel oil. The
general tendencies that are important for the additional crops produced, and it is by annual operating times must still be long,
assessment of the potential role of biomass no means evident that irrigation is eco- the load factor high, the power needs not
gasifiers in developing countries. nomic even if it increases production. too small, and the alternative value of the
The principal conclusions to be drawn Irrigation systems usually operate with a fuel not too high. In Tanzania, for exam-
from Table 8 are the following: high and constant load, i.e., a high load ple, the four small gasifier units installed
1. Gasifier systems are favored by long factor. The annual operating times can for operation of maize mills using cobs as
annual operating times and a high load vary from a few hundred to several fuel have proved unsuitable because of the
factor because the share of the capital cost thousand hours per year. (See for example low load factor and short operating times.
and the cost for labor on each kWhour a study of Sri Lanka, Reference 10). Operation of the power plant at the Giriul-
produced are then smaller. From Table 8 it may be seen that gasifier la Mills in Sri Lanka is infeasible because
2. Charcoal gasifier systems will have systems are economic where there is a high the price of the coconut shells on which the
difficulty competing with diesel systems. demand for irrigation, i.e., a large power plant was designed to operate increased to
Only when the difference in energy costs need and long annual operating times. But 1,500 rupees per ton, which is about twice
for charcoal and diesel oil is much larger cheap gasifier fuel is not necessarily avail- the break-even cost of diesel operation.
than that assumed for the base case will able in such areas. Utilization of crop res- Slabs from sawmills can sometimes be
the charcoal gasifiers have a chance. idues as fuel is one possibility. Unfortu- sold as firewood, or be used for making
3. Gasifiers are more likely to be eco- nately, gasifier technology is not sufficient- charcoal, which can be sold at a good
nomic compared to diesel engines at larger ly advanced to make it possible to design a price. The use of the slabs as gasifier fuel is
power outputs because the marginal reliable gasifier for any type of crop res- not always the best solution.
specific investment for the gasifier is less idue. Development of gasifiers suitable for
for the larger plants. various types of briquetted crop residues is
4. If oil prices were to increase by a therefore important. VEHICLEOPERATION
factor of two, the number of applications Many industries and mills generate res- Installation of a gasifier system on a ve-
for economical use of gasifier systems idues that can be gasified to provide the hicle involves a certain investment; it also
would increase considerably. electrical or mechanical energy needed for impairs performance and increases the
In the following discussion, the results operation. The residue is available at the time required for service, maintenance,
of the estimates are applied to the use of site and may even be a nuisance that the and repair. These effects can be translated
gasifier systems for the generation of operator of the plant is prepared to pay to into increased costs for the vehicle. Wood
mechanical or electrical power. get rid of. The annual operating times are gas operation is economically feasible only
The benefits of village electrification are often reasonably long, i.e., 1,500-2,000 if these costs are outweighed by the sav-
obvious. Electric energy can increase the hours, and the load factor reasonably high, ings on fuel costs.
productivity of artisans and small indus- i.e., about 0.5. Gasifiers, therefore, can It can be inferred from this that wood-
tries; it can be used for water pumping, often be an economical solution. Exam- gas operation will be most competitive in
milling, and grinding, thereby freeing ples of such installations are presented in situations where annual utilization of the
labor for work in the fields; and it can References 11-13. vehicle is high, wages are low, and the
provide light in workshops and homes. It should be mentioned, however, that price difference between petroleum fuels
Lighting provides opportunities to use the availability of residual fuels at the site does and wood is large.
hours of darkness for productive work and
study.
Some estimates of the possible libera-
tion of human labor by electrification have
been given by van den Aarsen (9). De-
pending on the application of the electrici- Table7. Economicdatafor comparisonbetweenproducer-gasanddiesel-powerplants.
ty, the electric energy can be worth 8 to 30
man-hours per kWh. If these man-hours
can be used productively, a fairly high cost 5kW1 15kW 50k10W
for electricity generation is apparently jus- fulMnulfe
Manua M anuafe Maualfe
tified. feeding ~fednfeig edig
Charcoa Charoa Woo, hrol odWo
Whether the electricity can be generated
most economically using a diesel power
plant or a gasifier power plant depends on Processeq6mnt 20 14 8 8 0 8
power needs, load conditions, labor costs, Building - 1 1
Marginalengin inivestmn 84 5 5 25 25 2
and fuel costs, as discussed earlier. Oher 82 48. 58 2 6 2
Small electric networks with domestic Totalcapitlinvstm ent 42 254 30 17 17 17
use as a large part of the connected load
often have low load factors. In such situa- (hus/pr tin hor) 0. .2 0.3 0.3 0.
tions, gasifier systems will be economic
only when the labor cost is low and the tenance
op erat
Other ing.
coats
IJS$/kWh
and2ma3 0.021 ~~~02.01 .1 0 0.00 0.00
difference in energy costs between liquid
and solid fuels is high.
The situation is more favorable for gasi- Tabl 8. rea-eve cos fo dieel fel costrelaiveto bselie cnsumtionof 320/n3)
fiers if the electricity can be used in day- Opertin conitIns: 00 000 000 400
light for extensive irrigation pumping or
for operation of an industrial activity like a
sawmill.
For somewhat larger networks with a
connected load of more than 50 kW, or in Ann.ual.. hour
topeaing.
a situation with high requirements on se-
curity of supply, so that multiple units will
be installed in any event, the most eco- Typeand powerofO
gasifier plant:.'
nomic solution may be to split the load on Chroa ($5.5/GJ 5W 4.6 3.2.3.2.22282519262218
two or more units and use a gasifier system 15kW 3.8 3.2 24 28.8.2.1.2.2016201815
for the base load and diesel engines for the 60 kW 26.6 2.3 1.8 2. 1. 1.5 17 1.1.6 .16.5 1.
Woo 4($2/G'P. 15 kW_ 3.8 2. 20 2.4 _2.0 1. 18 .5 11 .4 1.0 0.
peak load. 50kW 2.0 1.6 1.2 1.M41. . . . . 090.8 .
In many developing countries agricul- 100kW1.8 1.5 1.1 . 1.12 . 0.8I06
.00907 0.8
tural production can be increased substan-

AMBIO. 1985 271

 The purposeof the economicevaluation
presentedhere is to illustratethe circum-
stancesunderwhichwood gas operationof
a vehicle may compete with straightdiesel
operation. The marginal costs for the
gasifiersystemare comparedwith the sav-
ings on fuel costs for a farm tractorand a
truck.
Three cost levels for the gasifiersystem
are considered,a high level representative
of conversionof single vehicles in Sweden
and two lower levels assumedto represent
conversionof single vehicles in countries
with much lower labor costs.
A rangeof labor and fuel costs believed
to representthe present situationin Swe-
den and in the ThirdWorld are analyzed.
Capitalcosts are calculatedby the annuity
methodassuminga fixed real interestrate.
All costs are evaluatedin U.S. $ at a mid-
1984rate. For the economic evaluationof
the wood-gastruck, it is necessaryto con-
sider the reduced load capacity and the
longer distancetraveledfor a given work-
load. The service and maintenancecosts
for the truck and engine are assumed to
depend on annual drivingdistancesbased
on Swedishexperience.
The annualdifferencein costs betweena
diesel tractor and a wood-gas tractor is
evaluatedfor three economicsituations,as
specifiedearlier.
The annualutilizationis assumedat 500,
1,000, and 2,000 hours. To simplify the
comparison,it is assumed that the power
loss of 20 percentcan be accountedfor by
addingan investmentfor the producergas
alternativeequal to the difference in cost
for new tractors with that power differ-
ence. The cost differencecan be estimated
at about $2,500; and it is assumed that
depreciation must be based on 10,000
operatinghours. The comparisonis made
in Table 9, where the costs for wood fuel
and diesel fuel are also shown for each
case.
It is understandablethat wood gasifier
tractorsare not in regularuse in Sweden.
The operation is a loss even if the wood
fuel were free of charge. Not until the
price of diesel fuel increases 100 to 200
percent will a wood-gas tractor be eco-
nomical.
The situation is different if wages and
the cost of fuel wood are lower. For the
intermediatecase analyzed, the producer-
gas tractor is economical if the annual
operatinghours exceed about 700. At the
very lowest wages and wood-fuelcosts and
with the high cost for diesel fuel, the pro-
ducer-gastractor appears attractive. The
paybacktime for the gasifier system is on
the order of three to 13 months in the
scenariodescribedhere.
The differencein annualcosts betweena
diesel truck and a wood-gas truck are
evaluated for the same economic situa-
tions as considered for the tractor. The
initial cost for the truck is assumed to be

Table9. Economicanalysisof wood-gasand diesel fuel-relatedcosts fortractors(1984US$).

W1.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~44

Table10. Economiccomparisonbetweena wood-gastruckanda dieseltruck.

Wag I. IJS$ttt, WagesI US$II%, US$Ih,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wages00.8

Wtlo~~~~~**
t*#*IGJ~~~~~~~~~7 Woo2 U0GJ
50D: oo 0 SG,

2,900 16~~~~~~~~000
30,900 7,500~~~~~~~~~~~~~16,0
30,00 7,0 1,0 3000
~~~~~~~~~ 280 500 1,000 800 1,200 2,400 2,400~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.... 800 1,200 ....
15 5 15 13 8~28 15 13
10,8~S i8~O0 32,884 0,855 1,13 991 891 278 2,8
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~182
I& -2 -

'4g4VI
:'0--
040 3*0 820 1040 3,0 ,0 840 5,0
W ~ ~~~#0
444 4 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*00
10,408 32,800 8,200 18,400 82*00 8,200 18,400 02*00~~~~~~~~~~~~~
...

~~<~~4. .. 14*4? 2Z?40 39,940 9*53 21,858 7,738

15,10415,488~~~~~~~~~~. 9,838
.......

401 32.2 27.8 ~~~~~

~~~~174 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
14.0 17 73 . .

272 AMI O.1 O -

Table 11. Assessment of present and possible future prerequisites
Ousatlone
wItlOti
stoat
be.a..we.ed...A.UA...
IfWoodgpsshouldbe
wLtb~yee~
X C - <~~~~~O'`
I.isthresufiietecn ic on-
0
-1ive?:b. -
~ tn om tifes.
emepgit~e
uas4 :egularly fuel ~ ~~
~. Isther suiable lonlsafel aail-
abl.omr
e.bo
...n
r.lto
reet.tes
u...n cnus f
bl~~massfuelf~~or f.y ese
X~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
jsil'ed
.....
...
...
$28,000,with 10 percent added for freight
costs to a ThirdWorld country.
The usage situation assumed is one in
which the truck moves materialfrom one
place to another and returnsempty. This
situationis the least favorablefor producer
gas, because it will lead to a much longer
annualoperatingdistancethan for a diesel
truckdoing the same work.
The differencein costs is shownin Table
10 for three utilizationlevels, i.e., annual
transport work of 60,000, 120,000, and
240,000 tons per km.
The averagevelocityis assumedto be 10
percent less for producer-gasoperation,
mainly because of fuel charging stops.
Under European conditions, the average
velocity is assumedto be 60 km per hour
for the diesel vehicle (underless favorable
road conditions25 km per hour).
As expected, the resultsof the compari-
son are qualitativelysimilarto those pre-
sentedfor a farmtractor.Wood-gasopera-
tion in Swedenwill not be economicaluntil
the diesel price has increased consid-
erably-more than 200 percent.
Under the intermediate conditions,
when wages are lower and the price of
fuelwood lower, wood-gas operationdoes
not appear to be economical either. This
conclusion is different from the tractor
case because of the difference in use
patterns.If it were not necessaryto drive
the wood-gas vehicle a longer distance to
do the same transportation work, the
wood-gas truck would be marginallyeco-
nomical for the case of 240,000 tons per
AMBIO, 1985
for extensive use of wood gas as engine fuel.
=Q _ S
situation
oGvenetotyamsapom
roay
nolmpspton~~asifIet
eponomy
Present Possible
cheapen
4rnthl ef4y luthefutwe
ee Te atprtwilprbabl be4b-
rvd s e ereue
nrypliyad ngIpr~ad~vronouefIm
..rh* d e eo m nt e ..r..fi...
ltble.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ srtsettintoosevenr
km per year. The increase in diesel fuel
pricerequiredfor wood gas to be econom-
ical is between 100 and 25 percent. For
long annual distances, it may be econom-
ical at the present oil price if the wood is
extremelycheap.
For the extreme case of low wages, low
fuel wood price, and high prices for diesel
fuel, the wood-gastruckappearsextreme-
ly profitable,with a paybacktime of two
years or less for the gasification equip-
ment.
THEFUTUREOF BIOMASSGASIFIERS
There should be no doubt that biomass
gasifiershave played an importantrole in
the past, when liquid fuels for internal
combustionengines were not availableor
were very expensive. Interestin this tech-
nology has increased since the middle of
the 1970s among scientists, energy
planners,internationaldevelopmentassist-
ance agencies, and governmentofficialsin
some countries. It is seen as a means of
reducingoil importsin countrieswithgreat
biomass resources. But, so far, very few
installationsare in commercialoperation.
With the exception of Brazil and the
Philippines,where a few thousand char-
coal gasifiers are operating; there are
probably fewer than 100 installations in
the world that use gas to operate an inter-
nal combustionengine.
While it is clear that the technologyhas
a future role in oil-importingcountriesas
an emergency option, it is less apparent
eftuodon~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'S 0.
Ye oroe Ineaigw essarsutf
eplctOs eo nio evomnt wil
P~Y~OPING~OUWTRIE.
make#aalfiers WNA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
lets profitable,
.V
Present Possible ohangesIn tiw
fut.re
tes-o
l~someoour Preent ecessve
that wood gas will have a futureas a regu-
lar engine fuel. Table 11 lists criticalques-
tions that must be answeredaffirmatively
if biomass gas is to be used widely as en-
gine fuel.
Sweden's unfavorable economic situa-
tion for wood gasificationaccountsfor the
few plants in operation. The price of pe-
troleum fuels and electricity is not high
enoughto make the cheaperwood fuel pay
for the high labor and capitalcosts associ-
ated with the gasifiersystem.
In fixed value, the price of petroleum
fuels in Swedenis not muchdifferentfrom
what it was in the 1930s;in fact it is lower
than just after the second worldwar. Only
duringthe war was the price significantly
higher.
A change will require substantiallyin-
creased oil prices or substantialincreases
in the cost of electricity. Such a develop-
ment is in accordance with the present
energy policy in Sweden, which aims to
increasetaxes on importedfuels and abol-
ish nuclearpower before 2010, but it will
not be until after the year 2000 that eco-
nomic conditions may favor wood gasi-
fiers. In general, similarly unfavorable
economic conditions apply for wood gasi-
fiers in most countriesin the industrialized
world. Therefore, there appearsto be no
great immediate future for wood gas as
engine fuel in the industrializedcountries.
Biomass gasifiers may be economical
under special circumstances,as for indus-
tries with a surplus of biomass residues,
but the impact on the energy balancewill
273
be negligible.This is not to say that there
is no need to keep the technologyalive and
improve on it. The situation may change
by the end of the century, and biomass
gasification is still the only realistic
emergency alternative for transportation
in many countries.
The most importantquestionin connec-
tion with the futureof biomassgasification
in developing countries is its facilitatory
role in economic development.
The use of small engines to provide
mechanicalor electricalenergy for pump-
ing, milling, grinding, soil treatment,
wood- and metalworking, lighting, and
transportationis important to increased
productivity.
Biomass gasification,therefore, can be
the key to economic developmentwhere
use of petroleumfuels is economicallyim-
possible because of high transportation
costs or lack of foreign currency.
Availability of biomass fuel may be a
critical obstacle in some countries. For
many of these countries,the technicalpo-
tential for makingbiomass fuels available
for new uses exists through conservation
(improved cooking stoves) or increased
production(energy plantations). What is
lacking in these countries is the political
opportunityor willingnessto improvethe
availabilityof biomassfuels.
Otherobstaclesto utilizationof biomass
gasifiersfor engine operationin develop-
ing countries are lack of know-how and
commerciallyavailableequipment. It can
only be hoped that the information-dis-
seminationactivities of FAO, and of or-
ganizationslike the ProducerGas Round
Table and the BiomassUsers Networkwill
contribute to the transfer of skills and
knowledge to such an extent that these
obstacles can be eliminated. The un-
availability of commercial equipment is
due in partto the lackof know-howdiscuss-
ed above, insufficientstart-upcapital and
perhapsmost important,the lack of a real
marketfor the products.
That there is no real marketmay seem
strangeif it is true, as is shown earlier in
this paper, that use of wood gas as engine
fuel can be economicalin the ThirdWorld.
But scarcityof capital, combinedwith in-
sufficientdata for an economic feasibility
assessmentare indeed major obstacles to
wide use of the technology.
If it is assumedthat the size of an invest-
ment can be assessed by calculatingthe
ratio between the investment and wages,
the marginalinvestmentfor a gasifiersys-
tem in Europe may be the equivalentof
about 15 workinghours per kW installed
capacity,whereasin a developingcountry
(as can be inferredfrom estimatesearlier
in this paper) the marginal investment
could be the equivalentof 80 to 200 work-
ing hours per kW, even more for equip-
ment built as single units in Europe and
used in a developingcountry.
It is understandablethat investmentsin
gasifierequipmentwill depend to a large
extent on borrowedmoney. The availabili-
ty of loans for such purposes may be a
limitingfactor, and in any case it will be
necessaryto convince the lending institu-
tion that the investmentwill be profitable.
Showing profitabilitymay be difficult if
there is no favorablelocal experiencewith
274
the technology. ganizationsis essential. The need for fi-
Any developing country may adapt, nancial supportwill be of short duration
develop, and introducebiomasstechnolo- because an improved economic situation
gy without much assistance from other resulting from lower oil bills may soon
countries. However, rapid introduction make possible further investment in
with a minimumof technicalmistakeswill gasifier systems. In addition to the com-
require the utilization of European and mercial advantagesfor the industrialized
U.S. experience.Non-profitorganizations countriesof such a cooperativeeffort, the
can provide some support, but the assist- informationfeedbackfrom practicaloper-
ance of manufacturers of successfully ation of modern engines by means of
operatingequipmentis also critical.Com- biomassgasifierscould be valuablein case
mercial agreementswith the manufactur- of a petroleumsupplycrisis.
ers appear to be the smoothest route to It appearsthat the obstaclesto introduc-
introductionof biomassgasifiers. tion of wood gasifier technology can be
Cooperative efforts to improve under- eliminatedin a reasonablyshorttime only
standing and find ways to reduce health if there is a stronggovernmentprogramto
hazards and possible environmentalim- supportit, includinginstallationand oper-
pacts of wood-gasoperationare essential. ation of demonstrationplants,cheaploans
Despite the very promising economic to pioneer users, and organizationof the
possibilitiesof this technology, it may be fuel supply.
necessaryto limitits use to specialapplica- The futureof wood-gasificationtechnol-
tions if environmentalhealthandpollution ogy as a substitutefor importedpetroleum
problemscannot be resolved. Neurologi- fuels in the Third World will, therefore,
cal effects of carbon monoxide poisoning depend mainly on governmentinitiative.
and pollution by tar condensatesare po- These programs will require financial
tentiallyseriousproblemsin the long term. support from internationaldevelopment-
Careful internationalmonitoringand in- assistanceorganizations.At present, such
formation exchange focused on these supportis providedto demonstrationproj-
issues should be given high priority. ects in many countries; support for pro-
Initially, capital will be required that grams with a broader scope will be re-
may not be availablein most ThirdWorld quired.
countries. Supportfrom internationalor-
References and Notes
1. G. Foley and G. Barnard, Biomass Gasification in
Developing Countries, Technical Report No. 1,
(EarthscanEnergyInformationProgram.1983).
2. Producer Gas 1982-A collection of papers on
producergas with emphasison applicationsin de-
veloping countries. (The Beijer Institute,Stock-
holm, Sweden, 1983.)
3. ProducerGas1985-Proceedingsof the 2ndInter-
national Producer Gas Conference, Bandung/
Jakarta,March1985.(The BeijerInstitute,Stock-
holm, Sweden,in press.)
4. Generator Gas-The Swedish Experience from
1939-1945.The SwedishAcademyof Engineering
Sciences.Translatedby the SolarEnergyResearch
Institute,U.S.A. SERI/SP-33-140,January1979.
5. A. Kaupp and J. R. Goss, State-of-the-Art for
Small-Scale (to 50 kW) Gas-Producer Engine Sys-
tems. ContractNo. 53-319R-0-141.Bioresources
for Energy, Timber Management Research,
USDA, ForestService.March,1981.
6. B. Kjellstrom, Producer Gas 1980-Local Electric-
ity Generation from Wood and Agricultural Res-
idues. (The Beijer Institute,Stockholm,Sweden,
June, 1981).
7. M. J. Groeneveld, The Co-Current Moving Bed
Gasifier,Dissertation,TwenteUniversityof Tech-
nology, Enschede,the Netherlands,1980.
8. 0. Nordstrom,Account of researchand testing
activitiesin the producergas field at the National
SwedishInstitutefor AgriculturalMachineryTest-
ing during1951-1962,carriedout for the Swedish
Boardof EconomicDefense, StatensMaskinprov- Dr. Bjorn Kjellstrom is employed by
ningar,Uppsala,Sweden, 1963. Exergetics AB, a consultant com-
9. F. van den Aarsen, Small Industry for Communal pany located in Trosa, Sweden. He
Villages in Mozambique-Consultancy in Wood
was with the Swedish Nuclear Re-
Gasification(FAO, Rome, October,1983).
10. R. J. van der Plas, Estimating the Potential De- search Establishment for 18 years,
mand for Microscale Gasifiers for Irrigation Pur- working mainly with thermo-hy-
poses in Five Geographical Areas in Sri Lanka, draulic research and design. He has
Twente Universityof Technology,Enschede,the been involved in research and de-
Netherlands,1984.
11. D. de Silva, Operating Experiences of a 40-kW velopment of different types of gasi-
Wood Producer Gas Power Plant in Sri Lanka with fiers since 1976, and is presently re-
Coconut Shell as Fuel. Second Expert Consultation sponsible for the Producer Gas Sec-
on ProducerGas Developmentin Asia and the
Pacific Region (FAO, Bangkok, Thailand, retariat at the Beijer Institute of the
November,1983). Royal Swedish Academy of Sci-
12. B. Kjellstromand G. Thessen, Testswitha Pro- ences, Box 50005, S-10405 Stock-
ducer Gas Power Pack for Operation of Sawmills holm, Sweden.
(The Beijer Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, De-
cember, 1984).
13. G. Kohler, Holz-Zentralblatt, 107 (1981).
AMBIO VOL. 14 NO. 4-5