Relationship between Fuels and Emissions. HTL Steyr, 2011 Dr. Günther Herdin

Transkript

1 Relationship between Fuels and Emissions HTL Steyr, 2011 Dr. Günther Herdin

2 Fuel Gases for Power Stations & Traffic use Fuel Gases for Power Stations & Traffic use Natural Gas Propane LPG Bilological Gases (Landfill Gases, Sewage Treatment Gases) Synthetic Gases Wood Gas, SNG Pyrolysis Gases

3 Fuel s for Traffic Use Liquid Fuel s and Alternatives Gasoline Diesel & bio oils GTL, CTL, BTL DME Ethanol & Methanol POX fuels

4 Declaration of Fuels NG LNG CNG SNG LPG LFG DG GTL BTL CTL FT Diesel natural gas liquified natural gas compressed natural gas substitut NG (from biomass) liquid petrol gas (mixture of butan and propan) land fill gas digester gas gas to liquid biomass to liquid coal to liquid Fischer Tropsch Diesel

5 Kenngrößen der Kraftstoffqualität Ottokraftstoff Oktanzahl, Methanzahl, Aromaten n -... iso -... Dieselkraftstoff Cetanzahl n -... iso -... Kraftstoffblends O2 Gehalt Synthetische Kraftstoffe Struktur

6 CO 2 Production of Different Fossil Fuels [kg CO 2 /kwh] 0,4 0,4 0,33 0,3 0,28 0,26 0,2 0,2 0,1 0 source: ASUE lignite bit coal heavy fuel diesel natural gas

7 Methane Number Different Gases methane number [ ] , ,5 0 CH 4 C 2 H 6 C 3 H 8 C 4 H 10 H 2

8 Ignition Limits of Different Gases 10 AF-ratio ,1 H 2 CH 4 CO C 3 H 8

9 Auto Ignition Temp. Stoichiometric Mixtures temperature [ C] methane propane decane hydrogen

10 Fuel Properties of Several Otto Fuels

11 Boiling Curve Diesel / Gasoline / RME RME temperature exchanged amount

12 Soot and NOx Formation Diesel Combustion source: Prof. Spicher, TU Karlsruhe

13 Soot Formation & Phases Diesel Combustion source: Prof. Spicher, TU Karlsruhe

14 Diesel Exhaust Emission on JE05 Mode 1,4 1,2 [(g/kwh)/g/kwh)] 0,055g/kWh zero level Normalized Emission 1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 DF (S10) GTL50 GTL100 0 CO THC NOx PM source: Bailey, NREL

15 Effect of Fischer-Tropsch Diesel (2 different Trucks) Compared with California Diesel 16 [g/mi] Emissions *10 California Diesel 60% F-T Diesel 100% F-T Diesel CO NOX HC PMx source: Bailey, NREL

16 Oxigenated (Diesel) Fuels NOx & PM source: Andrews, Leeds University Merkisz, Poznan University

17 Effect of Fuel Type on NOx Smoke Trade-Off. Engine Speed:1550 rpm, BMEP 3 bar Smoke, FSN 1,8 1,6 1,4 1,2 1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0 EGR SynD WWFC4 StanD2 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 NOx [g/kwh] source: Dr. Maly, Daimler

18 DME Impact on Emissions Dimethylether (DME) C 2 H 6 O source: Dr. Goto, NIAIST

19 NO X Generation Different Fuels NO X emission [g/kwh] rich lean hydrogen NG gasoline lean limits 10 H 2 /N 2 mixture (16/84 %vol.) 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 A/F-ratio

20 NOx Emissions, Lean Burn, NG Compared with NG+25% H2 Mixture NOx [g/kwh] lean limit % H2 10 bar 4 NG 10 bar ,4 1,5 1,6 1,7 Lamda [-] source: Prof. Johansson Lund University

21 NOx Emissions, Lean Burn, NG Compared with NG+25% H2 Mixture [g/kwh] NOx lean limit NG 7 bar 25% H2 7 bar 0 0,9 1,1 1,3 1,5 1,7 Lamda [-] source: Prof. Johansson Lund University

22 Maximum Brake Thermal Efficiency, Lean Burn, Comparison NG and NG+25% const. NOx 45 [%] 40 Efficiency [%] NG EGR 25% H2 lean BMEP [bar] source: Prof. Johansson Lund University

23 Main Combustion Duration (10-90% burnt), Lean Burn, NG Compared with NG+25% H2 Mixture [CAD] HR % H2 12 bar 12 NG 12 bar 10 0,9 1,1 1,3 1,5 1,7 Lamda [-] source: Prof. Johansson Lund University

24 HC Emissions, in Relation of EGR NG Compared with NG+25% H2 Mixture 6 [g/kwh] 5 4 HC % H2 12 bar NG 12 bar % EGR source: Prof. Johansson Lund University

25 Use of H2 Efficiencies & NOx Lambda 2 source: Dr. Wallner/Argonne Lab.

26 Use of H2 Efficiencies & NOx Lambda 3 source: Dr. Wallner/Argonne Lab.

27 Hydrogen Engine NOx Emissions vs. Lambda source: Dr. Wallner/Argonne Lab.

28 Comparison Syngas 1 - Efficiency on Lambda BMEP = 8,25 bar vs. Ignition Timing and NOx Emission 40 efficiency [%] 39,5 39,2@58ppm NOx 39 38,8@26ppm NOx 38, ,5 38,0@6ppm NOx 38,5@16ppm NOx Lambda 2 Lambda 1, , timing [btdc] source: Dr. Herdin/Agnion Techn.

29 Comparison Efficiency MAN 2876 Origin/agnion Syngas Eng efficiency [%] MAN Original Erdgas agnion 2G Syngas ¼ TA-Luft 36 ppm NOx 5 % TA-Luft 180 ppm NOx power output [kw] source: Dr. Herdin/Agnion Techn.

30 Quellen zukünftiger Kraftstoffe solar radiation 178,000 billion kw weather 40,000 billion kw biomass 200 billion kw hydro power potential 4 billion kw hydro power used 0.25 billion kw global demand 10 billion kw

31 Conversion Efficiencies Sun Energy to Biomas kwh/ha*a real high potential summer average year sun radiation Radstadt (A) alges corn silage forest wood

32 Algen als Basis für Biokraftstoffe Spezielle Algen haben bis 60% Ölanteil in der Trockenmasse => Biodiesel der ersten Generation

33 Biogas CHP System source: IBBK

34 Comparison Biofuels RME/Ethanol/BioSNG source: AEA

35 Biomass Gasification - Guessing Fluidized bed steam gasification Gasifier: 8 MW th Wood gas: N 2 3 % CH 4 10 % CO 2 23 % H 2 40 % CO 24 % LHV MJ/sm 3 commissioned 9/01 operating hours >55,500 (8/2010)

36 Allothermal Biomass Agnion Heatpipe-Reformer Reformer Fluidized Bed Biomass Steam Heatpipes Biomass Air Syngas (wet) Density 1,270 [kg/nm3] LHV 2,01 [kwh/nm³] Lmin 1,68 [m³ Air/m³ Gas] Residual Coke Flue Gas CH4 8,0% H2 25,0% CO 13,5% CO2 11,45 N2 5,05 H2O 37,0% Combustion Chamber Fluidized Bed

37 Fully Future Synthetic Fuels POX Fuels/Oligoether Generated from Biomass or Waste via Gasification SP and BP depending on Number of -[CH2-O] solid point boiling point T [ C] Number -[CH2-O]- CH 3 - O - (CH 2 O) 1 -CH 3 CH 3 - O - (CH 2 O) 3 - CH 3 CH 3 - O - (CH 2 O) 2 - CH 3

38 Nature H2 Sources (nearly un known) Krafla geothermal area in Northern Iceland Potential the same as wind energy Thorsteinn I. Sigfússon, Bragi Árnason Science Institute, University of Iceland, Dunhaga 3, Reykjavik

39 Wind to Hydrogen Project Patagonia/Argentina

40 Wind to Hydrogen Target 16 GW Convertet to H2

41 Cost Situation Biomass Ressources in US

42 Costs for Alternative Fuels ($/Barrel Oil Equivalent)

43 Resümee Neben dem Verbrennungskonzept hat der Kraftstoff wesentlichen Einfluss auf das Emissionsverhalten Bei Ottomotoren ist die homogene Gemischbildung (Magerkonzept) ein optimaler Ausgangszustand für niedrige NOx Emissionen der Wasserstoff hat im Trade Off von NOx zu Wirkungsgrad die besten Voraussetzungen Bei Dieselmotoren ist eine hohe Cetanzahl für ein gutes Emissionsniveau wichtig Mit Hilfe von synthetischen Dieselkraftstoffen kann der Trade Off von Partikel und NOx deutlich verbessert werden Gemäß dem Stand der Technik ist DME ein clean fuel für die Dieselverbrennung mit einem sehr günstigen Emissionsniveau

44 thank you for attention