High-speed thermogravimetric analysis of the combustion of wood and Ca-rich fuel

  • Birgit MaatenEmail author
  • Alar Konist
  • Andres Siirde


Due to the increasing environmental concerns, the use of fossil fuels is being reduced. In search of less polluting ways of energy production, co-combustion offers a good way to decrease emissions and decrease the use of fossil fuels. As very high temperatures and heating rates are used in the industry, this paper presents the preliminary results of the co-combustion of the different ratios of mixtures of wood and oil shale at very high heating rates (up to 1000 °C min−1). Both oil shale and wood were analysed separately, too. The results showed that in case of wood, a higher heating rate increases the temperature range of the second decomposition step, also complicating its distinction. For the mixtures, ignition was shifted to significantly lower temperatures when comparing to oil shale. The end temperatures remained less affected.


Oil shale Wood Co-combustion High-speed thermogravimetric analysis 



  1. 1.
    Konist A, Pihu T, Neshumayev D, Külaots I. low grade fuel oil shale and biomass co-combustion in CFB boiler. Oil Shale. 2013;30:294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Altun NE, Hicyilmaz C, Hwang J-Y, Bacgi AS, Kök MV. Oil shales in the world and Turkey; reserves, current situation and future prospects: a review. Oil Shale. 2006;23:211–27.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baughman GL. Synthetic fuels data handbook. 2nd ed. Woodbury: Cameron Engineers Inc.; 1978.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    World Energy Council. World energy resources: 2013 survey. World Energy Council; 2013. p. 11. Accessed 2 Sept 2018.
  5. 5.
    Siirde A. Oil shale: global solution or part of the problem? Oil Shale. 2008;25:201–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Robinson WE. Chapter 4: origin and characteristics of Green River oil shale. Dev Pet Sci. 1976;5:61–79.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vučelić D, Marković V, Vučelić V, Spiridonović D, Jovančićević B, Vitorović D. Investigation of catalytic effects of indigenous minerals in the pyrolysis of Aleksinac oil shale organic matter. Org Geochem. 1992;19:445–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhou H, Ma W, Zhang J, Xu Y, Zhao M. Ash deposition behavior under coal and wood co-firing conditions in a 300 kW downfired furnace. J Energy Inst. 2018;91:743–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cao W, Li J, Lue L. Study on the ignition behavior and kinetics of combustion of biomass. Energy Proc. 2017;142:136–41. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hupa M. Interaction of fuels in co-firing in FBC. Fuel. 2005;84:1312–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Basu P, Butler J, Leon MA. Biomass co-firing options on the emission reduction and electricity generation costs in coal-fired power plants. Renew Energy. 2011;36:282–8. Scholar
  12. 12.
    Magdziarz A, Dalai AK, Kozin JA. Chemical composition, character and reactivity of renewable fuel ashes. Fuel. 2016;176:135–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zuo Z, Yu Q, Xie H, Duan W, Liu S, Qin Q. Thermogravimetric analysis of the biomass pyrolysis with copper slag as heat carrier. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2017;129:1233–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ma Y, Wang J, Zhang Y. TG–FTIR study on pyrolysis of waste printing paper. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2017;129:1225–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Loo L, Maaten B, Siirde A, Pihu T, Konist A. Experimental analysis of the combustion characteristics of Estonian oil shale in air and oxy-fuel atmospheres. Fuel Process Technol. 2015;134:317–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bhargava S, Awaja F, Subasinghe ND. Characterisation of some Australian oil shale using thermal, x-ray and IR techniques. Fuel. 2005;84:707–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yao Z, Ma X, Wang Z, Chen L. Characteristics of co-combustion and kinetic study on hydrochar with oil shale: a thermogravimetric analysis. Appl Therm Eng. 2017;110:1420–7. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Skreiberg A, Skreiberg O, Sandquist J, Sørum L. TGA and macro-TGA characterisation of biomass fuels and fuel mixtures. Fuel. 2011;90:2182–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Saldarriaga JF, Aguado R, Pablos A, Amutio M, Olazar M, Bilbao J. Fast characterization of biomass fuels by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA). Fuel. 2015;140:744–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lin Y, Liao Y, Yu Z, Fang S, Ma X. The investigation of co-combustion of sewage sludge and oil shale using thermogravimetric analysis. Thermochim Acta. 2017;653:71–8. Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liang F, Wang R, Jiang C, Yang X, Zhang T, Hu W, et al. Investigating co-combustion characteristics of bamboo and wood. Bioresour Technol. 2017;243:556–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jiang XM, Cui ZG, Han XX, Yu HL. Thermogravimetric investigation on combustion characteristics of oil shale and high sulphur coal mixture. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2006;85:761–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bazelatto Zanoni MA, Massard H, Ferreira MM. Formulating and optimizing a combustion pathways for oil shale and its semi-coke. Combust Flame. 2012;159:3224–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maaten B, Loo L, Konist A, Pihu T, Siirde A. Investigation of the evolution of sulphur during the thermal degradation of different oil shales. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis. 2017;128:405–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Plötze M, Niemz P. Porosity and pore size distribution of different wood types as determined by mercury intrusion porosimetry. Eur J Wood Wood Prod. 2011;69:649–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Burnham AK. Porosity and permeability of Green River oil shale and their changes during retorting. Fuel. 2017;203:208–13. Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Energy TechnologyTallinn University of TechnologyTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations