Advertisement

Evaluation of bottom ash slagging risk during combustion of herbaceous and woody biomass fuels in a small-scale boiler by principal component analysis

  • Thomas ZengEmail author
  • Agata Mlonka-Mędrala
  • Volker Lenz
  • Michael Nelles
Original Article
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

In the short- and mid-term perspective, drastic measures for the reduction of anthropogenic emissions including extensive decarbonization of the residential and industrial heating sector have to be implemented. To replace fossil fuels, solid biogenic residues and wastes will have to be increasingly utilized. Compared to clean woody biomass, these biomass assortments are commonly characterized by higher Si and alkaline metal contents recognized as major driver for low ash melting temperatures resulting in elevated risk of bottom ash slagging. To facilitate the prediction of bottom ash slagging during combustion, several fuel indices have been proposed. Based on empirical correlations with parameters relevant for slagging behavior, e.g., ash melting temperatures or slag fraction of the bottom ash, these fuel indices were subsequently enhanced and adapted for an increasing range of biomass fuel characteristics. In this study, analysis data of 26 woody and non-woody fuels and experimental data derived from two combustion test campaigns with an automatically stoked small-scale boiler were investigated through principal component analysis. Thus, the complex interdependencies between the fuel composition and the resulting bottom ash characteristics and the applicability of existing fuel indices were evaluated. The chemometric analysis highlighted that Si, Ca, K, Mg, and also the remaining Al and S in the bottom ash are crucial fuel components in the context of bottom ash melting. On this basis, the molar ratio (Si + P + K)/(Ca + Mg) was adapted and correlated with the susceptibility to slag formation which is a new parameter derived from ash content, slag fraction > 16 mm in the bottom ash, and slag category. Thus, the applicability of a newly developed fuel index was evaluated with respect to the bottom ash slagging risk during real-scale combustion. Three ranges were distinguished for the fuel index corresponding to a specific susceptibility to slag formation (i.e., low < 20 mol/g for woody biomass, elevated between 20 and 75 mol/g, and serious > 75 mol/g for straw-like fuels and blends with wood). The linear regression of the fuel index with susceptibility to slag formation exhibits a high coefficient of determination (i.e., 0.99 for woody biomass and 0.84 for straw-like fuels and their blends with wood).

Keywords

Fuel index Biomass Combustion Principal component analysis Ash Slagging Chemometric analysis 

Nomenclature

cos2i

Squared loadings for ith variable (−)

Co

Contributions of the variables to the principal components (%)

Abbreviations

Ai

Ash content of fuel i (wt%)

Amax

Maximal ash content of all investigated fuels (wt%)

AN

Normalized ash content (−)

B/A

Base-to-acid ratio

BAFS

Bottom ash fraction that forms slag

BAI

Bed agglomeration index

d.b.

Dry basis

DIN

Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V. (German Institute for Standardization)

DT

Ash deformation temperature (°C)

E

Processed wood chips (i.e., end product)

EN

European standard

ENplus

ENplus is an international acknowledged wood pellet certification scheme which was established in 2011. ENplus introduced quality classes and stronger requirements to those set by the European and international product standards for solid biofuels

FT

Ash flow temperature (°C)

Fu

Fouling Index

HF

Hydrofluoric acid

HT

Ash hemisphere temperature (°C)

M

Miscanthus

PC

Principal component

PCA

Principal component analysis

R

Unprocessed wood chips (i.e., raw material)

Rs

Babcock index

S

Wheat straw

SA

Ratio of Si and Al oxides

SD

Standard deviation

Si

Sinter category of fuel i (−)

Smax

Maximal sinter category of all investigated fuels (−)

SN

Normalized sinter category (−)

SFi

Bottom ash fraction that forms slag > 16 mm of fuel i (wt%)

SFmax

Maximal bottom ash fraction that forms slag > 16 mm of all investigated fuels (wt%)

SFN

Normalized bottom ash fraction that forms slag > 16 mm (−)

SSF

Susceptibility (to slag formation)

SR

Slag viscosity index

SST

Ash shrinkage starting temperature (°C)

W

Wood sawdust

Notes

Funding

The data sets used in this publication were funded under grant agreement number 22031814, 22035714, 22035814, and 22005815 of the Agency for Renewable Resources (Fachagentur Nachwachsende Rohstoffe e.V., FNR) in the name of the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) on the basis of a resolution of the German Federal Parliament and upon work supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) under Grant No. 03SF0347B. A.M.M. was supported by DAAD for an internship in DBFZ Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum gemeinnützige GmbH (DBFZ) through Research Grants - Short-Term Grants 2018 Program (funding program no. 57378443). Furthermore, funds of the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) supported this work based on a decision of the Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany via the Federal Office for Agriculture and Food (BLE) under the innovation support program.

Supplementary material

13399_2019_494_MOESM1_ESM.docx (37 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 36 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2015) Adoption of the Paris Agreement: Proposal by the President. Paris Climate Change Conference - November 2015, Cop 21, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit (2016) Klimaschutzplan 2050: Klimaschutzpolitische Grundsätze und Ziele der Bundesregierung, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2018) Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty: Summary for PolicymakersGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Steffen W, Rockström J, Richardson K, Lenton TM, Folke C, Liverman D, Summerhayes CP, Barnosky AD, Cornell SE, Crucifix M, Donges JF, Fetzer I, Lade SJ, Scheffer M, Winkelmann R, Schellnhuber HJ (2018) Trajectories of the earth system in the Anthropocene. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115:8252–8259.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smith CJ, Forster PM, Allen M, Fuglestvedt J, Millar RJ, Rogelj J, Zickfeld K (2019) Current fossil fuel infrastructure does not yet commit us to 1.5 °C warming. Nat Commun 10(1):101.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07999-w
  6. 6.
    (2018) AGEB - Zusammenfassung Anwendungsbilanzen für die Endenergiesektoren 2013 bis 2016, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Szarka N, Scholwin F, Trommler M, Fabian Jacobi H, Eichhorn M, Ortwein A, Thrän D (2013) A novel role for bioenergy: a flexible, demand-oriented power supply. Energy 61:18–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.12.053 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thrän D (2015) Smart bioenergy: technologies and concepts for a more flexible bioenergy provision in future energy systems. Springer International PublishingGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brosowski A, Thrän D, Mantau U, Mahro B, Erdmann G, Adler P, Stinner W, Reinhold G, Hering T, Blanke C (2016) A review of biomass potential and current utilisation – status quo for 93 biogenic wastes and residues in Germany. Biomass Bioenergy 95:257–272.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.10.017 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vassilev SV, Baxter D, Andersen LK, Vassileva CG (2010) An overview of the chemical composition of biomass. Fuel 89(5):913–933.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2009.10.022 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boström D, Skoglund N, Grimm A, Boman C, Öhman M, Broström M, Backman R (2012) Ash transformation chemistry during combustion of biomass. Energy Fuel 26(1):85–93.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef201205b Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dietz E, Kuptz D, Blum U, Schulmeyer F, Borchert H, Hartmann H (2016) New indexes for the contamination of wood chips with mineral soil. In: ETA-Florence renewable energies (ed) proceedings of the 24th European biomass conference and exhibition, Florence, pp 630–633Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vassilev SV, Vassileva CG, Song Y-C, Li WY, Feng J (2017) Ash contents and ash-forming elements of biomass and their significance for solid biofuel combustion. Fuel 208:377–409.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.07.036 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knudsen JN, Jensen PA, Dam-Johansen K (2004) Transformation and release to the gas phase of Cl, K, and S during combustion of annual biomass. Energy Fuel 18(5):1385–1399.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef049944q Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sommersacher P, Brunner T, Obernberger I (2012) Fuel indexes: a novel method for the evaluation of relevant combustion properties of new biomass fuels. Energy Fuel 26(1):380–390.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef201282y Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vassilev SV, Baxter D, Vassileva CG (2014) An overview of the behaviour of biomass during combustion: part II. Ash fusion and ash formation mechanisms of biomass types. Fuel 117:152–183.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.09.024 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vassilev SV, Baxter D, Andersen LK, Vassileva CG, Morgan TJ (2012) An overview of the organic and inorganic phase composition of biomass. Fuel 94:1–33.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2011.09.030 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gilbe C, Lindström E, Backman R, Samuelsson R, Burvall J, Ohman M (2008) Predicting slagging tendencies for biomass pellets fired in residential appliances: a comparison of different prediction methods. Energy Fuel 22(6):3680–3686.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef800321h
  19. 19.
    Pronobis M (2005) Evaluation of the influence of biomass co-combustion on boiler furnace slagging by means of fusibility correlations. Biomass Bioenergy 28(4):375–383.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.11.003 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vamvuka D, Zografos D (2004) Predicting the behaviour of ash from agricultural wastes during combustion. Fuel 83(14–15):2051–2057.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2004.04.012 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lindström E, Öhman M, Backman R, Boström D (2008) Influence of sand contamination on slag formation during combustion of wood derived fuels. Energy Fuel 22(4):2216–2220.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef700772q
  22. 22.
    Díaz-Ramírez M, Boman C, Sebastián F, Royo J, Xiong S, Boström D (2012) Ash characterization and transformation behavior of the fixed-bed combustion of novel crops: poplar, brassica, and cassava fuels. Energy Fuel 26(6):3218–3229.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef2018622 Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Öhman M, Boman C, Hedman H, Nordin A, Boström D (2004) Slagging tendencies of wood pellet ash during combustion in residential pellet burners. Biomass Bioenergy 27(6):585–596.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.08.016 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bryers RW (1996) Fireside slagging, fouling, and high-temperature corrosion of heat-transfer surface due to impurities in steam-raising fuels. Prog Energy Combust Sci 22(1):29–120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-1285(95)00012-7 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jenkins BM, Baxter LL, Miles TR (1998) Combustion properties of biomass. Fuel Process Technol 54(1–3):17–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3820(97)00059-3 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Garcia-Maraver A, Mata-Sanchez J, Carpio M, Perez-Jimenez JA (2017) Critical review of predictive coefficients for biomass ash deposition tendency. J Energy Inst 90(2):214–228.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2016.02.002 Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Basu P, Kefa C, Jestin L (2000) Corrosion and fouling of heat transfer surfaces. In: Basu P, Kefa C, Jestin L (eds) Boilers and burners: design and theory. Springer New York, New York, NY, pp 385–425Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Niu Y, Zhu Y, Tan H, Hui S, Jing Z, Xu W (2014) Investigations on biomass slagging in utility boiler: criterion numbers and slagging growth mechanisms. Fuel Process Technol 128:499–508.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.07.038 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vamvuka D, Zografos D, Alevizos G (2008) Control methods for mitigating biomass ash-related problems in fluidized beds. Bioresour Technol 99(9):3534–3544.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.07.049 Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pronobis M, Kalisz S, Polok M (2013) The impact of coal characteristics on the fouling of stoker-fired boiler convection surfaces. Fuel 112:473–482.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.05.044 Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lindström E, Sandström M, Boström D, Öhman M (2007) Slagging characteristics during combustion of cereal grains rich in phosphorus. Energy Fuel 21(2):710–717.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef060429x Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sommersacher P, Brunner T, Obernberger I, Kienzl N, Kanzian W (2015) Combustion related characterisation of Miscanthus peat blends applying novel fuel characterisation tools. Fuel 158:253–262.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.05.037 Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wiinikka H, Gebart R, Boman C, Boström D, Öhman M (2007) Influence of fuel ash composition on high temperature aerosol formation in fixed bed combustion of woody biomass pellets. Fuel 86(1–2):181–193.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2006.07.001 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lindberg D, Backman R, Chartrand P, Hupa M (2013) Towards a comprehensive thermodynamic database for ash-forming elements in biomass and waste combustion — current situation and future developments. Fuel Process Technol 105:129–141.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2011.08.008 Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rizvi T, Xing P, Pourkashanian M, Darvell LI, Jones JM, Nimmo W (2015) Prediction of biomass ash fusion behaviour by the use of detailed characterisation methods coupled with thermodynamic analysis. Fuel 141:275–284.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.10.021 Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Paulrud S, Nilsson C, Öhman M (2001) Reed canary-grass ash composition and its melting behaviour during combustion. Fuel 80(10):1391–1398.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-2361(01)00003-5 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sommersacher P, Brunner T, Obernberger I, Kienzl N, Kanzian W (2013) Application of novel and advanced fuel characterization tools for the combustion related characterization of different wood/kaolin and straw/kaolin mixtures. Energy Fuel 27(9):5192–5206.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef400400n Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zeng T, Pollex A, Weller N, Lenz V, Nelles M (2018) Blended biomass pellets as fuel for small scale combustion appliances: effect of blending on slag formation in the bottom ash and pre-evaluation options. Fuel 212:108–116.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.10.036 Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zeng T, Weller N, Pollex A, Lenz V (2016) Blended biomass pellets as fuel for small scale combustion appliances: influence on gaseous and total particulate matter emissions and applicability of fuel indices. Fuel 184:689–700.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.07.047 Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kuptz D, Schreiber K, Schulmeyer F, Lesche S, Zeng T, Ahrens F, Zelinski V, Schön C, Pollex A, Borchert H, Lenz V, Loewen A, Nelles M, Hartmann H (2019) Evaluation of combined screening and drying steps for the improvement of the fuel quality of forest residue wood chips - results from six case studies. Biomass Conv Bioref 81(3):356.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-019-00389-2
  41. 41.
    Schön C, Kuptz D, Mack R, Zelinski V, Loewen A, Hartmann H (2019) Influence of wood chip quality on emission behaviour in small-scale wood chip boilers. Biomass Conv Bioref 9(1):71–82.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-017-0249-7 Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zeng T, Kuptz D, Schreiber K, Schön C, Schulmeyer F, Zelinski V, Pollex A, Borchert H, Loewen A, Hartmann H, Lenz V, Nelles M (2019) Impact of adhering soil and other extraneous impurities on the combustion and emission behavior of forest residue wood chips in an automatically stoked small-scale boiler. Biomass Conv Bioref 5(1):35.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-018-00368-z
  43. 43.
    Näzelius I-L, Boström D, Rebbling A, Boman C, Öhman M (2017) Fuel indices for estimation of slagging of phosphorus-poor biomass in fixed bed combustion. Energy Fuel 31(1):904–915.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b02563 Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fernández MJ, Mediavilla I, Barro R, Borjabad E, Ramos R, Carrasco JE (2019) Sintering reduction of herbaceous biomass when blended with woody biomass: predictive and combustion tests. Fuel 239:1115–1124.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.11.115 Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Škrbić BD, Cvejanov J, Đurišić-Mladenović N (2015) Chemometric characterization of vegetable oils based on the fatty acid profiles for selection of potential feedstocks for biodiesel production. J. Biobased Mater. Bioenergy 9(3):358–371.  https://doi.org/10.1166/jbmb.2015.1527
  46. 46.
    Eide I, Zahlsen K (2007) Chemical fingerprinting of biodiesel using electrospray mass spectrometry and chemometrics: characterization, discrimination, identification, and quantification in petrodiesel. Energy Fuel 21(6):3702–3708.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef700342f Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Flood ME, Goding JC, O’Connor JB, Ragon DY, Hupp AM (2014) Analysis of biodiesel feedstock using GCMS and unsupervised chemometric methods. J Am Oil Chem Soc 91(8):1443–1452.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11746-014-2488-0 Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hupp AM, Marshall LJ, Campbell DI, Smith RW, McGuffin VL (2008) Chemometric analysis of diesel fuel for forensic and environmental applications. Anal Chim Acta 606(2):159–171.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2007.11.007 Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kim K, Labbé N, Warren JM, Elder T, Rials TG (2015) Chemical and anatomical changes in Liquidambar styraciflua L. xylem after long term exposure to elevated CO2. Environ Pollut 198:179–185.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2015.01.006 Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Toscano G, Rinnan Å, Pizzi A, Mancini M (2017) The use of near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy and principal component analysis (PCA) to discriminate bark and wood of the most common species of the pellet sector. Energy Fuel 31(3):2814–2821.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b02421 Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Mancini M, Rinnan Å, Pizzi A, Mengarelli C, Rossini G, Duca D, Toscano G (2018) Near infrared spectroscopy for the discrimination between different residues of the wood processing industry in the pellet sector. Fuel 217:650–655.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.01.008 Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Friedl A, Padouvas E, Rotter H, Varmuza K (2005) Prediction of heating values of biomass fuel from elemental composition. Anal Chim Acta 544(1):191–198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2005.01.041 Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pommer L, Öhman M, Boström D, Burvall J, Backman R, Olofsson I, Nordin A (2009) Mechanisms behind the positive effects on bed agglomeration and deposit formation combusting forest residue with peat additives in fluidized beds. Energy Fuel 23(9):4245–4253.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef900146e Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tao G, Geladi P, Lestander TA, Xiong S (2012) Biomass properties in association with plant species and assortments. II: a synthesis based on literature data for ash elements. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16(5):3507–3522.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.023 Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Tao G, Lestander TA, Geladi P, Xiong S (2012) Biomass properties in association with plant species and assortments I: a synthesis based on literature data of energy properties. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16(5):3481–3506.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.02.039 Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Sad CMS, da Silva M, dos Santos FD, Pereira LB, Corona RRB, Silva SRC, Portela NA, Castro EVR, Filgueiras PR, Lacerda V Jr (2019) Multivariate data analysis applied in the evaluation of crude oil blends. Fuel 239:421–428.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.11.045 Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Voshell S, Mäkelä M, Dahl O (2018) A review of biomass ash properties towards treatment and recycling. Renew Sust Energ Rev 96:479–486.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.07.025 Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Dellavedova M, Derudi M, Biesuz R, Lunghi A, Rota R (2012) On the gasification of biomass: data analysis and regressions. Process Saf Environ Prot 90(3):246–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2011.08.001 Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Đurišić-Mladenović N, Škrbić BD, Zabaniotou A (2016) Chemometric interpretation of different biomass gasification processes based on the syngas quality: assessment of crude glycerol co-gasification with lignocellulosic biomass. Renew Sust Energ Rev 59:649–661.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.002 Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Škrbić BD, Đurišić-Mladenović N, Cvejanov J (2018) Differentiation of syngases produced by steam gasification of mono- and mixed sources feedstock: a chemometric approach. Energy Convers Manag 171:1193–1201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.06.060 Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Manyà JJ, Ruiz J, Arauzo J (2007) Some peculiarities of conventional pyrolysis of several agricultural residues in a packed bed reactor. Ind Eng Chem Res 46(26):9061–9070.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie070811c Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pattiya A, Titiloye JO, Bridgwater AV (2010) Evaluation of catalytic pyrolysis of cassava rhizome by principal component analysis. Fuel 89(1):244–253.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2009.07.003 Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Acquah GE, Via BK, Fasina OO, Adhikari S, Billor N, Eckhardt LG (2017) Chemometric modeling of thermogravimetric data for the compositional analysis of forest biomass. PLoS One 12(3):e0172999.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172999 Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Leth-Espensen A, Glarborg P, Jensen PA (2018) Predicting biomass char yield from high heating rate devolatilization using chemometrics. Energy Fuel 32(9):9572–9580.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b02073 Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Howaniec N, Smoliński A (2014) Influence of fuel blend ash components on steam co-gasification of coal and biomass – chemometric study. Energy 78:814–825.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.10.076 Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Smoliński A, Howaniec N (2017) Chemometric modelling of experimental data on co-gasification of bituminous coal and biomass to hydrogen-Rich gas. Waste Biomass Valor 8(5):1577–1586.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-017-9850-z Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Smoliński A, Howaniec N (2017) Analysis of porous structure parameters of biomass chars versus bituminous coal and lignite carbonized at high pressure and temperature—a chemometric study. Energies 10(10).  https://doi.org/10.3390/en10101457
  68. 68.
    Cempa M, Smoliński A (2017) Reactivity of chars gasified in a fixed bed reactor with the potential utilization of excess process heat. J Sust Mining 16(4):156–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsm.2017.12.001 Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Venturini E, Vassura I, Agostini F, Pizzi A, Toscano G, Passarini F (2018) Effect of fuel quality classes on the emissions of a residential wood pellet stove. Fuel 211:269–277.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.09.017 Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Jeguirim M, Kraiem N, Lajili M, Guizani C, Zorpas A, Leva Y, Michelin L, Josien L, Limousy L (2017) The relationship between mineral contents, particle matter and bottom ash distribution during pellet combustion: molar balance and chemometric analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(11):9927–9939.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-8781-3 Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Schwabl M, Feldmeier S, Nagelhofer K, Wopienka E, Haslinger W. Applicability and slag formation survey of different biomass fuel qualities in small scale combustion: a substudy in the EU FP7-SME Project Ashmelt. In: ETA-Florence Renewable Energies (Hg.) 2012 – Proceedings of the 20st European Biomass Conference and Exhibition, pp 1156–1159Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    European Pellet Council (2015) ENplus Handbook: Quality Certification Scheme For Wood PelletsGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Deutsches Institut für Normung (2011) DIN EN 14780: Solid biofuels - Sample preparationGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Deutsches Institut für Normung (2011) DIN EN 14778: Solid biofuels - SamplingGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Deutsches Institut für Normung (2014) DIN EN ISO 17225-1: Solid biofuels - Fuel specifications and classes - Part 1: General requirementsGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Deutsches Institut für Normung (2003) DIN EN 12457–4: Characterization of waste - Leaching; Compliance test for leaching of granular waste materials and sludges - Part 4: One stage batch test at a liquid to solid ratio of 10 l/kg for materials with particle size below 10 mm (without or with limited size reduction)Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Retschitzegger S, Gruber T, Brunner T, Obernberger I (2015) Short term online corrosion measurements in biomass fired boilers. Part 1: application of a newly developed mass loss probe. Fuel Process Technol 137:148–156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2015.03.026 Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Panchuk V, Yaroshenko I, Legin A, Semenov V, Kirsanov D (2018) Application of chemometric methods to XRF-data – a tutorial review. Anal Chim Acta 1040:19–32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2018.05.023 Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Bro R, Smilde AK (2014) Principal component analysis. Anal Methods 6(9):2812–2831.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C3AY41907J Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Jolliffe IT, Cadima J (2016) Principal component analysis: a review and recent developments. Philosophical transactions. Series a, mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences 374(2065): 20150202.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202
  81. 81.
    Kumar K (2017) Principal component analysis: most favourite tool in chemometrics. Resonance 22(8):747–759.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12045-017-0523-9 Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Mack R, Kuptz D, Schön C, Hartmann H (2019) Combustion behavior and slagging tendencies of kaolin additivated agricultural pellets and of wood-straw pellet blends in a small-scale boiler. Biomass Bioenergy 125:50–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.04.003 Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Deutsches Institut für Normung (2006) DIN CEN/TS 15370–1: Solid biofuels - Method for the determination of ash melting behaviour - Part 1: Characteristic temperatures methodGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Björkman E, Strömberg B (1997) Release of chlorine from biomass at pyrolysis and gasification conditions 1. Energy Fuel 11(5):1026–1032.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef970031o Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Olsson JG, Jäglid U, Pettersson JBC, Hald P (1997) Alkali metal emission during pyrolysis of biomass. Energy Fuel 11(4):779–784.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef960096b Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Dayton DC, Jenkins BM, Turn SQ, Bakker RR, Williams RB, Belle-Oudry D, Hill LM (1999) Release of inorganic constituents from leached biomass during thermal conversion. Energy Fuel 13(4):860–870.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef980256e Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Dayton DC, French RJ, Milne TA (1995) Direct observation of alkali vapor release during biomass combustion and gasification. 1. Application of molecular beam/mass spectrometry to switchgrass combustion. Energy Fuel 9(5):855–865.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef00053a018 Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Davidsson KO, Stojkova BJ, Pettersson JBC (2002) Alkali emission from Birchwood particles during rapid pyrolysis. Energy Fuel 16(5):1033–1039.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef010257y Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Jensen PA, Frandsen FJ, Dam-Johansen K, Sander B (2000) Experimental investigation of the transformation and release to gas phase of potassium and chlorine during straw pyrolysis. Energy Fuel 14(6):1280–1285.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef000104v Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Enders M, Willenborg W, Albrecht J, Putnis A (2000) Alkali retention in hot coal slag under controlled oxidizing gas atmospheres (air–CO2). Fuel Process Technol 68(1):57–73.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3820(00)00110-7 Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Thy P, Lesher CE, Jenkins BM (2000) Experimental determination of high-temperature elemental losses from biomass slag. Fuel 79(6):693–700.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-2361(99)00195-7 Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Wang Y, Wu H, Sárossy Z, Dong C, Glarborg P (2017) Release and transformation of chlorine and potassium during pyrolysis of KCl doped biomass. Fuel 197:422–432.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.02.046 Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Thy P, Jenkins BM, Grundvig S, Shiraki R, Lesher CE (2006) High temperature elemental losses and mineralogical changes in common biomass ashes. Fuel 85(5–6):783–795.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2005.08.020
  94. 94.
    Evic N, Brunner T, Obernberger I (2012) Prediction of biomass ash melting behaviour - correlation between the data obtained from thermodynamic equilibrium calculations and simultaneous thermal analysis (STA). In: ETA-Florence renewable energies (ed) proceedings of the 20th European biomass conference and exhibition, pp 807–813Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Li QH, Zhang YG, Meng AH, Li L, Li GX (2013) Study on ash fusion temperature using original and simulated biomass ashes. Fuel Process Technol 107(Supplement C):107–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2012.08.012
  96. 96.
    Luan C, You C, Zhang D (2014) Composition and sintering characteristics of ashes from co-firing of coal and biomass in a laboratory-scale drop tube furnace. Energy 69:562–570.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.03.050 Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Wang G, Jensen PA, Wu H, Frandsen FJ, Sander B, Glarborg P (2018) Potassium capture by kaolin, part 1: KOH. Energy Fuel 32(2):1851–1862.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b03645 Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Wang G, Jensen PA, Wu H, Frandsen FJ, Sander B, Glarborg P (2018) Potassium capture by kaolin, part 2: K2CO3, KCl and K2SO4. Energy Fuel 32:3566–3578.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b04055 Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Steenari B-M, Lindqvist O (1998) High-temperature reactions of straw ash and the anti-sintering additives kaolin and dolomite. Biomass Bioenergy 14(1):67–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(97)00035-4 Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Gilbe C, Öhman M, Lindström E, Boström D, Backman R, Samuelsson R, Burvall J (2008) Slagging characteristics during residential combustion of biomass pellets. Energy Fuel 22(5):3536–3543.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef800087x
  101. 101.
    Olanders B, Steenari B-M (1995) Characterization of ashes from wood and straw. Biomass Bioenergy 8(2):105–115.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0961-9534(95)00004-Q Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Fagerström J, Näzelius I-L, Gilbe C, Boström D, Öhman M, Boman C (2014) Influence of peat ash composition on particle emissions and slag formation in biomass grate co-combustion. Energy Fuel 28(5):3403–3411.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef4023543 Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Johansen JM, Aho M, Paakkinen K, Taipale R, Egsgaard H, Jakobsen JG, Frandsen FJ, Glarborg P (2013) Release of K, Cl, and S during combustion and co-combustion with wood of high-chlorine biomass in bench and pilot scale fuel beds. Proc Combust Inst 34(2):2363–2372.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2012.07.025 Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    van Lith SC, Jensen PA, Frandsen FJ, Glarborg P (2008) Release to the gas phase of inorganic elements during wood combustion. Part 2: influence of fuel composition. Energy Fuel 22(3):1598–1609.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef060613i Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Sommersacher P, Kienzl N, Brunner T, Obernberger I (2016) Simultaneous online determination of S, Cl, K, Na, Zn, and Pb release from a single particle during biomass combustion. Part 2: results from test runs with spruce and straw pellets. Energy Fuel 30(4):3428–3440.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b02766 Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Näzelius I-L, Fagerström J, Boman C, Boström D, Öhman M (2015) Slagging in fixed-bed combustion of phosphorus-poor biomass: critical ash-forming processes and compositions. Energy Fuel 29(2):894–908.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef502531m Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Magdziarz A, Gajek M, Nowak-Woźny D, Wilk M (2018) Mineral phase transformation of biomass ashes – experimental and thermochemical calculations. Renew Energy 128:446–459.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.057 Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Kaknics J, Defoort F, Poirier J (2015) Inorganic phase transformation in Miscanthus ash. Energy Fuel 29(10):6433–6442.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b01189 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DBFZ Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum gemeinnützige GmbH (DBFZ)LeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Faculty of Energy and FuelsAGH University of Science and TechnologyKrakowPoland
  3. 3.Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Chair of Waste and Resource ManagementUniversity of RostockRostockGermany

Personalised recommendations