Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma

Gasication Melting process
Qinglin Zhang a,, Yueshi Wu a, Liran Dor b, Weihong Yang a, Wlodzimierz Blasiak a
a
b

Energy and Furnace Technology Division, Royal Institute of Technology, Brinellvgen 23, S-10044 Stockholm, Sweden
Environmental Energy Resources Ltd., 21 HaMelacha St., 48091 Rosh Haayin, Israel

h i g h l i g h t s
 A thermodynamic analysis was conducted to evaluate the characteristics of the PGM.
 Energy recovery using gas furnaces is suggested due to high total energy and exergy.
 Gas turbines are not recommended due to high tar yield.
 Increasing heat to the PGM is benecial for cold gas energy and exergy efciencies.
 A small steam addition is benecial for PGM energy and exergy efciencies.

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 25 September 2012
Received in revised form 20 March 2013
Accepted 22 March 2013
Available online xxxx
Keywords:
Gasication
Plasma
MSW
Energy
Exergy

a b s t r a c t
Plasma Gasication Melting is a promising technology for solid waste treatment. In this work, a thermodynamic analysis has been conducted to evaluate the advantages and limitations of the PGM technology.
According to the characteristics of the PGM, the whole process was divided into four sections such as drying, pyrolysis, char gasication and inorganics melting. The energy and exergy in each section has been
calculated. According to different usage of syngas, two kinds of energy and exergy efciencies are dened.
The results show that the PGM process produces a tar-rich syngas. When considering the raw syngas
(syngas with tar), the energy and exergy efciency of PGM process is very high. The effects of operating
conditions on the thermodynamic performance of the PGM process have been analyzed. Considering the
energy and exergy of clean syngas, it is benecial to increase sensible heat input to the PGM system.
However, high sensible heat input or high steam injection is not suggested when considering the energy
and exergy efciency of raw syngas.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Municipal solid waste (MSW) is one of the main by-products of
human society, but at the same time, it is also a potential energy
source which has attracted more and more attention over the
years. The waste-to-energy conception has become one of the most
popular topics in the energy eld. Among various waste-to-energy
technologies, gasication is recognized as a promising method
[13].
Gasication is generally an endothermic process. The heat required for gasication can be provided by either partial combustion of feedstock or external heat sources. It has been conrmed
that the use of an external heat source can increase both the energy
and the exergy efciency of gasication. Furthermore, it has been
shown that the heating value of syngas can also be enhanced
Corresponding author. Tel.: +46 8 790 6545; fax: +46 8 207 681.
E-mail address: qinglin@kth.se (Q. Zhang).

[46]. In recent years, the usage of thermal plasma in gasication

has gained increasing interest [79]. By using plasma gasication,
the solid feedstock can be decomposed into two products: a combustible syngas, and an inert vitreous slag. It was declared that
plasma gasication exhibits remarkable environmental advantages
for both air emission and slag toxicity control [10,11]. However,
since plasma gasication is a new technology, the knowledge
about performance and characteristics of plasma gasication are
still not enough. There are still disputes about the efciency, especially the energy and exergy efciency of plasma gasication.
The main purpose of this paper is to provide an energy and
exergy analysis for one of these plasma gasication processes
called Plasma Gasication Melting (PGM). It is the continuation
and developments of our previous experimental and numerical
studies about the characteristics of the PGM process [1215]. A
process simulating model which was used for performance analysis and syngas composition prediction [13] is adopted and updated
to perform energy and exergy analysis. Special attention was given

0306-2619/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Nomenclature
Abbreviation
CGE
cold gas efciency
CGEE
cold gas exergy efciency
ER
equivalence ratio
LHC
light hydrocarbons
LHV
lower heating value
MSW
municipal solid waste
PE
polyethylene
PER
plasma energy ratio
PGM
Plasma Gasication and Melting
PP
polypropylene
PVC
polyvinyl chloride
SAMR
Steam air mass ratio
Symbols
cp
h
e
h
heva
_
M
~_
M
P
R
~s
T
xi
~xi
e

heat capacity (J kg1 K1)

specic enthalpy (J kg1)
molar enthalpy (J mol1)
evaporation enthalpy of water (J kg1)
mass ow rate (kg s1)
molar ow rate (mol s1)
power (W)
universal gas constant (J mol1 K1)
molar entropy (J mol1 K1)
temperature (K)
mass fraction of species i
molar fraction of species i
specic exergy (J kg1)

to the inuence of different operating parameters on process energy and exergy efciency.
2. The PGM process and modeling
2.1. The PGM process
The PGM is a new plasma gasication technology developed
and owned by Environmental Energy Resources Ltd. The typical
schematics of a PGM processing chamber are shown in Fig. 1.
MSW or other types of solid waste are fed into the reactor by airtight feeding system at the upper part of the processing chamber.
Thermal plasma torches are placed near the bottom of the processing chamber, and high temperature plasma air (also known as the
primary gasication agents) of above 5000 C is fed into the chamber from these plasma torches. The high temperature plasma jets
supply the necessary heat to vitrify the inorganics of the feedstock.
In order to ensure the highest gasication efciency, secondary
gasication agents (air and steam) are fed from nozzles around
plasma nozzles. After the air and steam mixing, the rst and second agents ow into the process chamber. Reactions related to
xed-bed gasication occur in the waste column, and nally produces a combustible gas mixture known as syngas. The main combustible species in the syngas are CO, H2 and LHCs. At the syngas
exit, the gas temperature is about 200400 C. By using the PGM
technology, multiple objectives such as waste elimination, energy
recovery and benign slag product can be achieved in one single
process chamber.
By using the PGM technology, the following benets can be
expected:
 The syngas lower-heating-value from PGM can reach up to
10 MJ/Nm3. The syngas can be used as good fuel or chemicalengineering materials.

molar exergy (J mol1)

efciency

Subscript
0
air
ash
cel
ch
dry
en
ex
gas
H2O
i
in
MSW
out
ph
pla
plasma
pri
sec
solid
steam
syngas
tar

standard state
air
ash
cellulosic species
chemical
dry
energy
exergy
gas phase
moisture
ith time step
inlet
municipal solid waste
outlet
physical
plastics
plasma
primary pyrolysis
secondary pyrolysis
solid phase
steam
syngas
tar

~e

 The energy efciency of the PGM technology is higher than traditional gasication.
 The PGM technology provides more than 95% volume reduction
of raw MSW.
 Most heavy metals can be trapped in the molten slag [16,17].
After cooling down, the slag can be used as construction
material.
 Lower pollutant emission due to the reduction environment.

Fig. 1. Typical schematics of a PGM processing chamber.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Table 1
MSW proximate and ultimate analyses.
Proximate analysis
Moisture
Fixed carbon
Volatile
Ash

20.0%
10.7%
77.6%
11.7%

Ultimate analysis (in dry basis)

Carbon
Hydrogen
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Chlorine
Sulfur

50.5%
5.6%
30.7%
1.1%
<0.1%
0.3%

2.2. Feedstock properties

The feedstock used in this study is MSW collected in Israel. The
proximate and ultimate analyses of the MSW are given in Table 1.
In reality, the size of MSW particles varies from 1 to 100 mm.
2.3. Model description
In this work, a steady state model of the PGM process was used.
The model was developed with the process simulating software
Aspen Plus. In order to demonstrate the phenomena at different
stages of the PGM process, the whole PGM process is schematized
into four sub-models: drying, pyrolysis, char gasication and plasma melting. Mass and energy balances were considered individually in each zone. The simplied scheme of the PGM gasication
model is shown in Fig. 2. More details about the model have been
published previously [1315].
2.3.1. Drying
The ow sheet diagram of the drying sub-model is shown in
Fig. 3a. Raw MSW rstly meets the syngas from the pyrolysis zone,
and the drying happens in the reactor named DRY-REA. The heat of
drying is considered as the potential evaporation heat of water. The
energy balance of heat exchanger is described as:

X Z
_i
M
i

T syngas-in

_ MSW-dry
cp;i dT M

T syngas-out

T MSW-out

cp;MSW-dry dT

T MSW-in

_HO
M
2

Fig. 2. Simplied scheme of the PGM process model.

T syngas-out

T MSW-in

[2123]. In this work, the two-step pyrolysis model is applied for

both cellulosic species and plastics:

!
cp;H2 O dT hev a =M H2 O
1

2.3.2. Pyrolysis
Pyrolysis behavior is very important for the PGM process.
Firstly, the pyrolysis gaseous products directly ow through the
drying zone, and a major contributor of the syngas. Secondly, tar
production is a serious problem in updraft x-bed gasication processes like the PGM process [18,19], while tar formation mainly occurs in the pyrolysis section. As a result, accurately simulating of
the pyrolysis behavior is one of the key factors for a successful
PGM model.
The heterogeneous MSW composition is the reason for the complicated modeling of pyrolysis. According to the main pyrolysis
characteristics, combustible components in MSW can be divided
into two main groups: cellulosic fractions (wood, paper, vegetation
and cardboard) and plastics (PE, PP, PVC and rubber) [20]. Due to
the complexity in both reaction paths and products generated,
the detailed kinetics of pyrolysis is still unclear. However, the
two-step pyrolysis model is reported to be a good approach for
xed-bed processes where pyrolysis occurs at low heating rates

Cellulosic species ! aGascel;pri bTar cel;pri cAsh dC

Plastic species ! a0 Gaspla;pri b0 Tarpla;pri c0 Ash dC

Tarcel;pri ! eTar sec fGascel;sec

Tarpla;pri ! e0 Tarsec f0 Gaspla;sec

Yields and composition of cellulosic group pyrolysis and secondary tar cracking, including the composition of produced gases
and tars are taken from Hla [24]. Yields and compositions of primary pyrolysis of plastics are taken from Williams and Williams
[25]. No literature data was found for the secondary pyrolysis of
plastic mixture, so the yield of primary tar cracking of the plastic
group is calculated from elementary balance. To simplify the model, all LHCs except CH4 are considered as C2H4. The composition of
secondary tar is assumed to be benzene.
2.3.3. Char gasication
The char gasication zone involves a large number of reactions.
In the PGM process, the temperature in this zone can reach up to
1000 C. The order of magnitude of gases residence time in the char
gasication zone is 101 s.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Fig. 3. Flow sheet diagrams of four sub-models. (a) Drying, (b) pyrolysis, (c) char gasication and (d) melting.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Fig. 3. (continued)

At this condition, the chemical reactions occurring in this zone

can be regarded as at chemical equilibrium. In this model, the
products from the char gasication zone are calculated by
minimizing the system Gibbs free energy.
The ow sheet diagram of the char-gasication sub-model is
shown in Fig. 3c. All reactions involved in char gasication happen
in the Gibbs reactor named GASI-REA. Then, gaseous and solid
products are separated in the separator GASI-SEP. A heat stream
is specied afterwards so as to consider the temperature difference
between gas and solid phases.
2.3.4. Plasma melting and vitrication
The inorganic components (ash) of the MSW are melted and vitried due to the oxygen content of the plasma gas and by the high
temperature plasma jets in the plasma melting section. In this
work, the melting of inorganics is assumed to happen in the reactor
named MELTING. The heat needed for melting is provided by the
mixture of plasma and secondary air. According to the original
composition of the MSW, the heat capacity of the inorganics is calculated as following:

cp;ash

n
X
xi cp;i

i1

The composition of the inorganic components is assumed as a

mixture of 50% SiO2, 30% Al2O3 and 20% CaO. The melting latent
heat of the inorganics is calculated similarly to that of the heat
capacity.

In this work, the exergy analysis is carried out in each submodel by calculating the global exergy input and output. The
exergy involved in the PGM process including chemical exergy
Ech and physical exergy Eph.
For the gaseous stream, the chemical exergy is calculated as:

X
X
~xi ~e0;i RT 0 ~xi ln~xi
i

~eph;gas

~e0;i (J mol1)

~ (J mol1)
h
0;i

~s0;i (J mol1 K1)

H2O
CO
H2
CO2
CH4
C2H4
N2
O2

9500
275,100
236,100
19,870
831,650
1,361,100
720
3970

241,845
110,541
0
393,546
74,831
52,283
0
0

188.715
197.548
130.595
213.736
186.188
219.827
191.511
205.043

~ and ~s are the standard chemical exergy (J mol1),

where ~e0;i ,h
0;i
0;i
standard formation enthalpy (J mol1) and standard formation en~
tropy (J mol1 K1) of gaseous components. The values of ~e0;i h
0;i
and ~s0;i of main gaseous species are listed in Table 2.
Due to the heterogeneous composition of MSW, it is not practical to calculate its chemical exergy by its constructional species.
Szargut and Styrylska [26] introduced an empirical correlation
for the specic chemical exergy of solid fuels. This correlation
has been used by other researchers for exergy analysis of solid fuel
gasication [27]. In this work, it is chosen due to its positive feedback from previous works:

ech;MSW LHV MSW



1:044 0:016 xxHC  0:3493 xxOC 1 0:0531 xxHC 0:0493 xxNC
1  0:4124 xxOC
10

Similarly, the chemical exergy of various tars are simulated

with another correlation for liquid fuels [28]:


ech;tar LHV tar 1:0401 0:1728



xH
xO
xS
xH
0:0432 0:2196
1  2:0628
xC
xC
xC
xC
11

X
~xi ~eph;i

~eph;i

Substance

2.4. Exergy calculation

~ech;gas

Table 2
Standard chemical exergy, standard formation enthalpy and standard formation
entropy of gaseous species.

~ h
~  T 0 ~s  ~s
h
i
0;i
i
0;i

2.5. Energy and exergy efciencies

Generally, the energy efciency of a gasication process is often
dened as the cold-gas-efciency (CGE). For the PGM process, the
CGE is written as:

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

_
M

 LHV

syngas
syngas
gen;CGE _
 100%
M MSW  LHV MSW Psteam Pplasma

12

where Psteam denotes the power needed to produce high temperature steam, and Pplasma is the power of plasma generators.
Due to the relatively high tar yield in the syngas, the most efcient usage of the syngas is direct combustion in gas furnace. In
that case, tar in the syngas can be directly combusted. So for the
PGM process, the energy efciency can also be dened as the total
energy efciency:

_
M

 LHV

_
M

 LHV

syngas
tar
tar
gen _ syngas
 100%
M MSW  LHV MSW Psteam Pplasma

13

In this work, both denitions of energy efciency will be

considered.
Similarly, the exergy efciency of the PGM process can be dened as the cold-gas-exergy-efciency (CGEE) or total exergy
efciency:

~_
M
ech;syngas
syngas  ~
gex;CGE _
 100%
_ steam  eph;steam Pplasma
MMSW  ech;MSW M

14

~_
M
ech;syngas M_ tar  ech;tar
syngas  ~
gex _
 100%
_ steam  eph;steam Pplasma
M MSW  ech;MSW M

15

3. Results and analysis

3.1. Comparison with measured results
A demonstration PGM plant was constructed in Yblin, Israel,
with a designed capacity of 1220 tons of MSW per day. From
2007, a series of test runs has been performed in the demonstration PGM plant, so as to study the characteristics of the PGM process. Some typical results at different operation conditions were
published in by Zhang [12]. In this work, these experimental measured results are used to validate the numerical model. The operation parameters of compared cases are shown in Table 3.
The simulated results of syngas yield and composition are compared with experimental results, in terms of syngas yield, syngas
LHV and the ratio of H2 and CO volume fractions (H2/CO). Both results are shown in Table 4.
The simulated results t well with the measured results in both
syngas yield and its composition. The H2/CO values are slightly
underestimated in all cases, but they are still in acceptable range.
This model is acceptable to predict the performance of PGM
process.
3.1.1. Energy and exergy balance of the base case
Based on the operation experience of previous runs, the operation condition in case 1 is a rather stable condition, at which the
PGM process can keep stable operation. In order to better understand the thermo-dynamic characteristics of the PGM process,

Table 3
Operation parameters of the test runs.
Case number

Plasma power (kw)

Primary air feeding rate (kg h1)
Secondary air feeding rate (kg h1)
Secondary air feeding temperature (C)
Steam feeding rate (kg h1)
Steam temperature (C)

240
120
60
25
70
1000

240
120
60
25
100
1000

240
120
35
25
70
1000

260
130
13
25
70
1000

Table 4
Comparison between measured and simulated results.
Case number

Measured results
Syngas yield (Nm3 kg1 MSW)
Syngas LHV (MJ Nm3)
H2/CO

1.36
8.23
1.24

1.38
8.43
1.53

1.26
8.24
1.45

1.29
8.70
1.70

Predicted results
Syngas yield (Nm3 kg1 MSW)
Syngas LHV (MJ Nm3)
H2/CO

1.27
8.48
1.16

1.32
8.70
1.33

1.16
8.05
1.32

1.14
8.38
1.41

the case 1 is chosen as an example to demonstrate the energy

and exergy balance during the PGM process.
Fig. 4 shows the Sankey diagram of the energy ow of the base
case. It provides visible evidence for some characters of the PGM
process of MSW. For instance, the chemical energy transfer from
MSW to syngas mainly happens in the pyrolysis and char gasication sections, while about 80% of total chemical energy transfer occurs during pyrolysis. The sensible heat input rate from plasma and
high temperature steam is about 10% of the chemical energy transfer rate. It can also be found that the total energy efciency gen is
about 94.4%, which is quite high compared to other technology.
However, the chemical enthalpy of tar is 1236.3 kW, which is
about 46% of total chemical enthalpy in the syngas. The gen,CGE value in the base case is only 50.8%. This demonstrates quite low energy efciency for clean syngas usage in gas turbines and gas
engines.
Fig. 5 is the Sankey diagram of the exergy ow for the PGM process for the base case. It is found that the exergy loss in the pyrolysis section reaches 150 kW, which is the highest in all four
sections. This shows that the intense chemical energy transfer between solid and gas during the pyrolysis process is strongly irreversible. The exergy loss in the plasma melting section is
122 kW, this phenomena ts the results in Fig. 4 because there is
a large heat loss during plasma melting. Another exergy loss is in
the mixing of high temperature plasma ow with secondary air.
The mixing process is strongly irreversible. Despite the exergy loss
during the PGM process, the total exergy efciency gex for the base
case is 86.5%, while the cold gas exergy efciency gex,CGE is 44.9%.
3.2. Parameter study
3.2.1. Inuences of equivalence ratio on energy and exergy efciency
In a gasication process, the feeding of air provides an oxidizer
for char gasication. Meanwhile, it supplies heat by partial combustion of feedstock. The amount of air supply for gasication is
usually represented by the equivalence ratio (ER):



_ air =M
_ MSW
M

ER 
_ MSW
_ air =M
M

16

stoic

In the PGM process, due to sensible heat supplied by thermal

plasma and high temperature steam, the ER value is much lower
(0.040.10) than that of conventional gasiers (around 0.3). From
the view point of exergy efciency, a low ER is desirable because
the combustion process is irreversible, and it reduces the total
exergy inside the gasier. In addition, a low ER value prevents dilution of syngas from N2 and CO2. This thought is conrmed by the
simulated gen and gex values at different ER value. As an example,
Fig. 6 shows the variation of gen and gex with ER, when the plasma
power is 240 kw, and the steam feeding rate is 70 kg/h. It is clear
that both gen and gex decrease with increasing ER, and decreasing
trends become more obvious with increasing ER.
Fig. 7 shows the variation of gen,CGE and gex,CGE with the same
conditions. It is found that the gen,CGE and gex,CGE rst increase with

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Fig. 4. Sankey diagram of energy balance for the base case.

Fig. 5. Sankey diagram of exergy balance for the base case.

increasing ER, and reach their maximum at about ER = 0.13. If the

ER value further increases, both gen,CGE and gex,CGE show slight
decreasing trends.

Together with the trends of gen and gex, This indicates a significant reduction of tar yield with increasing ER. This result coincide
with the experimental results by Ponzio et al. [29], who carried out

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Fig. 6. Inuence of ER on gen and gex.

Fig. 8. Inuence of PER on gen and gex.

Fig. 7. Inuence of ER on gen,CGE and gex,CGE.

Fig. 9. Inuence of PER on gen,CGE and gex,CGE.

an experimental study on waste gasication in an updraft xedbed gasier with highly preheated air and steam as agents. It is believed that the decreasing of tar yield is mainly due to favored thermal cracking at increased environmental temperature. The
cracking produces combustible gases such as CO, H2 and LHCs,
and this explains the increasing of gen,CGE and gex,CGE with ER when
ER < 0.13. If the value of ER exceeds 0.13, the negative effects of ER
due to feedstock consumption exceed the tar cracking, so gen,CGE
and gex,CGE start to decrease, and gen and gex decrease faster.

and exergy loss in the plasma melting process. Since the generation
of plasma ow consumes a large amount of electricity, it is not suggested to use very high plasma power for the gas furnace application of PGM.
Fig. 9 shows the variation of gen,CGE and gex,CGE with PER. It is
found that when PER increases from 0.078 to 0.109, the gen,CGE increases from 45% to 55%, and the gex,CGE increases from 40% to
48.5%. This result ts previous experimental results from a demonstration PGM processing chamber [12]. Similarly to the effect of ER,
it is believed that the increase of gen,CGE and gex,CGE with increasing
PER is mainly due to favored char gasication and tar cracking by
enhanced reaction temperatures.

3.2.2. Inuences of plasma power on energy and exergy efciency

Using thermal plasma torches in the melting section is one
innovation of the PGM technology. These plasma torches not only
provide high temperatures for the melting of inorganic components in MSW, but also provide sensible heat for the MSW gasication. The providing of extra heat can largely increase the energy
and exergy efciency of gasication. However, the generation of
plasma ow needs large exergy input by electricity. As a result,
the use of plasma torches has two contrary inuences on energy
and exergy efciency.
In this work, the amount of plasma energy input is expressed by
dimensionless plasma energy ratio (PER), which is dened as:

PER

P plasma
_ MSW
LHV MSW  M

17

Fig. 8 shows the variation of gen and gex with PER, at ER = 0.06
and steam feeding rate equal to 70 kg/h. It is found that the inuence of PER on gen and gex seems slightly negative. A possible reason for this phenomenon is the large increase of energy and exergy
input to the PGM system with increasing PER. As was demonstrated in section 3.1.2, the plasma ow undergoes large energy

3.2.3. Inuences of steam feeding rate on energy and exergy efciency

In the PGM process, high temperature steam is usually used as
additional agent to promote char gasication. Meanwhile, it is also
used as a carrier of sensible heat. In this work, the amount of steam
feeding rate is expressed by steam air mass ratio:

SAMR

_ steam
M
_ air
M

18

Fig. 10 shows the variation of gen and gex with SAMR, at

ER = 0.06 and PER = 0.094. It is found that both gen and gex demonstrate increasing trends when SAMR increases from 0 to 0.2.
According to previous study results [15], the dramatic increasing
of gen and gex is caused by incomplete gasication of char due to
a deciency of agent supply. The injection of high temperature
steam largely enhances the char gasication ratio, and the complete gasication of char can be achieved at about SAME = 0.2.
When SAME continues increasing from 0.2, the gen and gex start
to decrease slightly with increasing PER.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054

Q. Zhang et al. / Applied Energy xxx (2013) xxxxxx

References

Fig. 10. Inuence of SAMR on gen and gex.

Fig. 11. Inuence of SAMR on gen,CGE and gex,CGE.

The variation of gen,CGE and gex,CGE with SAMR at ER = 0.06 and

PER = 0.094 is shown in Fig. 11. Generally, the effects of SAMR on
gen,CGE and gex,CGE are positive. It is believed that this is caused by
favored steam reforming of tar. Meanwhile, the positive effects of
SAMR on char gasication can also be found when the SAMR is below 0.2.
4. Conclusions
Energy and exergy analysis for the PGM process is performed
based on a process simulating model. Two kinds of energy and
exergy efciency are dened. For the base case, the gen,CGE = 50.8%,
and the gex,CGE = 449%. When the LHV of tar is included in the efciency calculation, then gen = 94.4%, and gex = 86.5%. It is suggested
to directly use the syngas from The PGM in the gas furnace to obtain high energy and exergy efciency.
A parameter study was performed to investigate the inuences
of plasma power, air feeding rate and steam feeding rate on the energy and the exergy efciency of the PGM process. Generally, at the
reasonable operating conditions, the effects of all three parameters
are positive for gen,CGE and gex,CGE. However, when consider total
energy efciency gen and exergy gex, it is not suggested to use high
ER, PER or SAMR. From either denition of energy and exergy efciency, a small amount of steam injection is benecial.

[1] Thomas M. Novel and innovative pyrolysis and gasication technologies for
energy efcient and environmentally sound MSW disposal. Waste Manage
2004;24(1):5379.
[2] Bebar L, Stehlik P, Havlen L, Oral J. Analysis of using gasication and
incineration for thermal processing of wastes. Appl Therm Eng
2005;25(7):104555.
[3] Birgersson KE, Balaya P, Chou SK, Yan J. Energy solutions for a sustainable
world. Appl Energy 2011;90(1):12.
[4] Min TJ, Yoshikawa K, Murakami K. Distributed gasication and power
generation from solid wastes. Energy 2005;30(1112):221928.
[5] Yang W, Anna P, Lucas C, Blasiak W. Performance analysis of a xed-bed
biomass gasier using high-temperature air. Fuel Process Technol
2006;97(3):23545.
[6] Lincoln Y, Carlson CPP. High-temperature, air-blown gasication of dairy-farm
wastes for energy production. Energy 2003;28(7):65572.
[7] Moustakas K, Fatta D, Malamis S, Haralambous K, Loizidou M. Demonstration
plasma gasication/vitrication system for effective hazardous waste
treatment. J Hazard Mater 2005;123(13):1206.
[8] Lemmens B, Elslander H, Vanderreydt I, Peys K, Diels L, Oosterlinck M, et al.
Assessment of plasma gasication of high caloric waste streams. Waste
Manage 2007;27(11):15629.
[9] Falcucci G, Jannelli E, Minutillo M, Ubertini S, Han J, Yoon SP, et al. Integrated
numerical and experimental study of a MCFC-plasma gasier energy system.
Appl Energy 2012;97:73442.
[10] Lapa N, Santos Oliveira JF, Camacho SL, Circeo LJ. An ecotoxic risk assessment
of residue materials produced by the plasma pyrolysis/vitrication (PP/V)
process. Waste Manage 2002;22(3):33542.
[11] Koutaro K, Tomonori A, Yoshihito K, Ryoji S. Melting municipal solid waste
incineration residue by plasma melting furnace with a graphite electrode. Thin
Solid Film 2001;386(2):1838.
[12] Zhang Q, Dor L, Fenigshtein D, Yang W, Blasiak W. Gasication of municipal
solid waste in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl Energy
2011;90(1):10612.
[13] Zhang Q, Dor L, Umeki K, Yang W, Blasiak W. Process modeling and
performance analysis of a PGM gasier. In: 10th conference on energy for a
clean environment. Lisbon, Portugal; July 2009.
[14] Zhang Q, Dor L, Yang W, Blasiak W. Properties and optimizing of a plasma
gasication & melting process of municipal solid waste. In: Proceedings of
international conference of thermal treatment technology & hazardous waste
combustors (IT3/HWC). San Francisco, California, USA; May 1720, 2010.
[15] Zhang Q. Mathematical modeling of municipal solid waste plasma gasication
in a xed-bed melting reactor. PhD thesis, Royal Institute of Technology,
Sweden; 2004.
[16] Jung CH, Matsuto T, Tanaka N. Behavior of metals in ash melting and
gasication-melting of municipal solid waste (MSW). Waste Manage (Oxford)
2005;25(3):30110.
[17] Xiao G, Jin B, Zhong Z, Chi Y, Ni M, Cen K, et al. Experimental study on MSW
gasication and melting technology. J Environ Sci 2007;19(11):1398403.
[18] Christopher H, Maarten B. Gasication. Elsevier 2008.
[19] Li C, Suzuki K. Tar property, analysis, reforming mechanism and model for
biomass
gasicationan
overview.
Renew
Sust
Energy
Rev
2009;13(3):594604.
[20] Sorum L, Gronly MG, Hustad JE. Pyrolysis characteristics and kinetics of
municipal solid waste. Fuel 2001;80(9):121727.
[21] Chan WCR, Kelbon M, Krieger BB. Modeling and experimental verication of
physical and chemical processes during pyrolysis of a large biomass particle.
Fuel 1985;64. 11.
[22] Boroson ML, Howard JB, Longwell JP, Peter WA. Product yields and kinetics
from vapor phase cracking of wood pyrolysis tars. AIChE J 1989;35(1):1208.
[23] Colomba DB. Modeling wood gasication in a countercurrent xed-bed
reactor. AIChE J 2004;50(9):230619.
[24] Hla SH. A theoretical and experimental study on a stratied downdraft
biomass gasier. PhD thesis, University of Melbourne; 2004.
[25] Williams EA, Williams PT. The pyrolysis of individual plastics and a plastic
mixture in a xed bed reactor. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 1997;70(1):920.
[26] Szargut J, Styrylska T. Approximate evaluation of the exergy of fuels. Brennst
Warme Kraft 1964;16(12):58996.
[27] Krzysztof JP, Mark JP, Anke P. Exergetic evaluation of biomass gasication. Fuel
2007;32(4):56874.
[28] Stepanov VS. Chemical energy and exergy of fuels. Energy 1995;20(3):23542.
[29] Ponzio A, Kalisz S, Blasiak W. Effect of operating conditions on tar and gas
composition in high temperature air/steam gasication (HTAG) of plastic
containing waste. Fuel Process Technol 2006;87(3):22333.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang Q et al. A thermodynamic analysis of solid waste gasication in the Plasma Gasication Melting process. Appl
Energy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.054