Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Proceedings
of the
Combustion
Institute
Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733
www.elsevier.com/locate/proci

Experimental investigation on biomass co-firing

in a 300 MW pulverized coal-fired utility furnace
in China
Xuebin Wang a, Houzhang Tan a,b,*, Yanqing Niu a,
Mohamed Pourkashanian b, Lin Ma b, Erqiang Chen a, Yang Liu a,
Zhengning Liu a, Tongmo Xu a
a
State Key Laboratory of Multiphase Flow in Power Engineering, School of Energy and Power Engineering,
Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China
b
Energy and Resources Research Institute, School of Process, Environmental and Materials Engineering/
Centre for Computational Fluid Dynamics, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

Available online 6 August 2010

Abstract

Mold biomass pellets have been utilized on a 300 MW pulverized coal-fired furnace in China for the first
time. Biomass was ground using the existing mill system, and without using any additional equipment. The
maximum ratio of the biomass used in the experiments is 16.1% by energy input. The feasibility of grinding
biomass and the safety of mill operation have been analyzed. In addition, the effects of co-firing biomass on
the flame, temperature, pollutant emission, and unburned carbon in ash have been investigated. Also the
characteristics of fly ash and its utilization in the concrete have been tested. The results show that existing
roller mills and direct-blowing pulverizing systems can be used to grind mold biomass and to transport pul-
verized biomass within the limit in the flow rate of the biomass that can be processed. During the processes
of biomass co-firing, the flame on the biomass injector is stable, but the outlet temperature of the furnace
decreases, and the unburned carbon in the fly ash increases, when compared with the condition when firing
coal only. NOx emission decreases with an increase in the biomass input. When the rate of biomass feed
reaches 24 t/h in the test, the NOx emission is reduced by about 10%, but there is only a small reduction
in the SO2 emission. Investigations on the characteristics of the fly ash shows that the content of potassium
and chlorine in the ash increases with an increase in the biomass feed, but co-firing biomass does not affect
the quality of the fly ash to be used in the cement industry. The results presented in this paper can provide
guidance for direct biomass co-firing in existing high-capacity pulverized coal-fired furnaces in China.
Ó 2010 The Combustion Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Biomass; Co-firing; Mill; Ash; Utility furnace

*
Corresponding author at: Department of Thermal
Engineering, School of Energy and Power Engineering,
Xi’an Jiaotong University, 28 Xian Ning West Road,
Xi’an 710049, China. Fax: +86 02982668784.
E-mail address: tanhouzhang@yahoo.cn (H. Tan).
1. Introduction
The deterioration in the greenhouse effects has
attracted more and more attention, and numer-
ous techniques have been proposed in order to
reduce the emission of CO2. However, most of

1540-7489/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 The Combustion Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.proci.2010.06.055
2726 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733
the schemes could not be applied economically
because of the large scale investment that is re-
quired [1,2]. Among all the cheaper alternatives,
biomass co-firing with coal has been widely rec-
ognized as a feasible and economic way for the
reduction of CO2 [3–7].
Biomass is considered as a CO2-neutral fuel,
since biomass consumes the same amount of CO2
from the atmosphere during its growth as that
released during its combustion. Meanwhile, the
content of sulphur and nitrogen in biomass is much
lower, and the emission of SO2 and NOx can also be
reduced when the biomass co-firing is implemented
[2,8–13]. Furthermore, because the content of
alkali and chlorine is high, combustion of 100%
biomass will result in severe problems of slagging
and corrosion, and this can be effectively avoided
if co-firing biomass with coal. If biomass is injected
as a reburning fuel in the downstream region of the
primary combustion zone, it can achieve a high effi-
ciency in NOx reduction [14–17].
Despite of the advantages in the co-firing bio-
mass mentioned above, co-firing biomass in high-
capacity pulverized coal-fired furnaces can still
not be applied widely in China. This is because of
the problem of transportation, preparation and
feed of the biomass [12,18–20]. Experimental co-fir-
ing of wood with coal was performed in a 315 MW
tangentially fired furnace, where wood accounted
for 2.5–8% of the total heat input and it was
blended with coal in the coal yard. However, the
experiment did not last long because the roller mill
system used was insufficient to deal with the blend
of biomass and coal [12]. The same problem also
existed in the test carried out at the Kingston and
Colber Power Plant, which showed that the highest
ratio of biomass co-fired was about 5% by mass and
when the biomass co-firing ratio reached up to 5–
10%, a separated biomass grinding system would
be necessary [20].
On the other hand, the suitability of using bio-
mass ash in cement is still not debatable. The
ASTM (American Standard Testing and Materi-
als) C618 prohibits the use of biomass fly ash
in concrete, but the European Commission has
approved a standard to allow the use of biomass
fly ash (up to 25 wt.% straw co-firing with coal)
in concrete. Meanwhile, investigations in labora-
tories are rare and therefore this does not give a
unified conclusion on the utilization of fly ash
from biomass co-firing in the concrete industry
[21–23].
In China, because there is no subsidiary policy
to support biomass co-firing, only one demonstra-
tion case of biomass co-firing exists at the Shiliquan
Power Plant. It employs a new straw grinding sys-
tem and the cost of this system is more than 12 mil-
lion dollars. What is worse is that the biomass price
keeps increasing rapidly, leading to enormous fuel
costs and therefore the scheme has not been
adopted in other power plants in China.
In this paper, a new scheme of co-firing biomass
has been investigated and proposed experimen-
tally. The mold biomass pellets have been used in
a 300 MW pulverized coal-fired furnace at the Bao-
ji Power Plant in China for the first time. The bio-
mass was pulverized using the existing roller mill
system, without any additional equipment. The
practicality of grinding biomass and the safety of
the mill operation were analyzed. The effects of
co-firing biomass on the flame, temperature profile,
pollutant emission, and unburned carbon in ash
were investigated. The characteristics of the fly
ash from the biomass co-firing and the practicality
of its utilization in concrete were also tested.
2. Experimental setup
2.1. Test facility description
The biomass co-firing test was performed in a
DG1025/18.3-II9 tangentially-fired pulverized coal
furnace (300 MW, steam 1025 t/h, 18.3 MPa,
535 °C), which was designed for bituminous coal.
The furnace was equipped with 6 groups of roller
mills (A–F) and used a direct-blowing pulverizing
system. Only 5 groups (A–E) were utilized under
the condition of MCR (Maximum Continuous
Rating). The remaining F mill was usually on
standby in case of an accident and we use it to pul-
verize the mold biomass. Because all the mill sys-
tems were absolutely independent of each other, it
could be assumed that the grinding and combus-
tion of biomass will not affect the operation of the
coal mill.
The conventional combustors were arranged
concentric counter-tangentially, and the primary
air and secondary air injections forms four imag-
inary tangent circles. As shown in Fig. 1, 6 layers
of combustors were divided into three groups with
each group consisting of two primary air injectors
and three secondary air injectors, and a layer of
OFA (Over Fire Air) injectors was fixed on the
top of the combustion system.
2.2. Fuel characteristics
The primary fuel used in the co-firing test was
Huating bituminous coal, and the co-fired bio-
mass was straw. The mold straw is prepared by
compressing and extruding a mixture of biomass
(straw) and a binding agent (local soil). The prox-
imate and ultimate analysis of the tested fuels are
shown in Table 1. The ash content of the biomass
fuel is relatively high, and this is due to the addi-
tion of the binding agent (about 20% by weight)
during the biomass preparation. The mold bio-
mass pellets are 34 mm in diameter and less than
65 mm in length, with a density of 1.18 g/cm3.
The combustion of the two fuels has been com-
pared in a thermo-gravimetric analyzer (STA 409
 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733 2727

10
100
5 Huating Coal
Mold Straw 80
0

DTG / (%/min)
60

TG / %
-5
40

-10 20

-15 0

-20 -20
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Temperature /

Fig. 2. TG and DTG profiles for the Huating Coal and

the straw pellets (heating rate 10 °C/min).

the oxygen concentration at the furnace outlet is

Fig. 1. Layout of the combustion injectors.
PC, Netzsch) with a heating rate 10 °C/min and
the results are shown in Fig. 2. There are two
peaks of weight loss for the mold straw pellets,
one corresponds to volatile combustion, and the
other corresponds to char combustion; however,
there is only one peak for Huating Coal. Because
the volatile content in the mold straw pellets is
very high, the volatile can be easily released and
burned at a low temperature of about 260 °C,
compared with about 430 °C for Huating Coal.
Consequently, the ignition and combustion of
the mold straw pellets should be much more sta-
ble, and the self-ignition of the biomass should
be prevented during the processes of biomass
pulverization.
2.3. Test conditions and data collection
In the tests, the rate of biomass feed accounts
for 9.68–22.7% of the total fuel mass input
(6.53–16.1% of the total heat input). The load of
the power unit is stabilized at 250 MW. The inlet
and outlet temperatures of the mill F should not
be higher than 90 and 50 °C, respectively, and
controlled at about 4%, corresponding to a 19%
excess air. Coal is introduced from the primary
air A–E, and biomass is introduced from the pri-
mary air F. During the tests, the air flow rates for
the injectors are mainly kept constant and the test-
ing conditions are shown in Table 2. There is no
biomass input for Condition 0 as a baseline case.
In Condition 3 a reduced rate of primary air from
mill F is used, compared with Condition 2.
In addition, a Mastersizer 2000 (Malvern Ins-
trument Ltd.) is used to measure the size distribu-
tion of the pulverized biomass particles from the
outlet of mill F. Testo 350 (Testo Ltd.) is used
to detect the emission of NOx and SO2. An infra-
red thermometer 3iLRL3 (Raytek Ltd.) is used to
measure the furnace temperature at three heights:
34, 37 and 48.3 m. Isokinetic sampling is per-
formed to collect the fly ash, and then analyzed
using SEM, XRF and XRD. Key ash parameters
(water demand ratio, stability, flexural strength,
tensile strength, activity index) used in the con-
crete industry are tested in order to investigate
whether co-firing biomass with coal will influence
the utilization of fly ash in the concrete industry.
3. Results and discussions
3.1. Practicality of biomass grinding and the safety
of mill operations
The major difficulties of co-firing biomass are
associated with the costs of transport and the
grinding of biomass, and the techniques of
preventing self-ignition during the processes of

Table 1
Proximate and ultimate analysis of tested fuels.
Fuel Qnet,ar/MJ Kg1 Proximate analysis Ultimate analysis
Mar Vdaf Aar Car Har Oar Nar Sar
Huating Coal 18.7 18.5 35.5 17.6 57.9 3.34 11.0 0.60 0.71
Straw pellets 12.2 12.6 79.3 28.3 34.4 3.08 30.6 1.50 0.32
2728 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733

Table 2
Test conditions of biomass co-firing.
Condition No. 0 1 2 3 4
Unit load/(MW) 250 250 250 250 250
Biomass quantity/(t/h) – 12 24 24 30
Primary air of mill F/(m3/s) – 21.74 19.37 15.99 18.70
Inlet temperature of mill F/(C) – 78 83 86 84
Outlet temperature of mill F/(C) – 48 43 42 43
Ratio of primary air/(%) 25.1 30.7 30.3 29.2 32.1
Overall furnace equivalence ratio/(1) 1.184 1.191 1.183 1.180 1.195
Overall equivalence ratio before OFA/(1) 1.01 1.07 1.03 1.04 1.09
Equivalence ratio of burners A–D/(1) 1.02 0.99 0.96 1.04 1.02
Condition 0: mills A–D and E are on, and coal feed rate of mill E is 17 t/h; Conditions 1–4: mills A–D, F is on, mill F is
for biomass.

400
Power limit=349KW
350
Ilimit=40A
300

250

200

150
Fig. 3. Exterior appearance of the biomass before and 100
after mill: (a) straw pellets before mill, and (b) pulverized
biomass powder after mill. 50

biomass pulverization. Test results in Europe and
North America have shown that there was a limit
in the amount of biomass feed to the existing mills
that were designed for coal pulverizing, and this
limit was related to the structure of the mill system
[12,19,20,24,25].
Figure 3 shows the mold straw pellets before
and after milling. The straw pellets are hard
enough to be ground, which can be seen from
the biomass powder shown in Fig. 3b after it is
milled. This suggests that the roller mill can be
used for pulverizing the mold biomass pellets.
The effect of biomass feed rates, together with
the primary air flow rates, on the power consump-
tion of mill F and the resulting median diameter
D0.5 of the pulverized particles is shown in
Fig. 4. Under Conditions 1 and 2, when the bio-
mass feed rate is less than 24 t/h and with a nor-
mal primary air rate, the electric power and the
current of mill F are less than the maximum safety
limit value 349 kW and 40 A, respectively. The
inlet air temperature for all the operating condi-
tions shown in Table 2 is controlled at less than
90 °C, and mill F for the biomass pulverization
has been operating safely under these conditions.
However, when the rate of the biomass feed is
higher than about 30 t/h, the electric power and
current of mill F quickly exceeds the safety limit
value reaching about 393 kW and 45 A, and a
severe obstruction to the air flow occurs, and the
maximum airflow rate can only reach about
18.7 m3/s. Meanwhile, under the Condition 3, when
the primary airflow decreases to 15.99 m3/s, there
0
Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4
D0.5= D0.5= D0.5=
Fig. 4. Effect of biomass co-firing on the power
consumption of the mill and the median diameter of
the pulverized particles produced.
are also problems of an over shoot current and con-
gestion of the mill system. Tests under Conditions 3
and 4 cannot be performed well. Therefore, when
using existing coal mill to mill biomass, the biomass
feed rate should not be too high, and the carrying
airflow rate should be adequate to avoid a current
surge in the driving mechanism and a blockage of
the mill.
Biomass particle size distributions under differ-
ent operating conditions are shown in Fig. 5, and
this suggests that an increase in the feeding rate
results in a particle size increase. Corresponding
to feeding rates of 24 and 30 t/h, the size of the
biomass particles is mainly in the range of 100–
2000 lm; when the feeding rate decreases to 12
t/h, particles with diameters below 100 lm account
for about 50%. The median diameter D0.5 for
Conditions 1, 2 and 4 is 92, 240 and 438 lm, respec-
tively. Also it can be seen from Fig. 4 that the power
consumption of mill F increases, together with the
increase in the median diameter D0.5 of the biomass
particles.
3.2. Flame and temperature profiles
Figure 6 illustrates that the combustion flame
on the biomass injector is stable, and when the
 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733 2729

7
Condition 1，12t / h 1350 Condition 0, 0t/h
6 Condition 2，24t / h 1320 Condition 1, 12t/h
Condition 4，30t / h 1290 Condition 2, 24t/h
5
1260

Temperature
Volume / %

4
1230
3 1200

2 1170
1140
1
1110
0 1080
32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50
10 100 1000 Furnace height / m
Diameter / um
Fig. 7. Effect of the biomass feed rate on the temper-
Fig. 5. Effect of the feed quantity on the size distribution ature profile of the upper furnace.
of the biomass particles.

TVA power plant by Foster Wheeler Ltd., and

biomass feed rate increases from 12 to 24 t/h, the the results showed that the furnace temperature
flame stand off distance at the biomass injectors decreased by about 40 °C under the condition of
increases. biomass co-firing [25].
Figures 7 and 8 show the effect of the biomass
feeding rates on the temperature profile along the 3.3. Unburned carbon in fly ash and the furnace
height of the furnace, the furnace outlet tempera- efficiency
ture and the exhaust gas temperature. The furnace
outlet temperature decreases under the conditions The furnace efficiency g is defined as follows:
of biomass co-firing, because the volatile content
of the biomass is high, which is propitious to the g ¼ 100  q2  q3  q4  q5  q6
ignition of the fuel. However, when the biomass
where, in %, q2 is the energy loss in the outlet flue
quantity increases from 12 to 24 t/h, the tempera-
gas; q3 is the energy loss from unburned gas spe-
ture profile and outlet temperatures become
cies; q4 is the energy loss from unburned carbon
higher, which corresponds to the change in the
in the fly ash; q5 is the heat loss through furnace
flame stand off distance in Fig. 6. It is suggested
wall; and q6 is the energy loss from unburned car-
that the ignition distance of the flame out of the
bon in the slag.
injectors is prolonged. This means that the igni-
Table 3 shows, among others, the test results of
tion of the biomass has been delayed. This is
the unburned carbon content in the fly ash and the
because when the rate of biomass feed increases
furnace efficiency. Under the conditions of biomass
from 12 to 24 t/h, the loading of the solid biomass
co-firing, the content of unburned carbon in the fly
in the nozzle becomes much larger and the size of
ash is higher than that under the normal condition 0
the fuel particles also increases, see Fig. 5. A sim-
with no biomass co-firing. When the biomass quan-
ilar investigation has also been performed at the
tity increases from 0 to 12 t/h, the furnace efficiency
decreases by about 0.192%, and when the quantity
increases further to 24 t/h, the efficiency decreases
by about 0.524%.

140 1120
138 Exhaust gas temperature
Furnace outlet temperature / °C

1118
Exhaust gas temperature / °C

136 Furnace outlet temperature

1116
134
132 1114

130 1112
128 1110
126
1108
124
122 1106

120 1104
118 1102
116
1100
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Quantity of Biomass Feeding / t/h
Fig. 6. Combustion flame stand off distance for different
biomass feed rates: (a) Condition 1, 12 t/h, and (b) Fig. 8. Effect of the biomass feed rate on the furnace
Condition 2, 24 t/h. outlet temperature and the exhaust gas temperature.
2730 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733
Table 3
Effects of biomass co-firing on furnace efficiency.
Test conditions
Quantity of biomass feed (t/h)
Inlet temperature of upper mill (C)
Content of unburned carbon in fly ash (%)
Content of carbon in slag (%)
Exhaust temperature (C)
Furnace efficiency (%)
Yan [26] has calculated the effect of co-firing
biomass on the efficiency of another 300 MW
coal-fired furnace, and the results indicate that
the furnace efficiency decreases by 1.3–1.65%
when the quantity of the biomass feed accounts
for 20% of the total fuel input. The test results
of co-firing wood in the Allen Fossil power plant
also show that the furnace efficiency decreases by
about 1.5% with a 10–15% biomass feed [20]. Fur-
ther, Kati [12] has performed their biomass co-fir-
ing in a 315 MW coal furnace, where the biomass
is blended with coal before milling. Results show
that the addition of biomass into the coal flow
severely affects the performance of the mill, result-
ing in larger coal particles and consequently a
decrease in the combustion efficiency. Therefore,
the furnace efficiency and the ash characteristics
are closely related not only to the quality of coal,
the furnace construction, but also to the operation
of the mill system and the whole combustion
unit.
3.4. Emissions of NOx and SO2
The effect of biomass co-firing on NOx emis-
sions in the tests is shown in Fig. 9. With an increase
in the biomass input, the NOx emissions are gradu-
ally reduced. When the quantity of the biomass feed
reaches 24 t/h, the NOx emissions have been
reduced by about 10%. To demonstrate the reason
for the NOx reduction under the co-firing condi-
tions, the equivalence ratio of the coal combustion
burners, as well as the overall equivalence ratio
before the top burner and the overall equivalence
Δ =28mg/m
250
200
150
100
50
0
Condition 0: 0t/h Condition 1: 12t/h
Fig. 9. Effect of the biomass co-firing on the NOx
emissions.
0 1 2
0 12 24
229 78 83
0.179 0.474 0.519
1.393 1.438 1.269
135.5 125.5 133
94.673 94.481 94.149
ratio before OFA, have been calculated and they
are shown in Table 2. As has been mentioned
above, during the tests the oxygen concentration
at the furnace outlet and the ratio of OFA were
maintained largely unchanged. Table 2 shows that
the overall equivalence ratio of the furnace is
always about 1.19 and the overall equivalence ratio
before OFA is always in rich-oxygen conditions.
However, around the coal burners the conditions
are slightly lean. This suggested that the NOx
reduction is due to the air staging from the OFA
and the fuel reburning can be excluded.
Further, during the experiments, the volumet-
ric flow rate of the primary air in the top burner
for both the coal (Condition 0) and the biomass
(Condition 1 and 2) were kept the same at about
20 m3/s. In order to avoid self-ignition of the bio-
mass, the temperature of the primary air for the
biomass is much lower (at about 80 °C) than that
for coal (about 229 °C), therefore the mass flow
rate of the primary air for the biomass is much
higher than that for the coal.
Therefore, under the condition that both the
oxygen concentration at the outlet of the furnace
and the rate of OFA are kept unchanged, when
the primary air in the top burner is significantly
increased, the fraction of air from the rest of the
burners is reduced. This is shown in Table 2, the
overall equivalence ratio before the top burner in
Condition 0, pure coal combustion, is 1.02, a
slightly rich-oxygen condition. The overall equiva-
lence ratio before the top burner under Conditions
1 and 2 (biomass co-firing conditions) reduced to
0.99 and 0.96 (lean-oxygen), and this contributes
to the reduction of NOx [16,17].
3 Figure 10 shows the effect of co-firing biomass
on the SO2 emissions. During the co-firing tests, a
decrease in SO2 is not obvious and the maximum
decrease is only about 84 ppm. Other investiga-
tions on coal-fired pulverized furnaces, chain fur-
naces and fluidized bed furnaces also indicate that
co-firing biomass can reduce the SO2 emissions,
and some of the SO2 reductions are more significant
than that from our tests [8,12,27,28]. It is noted that
the sulphur content in the mold straw pellets that
have been used in our tests, see Table 1, is as high
as almost half of that in the HT coal used, and
Condition 2: 24t/h
the ratio of the biomass co-fired is relatively low.
Therefore, there is only a small decrease in the
SO2 emissions in our co-firing experiments.
 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733 2731

1200 Δ =84ppm 2.4 Potassium

0.014
Chlorine
1100 0.012
2.2

Content / %
1000 0.010
2.0
900 0.008
1.8
800 0.006
SO2 / ppm

700 1.6
0.004
600 1.4
0.002
500 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
400 Quantity of biomss feeding / (t/h) Quantity of biomss feeding / (t/h)
300
200 Fig. 11. Change of potassium and chlorine contents in
100 the fly ash with an increase in the biomass feed.
0
Condition 0: 0t/h Condition 1: 12t/h Condition 2: 24t/h

600
Fig. 10. Effect of the biomass co-firing on the SO2 400 Condition 4, 30t/h
emissions. 200
0

600 Condition 2, 24t/h

Intensity / Counts
400
3.5. Characteristics of the fly ash 200
0
Element profiles from the XRF (X-ray fluores- 600
400 Condition 1, 12t/h
cence) analysis of the ash are shown in Table 4. 200
Under the conditions of biomass co-firing, the 0
major elements in the fly ash are, as usual, oxygen, 600 A
silicon, aluminum, ferrum and calcium. However, 400 Condition 0, 0t/h
200 B A, D B
D
C
B B E A B
D A C AE A
C E
the content of the minor elements, such as potas- 0
sium and chlorine, increases with an increase in 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
the biomass feed, see Fig. 11. 2-theta /
To further investigate the inorganic crystal
Fig. 12. XRD analysis of the fly ash from the biomass
structure of the fly ash, an XRD (X-ray diffusion) co-firing (A-quartzes, SiO2; B-sillimanite, Al2SiO5; C-
analysis has been performed and the results are mullite, Al6Si2O13; D-potassium aluminum silicate,
reported in Fig. 12. It can be seen in Fig. 12 that KAlSiO4; E-potassium calcium silicate, K8CaSi10O25).
fly ash mainly consists of quartz, sillimanite and
mullite. Potassium exists mainly in the form of
potassium aluminum silicate and potassium cal- adhesive addition, is low and the co-firing ratio of
cium silicate. Under the SEM (Scanning Electron the biomass is still not very high. Therefore, bio-
Microscope), see Fig. 13, no obvious change has mass co-firing under the conditions tested will
been observed in terms of the overall structures not influence the ash characteristics significantly.
of the fly ash from pure coal combustion (Condi-
tion 0) and the biomass co-firing combustion 3.6. Possibility of ash utilization in the cement and
(Condition 2, 24 t/h). concrete industries
Although the content of potassium is high in
the biomass, as shown in Table 4 and Fig. 11, Further investigations have been undertaken to
the actual ash content in pure biomass, excluding validate whether the fly ash from biomass co-firing

Table 4
Elements profile from XRF analysis.
Weight (%) Condition 0 (0 t/h) Condition 1 (12 t/h) Condition 2 (24 t/h) Condition 4 (30 t/h)
Cl 0.00285 0.00546 0.00937 0.0134
Mn 0.0442 0.0435 0.0449 0.0433
Sr 0.128 0.0973 0.1 0.0513
P 0.154 0.135 0.158 0.136
S 0.256 0.168 0.172 0.18
Ba 0.222 0.188 0.173 0.185
Ti 0.803 0.666 0.646 0.589
Mg 1.02 0.957 1 0.984
Na 1.39 1.13 1.07 1.24
K 1.47 1.82 2.16 2.37
Ca 4.73 4.06 4.12 3.3
Fe 4.93 4.37 4.29 3.76
Al 14.2 13.6 13.1 12.9
Si 21.6 23.1 23.2 21.6
O 49.0 49.6 49.7 52.3
2732 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733

upper limit for the quantity of biomass feed

Fig. 13. Comparison of the SEM between (a) pure coal
firing (Condition 0), and (b) biomass co-firing (Condi-
tion 2, 24 t/h).
can be used in the cement and concrete industries
according to Chinese standard GB/T1596-2005.
Standard contrast samples of cement (GSB 14-
1510) are blended with fly ash and water to form
testing mortars, and then they are compared with
standard mortars (GSB 08-1337). The key parame-
ters of mortars used in the concrete industry include
the water demand ratio, expansion, flexural
strength and tensile strength at 7 and 28 days, plus
an activity index. The activity index is the ratio of
the tensile strength (28 days) of the tested mortar
and that of the standard mortar.
The main test results for the key parameters of
the mortars are listed in Table 5. GB/T1596-2005
requires an upper limit for the expansion to be
2 mm and a lower limit for the activity index to
be 75%. The test results presented in Table 5 are
within these limits. This suggested that for the bio-
mass co-firing conditions used in our experiments,
the fly ash can be used in the cement and concrete
industries; although there is a little increase in the
expansion and a decrease in the activity index,
compared with the fly ash of pure coal firing.
4. Conclusions
(1) The roller mill can be used for the pulveriz-
ing of mold biomass pellets. There is an
in the existing coal mill, and the airflow
should be adequate to avoid a blockage of
the mill which would lead to a power surge
in the driving mechanism. The size of the
pulverized biomass particles is mainly in
the range of 10–2000 lm in our test condi-
tions, with an increase in the biomass feed,
the biomass particles from the roller mill
system become larger.
(2) Under the biomass co-firing conditions
tested, the flame on the biomass injector is
stable. When the biomass is injected from
the top layer of the combustors, the outlet
temperatures of the furnace gas decrease,
and with an increase in the biomass feed
from 0 to 24 t/h, the unburned carbon in
fly ash increases from 0.179% to 0.519%,
and the furnace efficiency is slightly reduced
from 94.673% to 94.149%.
(3) During the biomass co-firing tests, with an
increase in the biomass feed rate, NOx emis-
sions gradually reduce, and when the quan-
tity of the biomass feed reaches 24 t/h, the
NOx emissions have reduced by about
10%, but the reduction of SO2 is not obvi-
ous, and the maximum decrease is about
84 ppm.
(4) The content of potassium and chlorine in
the ash increases with an increase in the bio-
mass feed rate, as is shown in the results
from XRF, and no obvious difference is
shown by XRD and SEM. Tests for the
major parameters of the mortars with bio-
mass ash addition demonstrate that for
the biomass co-firing conditions tested in
our experiments, the fly ash can still be used
in the cement and concrete industries; even
if there is a small increase in the expansion
and a decrease in the activity index limits,
when compared with the fly ash from the
pure coal firing.

Table 5
Test results for the major parameters of mortars with fly ash.
Mortar type Standard mortar Testing mortar with fly ash under Conditions 0–2
Source of fly ash None (used Condition 0, Condition 1, Condition 2,
as standard) with no biomass biomass feed biomass feed
co-firing rate 12 t/h rate 24 t/h
Water demand ratio (%) 100 91.15 88.50 88.50
Expansion (mm) 0.50 1.25 1.75 1.75
Flexural strength 6.40 4.90 4.95 5.05
(7 days) (MPa)
Tensile strength 36.70 25.30 23.55 22.30
(7 days) (MPa)
Flexural strength 8.70 8.95 8.95 8.60
(28 days) (MPa)
Tensile strength 49.6 39.95 37.95 37.45
(28 days) (MPa)
Activity index 100 80.55 76.50 75.50
 X. Wang et al. / Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 33 (2011) 2725–2733
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the Natural
Science Foundation of China (No. 50976086).
References
[1] T.F. Wall, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute
31 (2007) 31–47.
[2] M. Sami, K. Annamalai, M. Wooldridge, Progress
in Energy and Combustion Science 27 (2) (2001) 171–
214.
[3] R.I. Backreedy, L.M. Fletcher, J.M. Jones, et al.,
Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 30 (2) (2005)
2955–2964.
[4] M. Berggrena, E. Ljunggrena, F. Johnsson, Biomass
and Bioenergy 32 (9) (2008) 865–879.
[5] A. Kazagic, I. Smajevic, Energy 34 (5) (2009) 699–
707.
[6] G. Berndes, J. Hansson, A. Egeskog, et al., Biomass
and Bioenergy 34 (2) (2010) 227–236.
[7] J. Hansson, G. Berndes, F. Johnsson, et al., Energy
Policy 37 (4) (2009) 1444–1455.
[8] P. Molcan, G. Lu, T.L. Bris, et al., Fuel 88 (12)
(2009) 2328–2334.
[9] N.S. Harding, B.R. Adams, Biomass and Bioenergy
19 (6) (2000) 429–445.
[10] R.V. Broek, A. Faaij, A.V. Wijk, Biomass and
Bioenergy 11 (4) (1996) 271–281.
[11] J. Brouwer, W.D. Owens, S. Harding, et al., in:
Proceedings of the 2nd Biomass Conference of the
Americas: Energy, Agriculture, and Industry, Port-
land, Oregon, National Renewable Energy Labora-
tory, 1995, pp. 390–399.
[12] S. Kati, Applied Energy 74 (3–4) (2003) 369–381.
2733
[13] S.N. Ireland, B. McGrellis, N. Harper, Fuel 83 (7–
8) (2004) 905–915.
[14] A. Demirbas, Progress in Energy and Combustion
Science 31 (2) (2005) 171–192.
[15] P. Glarborg, A.D. Jensen, F.E. Johnsson, Progress
in Energy and Combustion Science 29 (2) (2003) 89–
113.
[16] S.C. Hill, L.D. Smoot, Progress in Energy and
Combustion Science 26 (4–6) (2000) 417–458.
[17] L.D. Smoot, S.C. Hill, H. Xu, Progress in Energy
and Combustion Science 24 (5) (1998) 385–408.
[18] B. Damstedt, J.M. Pederson, D. Hansen, et al.,
Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 31 (2) (2007)
2813–2820.
[19] G.R. Sampson, A.P. Richmond, G.A. Brewster,
et al., Forest Products Journal 41 (5) (1991) 53–56.
[20] E.E. Hughes, D.A. Tillman, Fuel Processing Tech-
nology 54 (1–3) (1998) 127–142.
[21] S. Wang, L. Baxter, Fuel Processing Technology 88
(11–12) (2007) 1165–1170.
[22] E. Tkaczewska, J. Malolepszy, Construction and
Building Materials 23 (7) (2009) 2694–2700.
[23] S. Wang, A. Miller, E. Llamazos, et al., Fuel 87 (3)
(2008) 365–371.
[24] K.R.G. Hein, J.M. Bemtgen, Fuel Processing Tech-
nology 54 (1–3) (1998) 159–169.
[25] B.A. Gold, D.A. Tillman, Biomass and Bioenergy 10
(2–3) (1996) 71–78.
[26] W. Yan, J. An, X. Lu, et al., Energy Engineering 4
(2009) 8–12 (in Chinese).
[27] K.V. Narayanan, E. Natarajan, Renewable Energy
32 (15) (2007) 2548–2558.
[28] I. Rasmussen, J.C. Clausen, in: Proceedings of the
13th International Conference on Fluidized Bed
Combustion, Orlando, Florida, ASME, 1995, pp.
557–563.