Energy 203 (2020) 117882

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Cofiring low-rank coal and biomass in a bubbling fluidized bed with

varying excess air ratio and fluidization velocity
Paulo R. Wander a, *, Fla

vio M. Bianchi b, Nattan R. Caetano c, Marcos A. Klunk a,
Maria Luiza S. Indrusiak d
a ~o Leopoldo, 93022-750, Brazil
Mechanical Engineering Graduate Program, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, Sa
b
SATC College, Criciúma, Brazil
c
Mechanical Engineering Department, Federal University of Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil
d
Brazilian Section of Combustion Institute, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cofiring coal and biomass is one of the alternatives to reduce emissions from thermoelectric power
Received 26 August 2019 plants. The influence of biomass fraction in the mixture is an important research topic to increase coal
Received in revised form substitution and achieve lower GHG emissions. A combustion system based on laboratory-scale bubbling
23 April 2020
fluidized bed technology was used to analyze the burning of different ratios (5, 10 and 15%) of mixed
Accepted 14 May 2020
biomass and low-rank mineral coal. Two operational parameters were varied, fluidization velocity (3umf
Available online 18 May 2020
and 6umf) and excess air ratio (50 and 70%). Previous studies focused mainly on gasification processes,
where excess air is a negative parameter. For combustion processes, high values of excess air are
Keywords:
Bubbling fluidized bed
mandatory. Experimental results showed that fuel mixtures containing up to 15% of biomass gives good
Cofiring results in terms of emissions and temperature stability control. Emissions were slightly increased as well
Fluidization velocity as the operating temperature with the presence of biomass. The operating regimes with higher fluid-
Low-rank mineral coal ization velocity and excess air ratio presented better performance, however, biomass volatiles release at
Biomass the freeboard should be the main concern for this type of application. Therefore, it was concluded that
the combined burning of coal with biomass is a feasible alternative to reduce emissions without
impairing efficiency.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and mineral processing (calcination of alumina, roasting of ores,

Energy conversion technologies using fluidized bed are envi-
ronmentally friendlier than more traditional processes such as
fixed bed and pulverized fuel combustors [1]. A relevant advantage
of fluidized bed technology is the possibility of gasification and
combustion of low quality solid fuels [2], such as high ash content
coals and biomasses with high moisture content [3], due to the
good uniformity of bed operating temperature [4]. Among the
characteristics of the fluidized beds that provide this advantage, the
high heat and mass transfer rates are the most important ones [2].
Applications of fluidized bed technology in the industry include
energy conversion (steam generation, gasification and incineration)
[5], petrochemical (catalytic cracking and Fisher-Tropsch synthesis)
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: prwander@unisinos.br, paulorwander@gmail.com
(P.R. Wander).
pre-calcination for the manufacture of cement), chemical and
pharmaceutical (phthalic anhydride from naphthalene, conversion
of methanol to olefins etc.) [6], physical processing (drying, particle
coating, heat treatment) amongst others [7].
The mineral coal present in the south of Brazil is mostly of the
sub-bituminous type, with approximately 40% ash and a substantial
amount of sulfur, around 2%. The raw coal is usually prepared to
reach typical requirements suitable to its use in thermoelectric
power plants [6]. Moisture is also present and can hinder com-
bustion by requiring operational adjustments [8], but this is a
problem that it has in common with biomass [9]. However, there
are several other advantages in the combined burning of coal and
biomass described in the literature [10].
Currently, the combined burning of coal with renewable fuels
has been a sustainable alternative to reduce the fossil fuels widely
used in industry [11]. Bubbling fluidized bed combustion usually
presents satisfactory operation even with fuels mixed in different

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117882
0360-5442/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882
List of Acronyms
ABNT Brazilian Association of Technical Standards
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
NBR Brazilian Standard
GHG Greenhouse Gases
List of Symbols
umf Minimum fluidization velocity (m/s)
l Excess air ratio
proportions, dealing well with blend characteristics [12]. However,
there are still gaps in the understanding of the combined burning
technology of low-rank coal with renewable fuels such as biomass
[13].
Cofiring low-rank coal and biomass in a bubbling fluidized bed
in terms of temperature and emissions was investigated before
[13e15]. However, most of the papers addressed gasification pro-
cesses of rice husk biomass [16]. This study considered the coal-
biomass combustion in a bubbling fluidized bed combustor in
laboratory scale, varying the percentage of biomass in the fuel and
using operating temperature and emissions of CO2, CO, NOx, CxHy
and SO2 as control parameters. Indeed, this is a work about cofiring
employing sawmill biomass residues mixed with low rank coal for
energy generation purposes [17].
Some studies showed interesting results for the cofiring of coal
with sludge [18] and biomass [19], although the mixture fraction
was limited to 10%. In fluidized bed combustion, the particulate
solids of the bed, including in some cases limestone for sulfur
compounds control [20], present physical and morphological
characteristics that affect the molecular phenomena (such as mass
diffusion) occurring within the particles and or amongst particles.
These characteristics are very useful for the mixture of different
fuels and are important for the design of a fluidized bed reactor
column [21]. Reactor dimensions, such as its diameter and useful
height, and some operational parameters, like flow and pressure
drop, are affected by the particle characteristics [22].
Bubbles formation and bed hydrodynamic behavior depends on
particle density and mean size, as well as fluidization gas, as clas-
sified by Geldart [23], defining the fluidization regime and the value
of the minimum fluidization velocity [21,24].
The mass of fuel present in a fluidized bed combustor consti-
tutes about 0.5e5% of the total bed solids, the remainder consisting
of inerts: bed particles, ash from the fuel, adsorbents and other
non-combustible materials. The fuel introduced into the equipment
is quickly surrounded by the bed hot material raising the fuel
temperature. The heating rate varies from 100
C/s to more than
1000
C/s, depending on many factors, among them, the fuel
granulometry and bed agitation [1].
The possible pollutants to be formed during the burning of any
organic fuel are particulate matter (PM), sulfur oxides (SO2 and
SO3), carbon monoxide and dioxide (CO and CO2) in addition to
nitrogen oxides (NO, N2O and NO2). The quantities of these pol-
lutants are naturally dependent on the fuels used, the technologies
used in the combustion, the conservation state of the equipment
and the operating conditions [25].
Sulfur is oxidized during combustion resulting in the formation
of sulfur oxides. In bubbling fluidized beds, it is common to use
limestone directly in the bed to remove sulfur dioxide. The reten-
tion efficiency may be greater than 95% when using proper
amounts of limestone. Sulfur compounds (SOx) are potentially
aggressive to the metallic components of industrial plants, since
their aqueous form produces sulfuric acid, highly corrosive to low
chromium steels. Sulfur delivered to the atmosphere produces acid
rain and respiratory problems.
The concentration increase of carbon dioxide in atmosphere is
considered as the main mechanism leading to the global warming
phenomenon. Renewable fuels such as biomass are considered CO2
neutral and so, combining biomass with a fossil fuel in a combus-
tion process has a positive impact on the overall emission of this
gas.
Nitrogen oxides (mainly NO, NO2 and N2O, referred to as NOx)
are formed in the fluid bed combustors mainly in two ways, the
oxidation of the nitrogen present in the fuel (fuel NOx) and re-
actions between the oxygen and the nitrogen present in the air
(thermal NOx). Since thermal NOx is produced at high tempera-
tures (mainly above 1480
C), it represents a small fraction of the
NOx produced in fluidized beds, with fuel NOx being responsible for
the largest contribution [26]. It is worth to mention, as described by
Turns [27], the formation of the prompt NOx from the mechanism
of Fenimore and that is closely linked to the chemistry of the
combustion of hydrocarbons. From this mechanism, NO is rapidly
produced in the flame zone, in pre-mixed laminar flames before the
formation of thermal NOx. This effect is hardly perceived in
bubbling fluidized bed combustion due to the dynamics of fuel-air
mixture and the small equivalence ratio.
The increase of the nitrogen in the fuel generates increase in the
emissions of NOx fuel. Its formation depends not only on the
amount of nitrogen in the fuel, but how it is combined in fuel
structure and on combustor operating conditions. The NO and N2O
chemistry is complex in fluidized bed combustors [28] where the
low combustion temperatures led to relatively high levels of N2O.
However, with increasing volatile fuel matter, NO increases while
N2O tends to decrease [26]. With the increase of biomass per-
centage (high volatile content) in the combined firing with mineral
coal, this effect may be observed, although in lean combustion and
low temperatures, N2O reacts with monoatomic oxygen and is
quickly converted to NO.
Jones et al. [29], observed that the combined burning of bitu-
minous coal and wood resulted in reduced emissions of particulate
matter and NOx when a fixed bed combustor was used. Jurado et al.
[30] verified the attenuation of SO2 concentrations and increase in
HCl concentrations with the increase of the biomass ratio (using
cereal residues) firing with El Cerrejon South American coal, using a
pilot unit of pulverized firing under conditions of air burning and
oxy-combustion. Also, under oxy-combustion conditions, Riaza
et al. [31] observed the reduction of NO emissions when biomass
mixtures (olive residues) were burned together with coals (Spanish
semi-anthracite) in a laboratory-scale flow-fired combustor.
Using a bench scale fluidized bed reactor, Aho et al. [32] tested
Chinese fuels, including two coals, two straws and sawdust and
observed the formation of alkaline chlorides (highly corrosive) in
the simple burning of the straws. The study found that by
combining the straws with Chinese coals reduced the formation of
alkaline chlorides due to its sulphation thanks to the high content
of aluminum and silicon in the coal.
The advantages of using fluidized bed combustors include
flexibility in the use of fuels, as high ash (60e70%) and low volatile
material (less than 1%) contents, and the lack of moving parts in the
system, which gives robustness. Other advantages are the good
flexibility regarding fuel granulometry, which reduces preparation
costs, the admissibility of fuels with high moisture content, besides
the neutralization of sulfur compounds through the direct appli-
cation of limestone or dolomite, and low NOx emissions due to low
operating temperatures [1]. However, the main drawbacks in the
use of bubbling fluidized bed are the erosion occurring mainly in
zones of high density of particles, the need for relatively large areas
 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882
when compared to pulverized fuel and circulating fluidized bed
systems, the need for good uniformity of the fuel dispersion in the
bed, which requires multiple feeders for larger units, besides hav-
ing limitations to operate with partial load [1].
Cofiring low-rank coal and biomass in a bubbling fluidized bed
in terms of temperature and emissions was investigated before
[10,11,13]. However, those studies considered only varying the
percentage of biomass in the fuel as operational control parame-
ters. Indeed, many studies about cofiring addressed gasification
processes of biomass [16,35,40e42]. Also, the combined burning of
coal with renewable fuels has been used to generate power in in-
dustry [7e9,11,17e19]. Most of the biomass types considered in
those studies (rice husk, straw, cereal and olive residues, lignite and
sludge) are different from that used in the present work. Some
studies about cofiring has limited the mixture fraction to 10% [19],
and with some differences, including limestone for sulfur com-
pounds control [20]. Other studies have verified the emissions of
cofiring with emphasis in oxy-combustion [30,31,43]. There are
works using fixed bed combustor to analyze emissions of particu-
late matter [29], circulator fluidized bed [44], pressurized bed [45]
and, also, in order to observe the formation of alkaline chlorides for
corrosivity analysis [32] or the effect of the biomass particle size
[47]. Thus, the main novelties brought by this work are the detailed
analysis on the emissions and temperature behaviors applied to
cofiring of both, low-rank coal (CE 4500) and biomass (Pinus Elliotti
sawdust), in a bubbling fluidized bed considering different coal/
biomass ratio, excess air ratio and fluidization velocity. Since these
are key parameters for systems design several new studies and
industrial applications that depend on this information may benefit
from the tendencies presented here to optimize the operational
parameters and control the emissions.
2. Materials and methods
This study aims at analyzing the behavior of the combined
burning of low-rank coal (CE 4500) with biomass (Pinus Elliotti
sawdust) in a bench scale bubbling fluidized bed combustor,
focusing on the effect on the emissions of the coal/biomass ratio
used.
2.1. Inert particles
Bubbling fluidized bed combustors contain a mass of granular
solids generally having sizes ranging from 0.1 mm to 1.0 mm,
depending on the application type. These solids are called bedding
material and are characteristically sand, limestone (when burning
coals with high sulfur content), and ashes resulting from coal
burning when in operation. Inert bed solids account for 97e99% of
all particulate matter present in this equipment [1].
For the current work, two types of candidate particles were
studied, a sand widely used in the manufacture of casting molds
(casting sand) and a sand used in pool water filters (filter sand).
Tests were carried out to determine the densities, using NBR 8630
(ABNT, 1984) and NBR 9745 (ABNT, 1987) standards for bulk density
and actual density, respectively. The sphericity of the particles was
estimated from a correlation indicated by Foust et al. [33] from the
measurement of the porosity of the fixed beds. The particle size
range and mean diameter were obtained from image analysis using
scanning electron microscopy, through a SEM microscope model
ZEISS™ EVO MA10 with EDS Bruker QUANTAX™.
Casting sand was selected because of the good particle size
distribution and to be in group B of the Geldart’s classification. The
filter sand has a grain size slightly larger than the casting sand and
was positioned in group ‘D’ of the Geldart’s classification.
3
2.1.1. Minimum fluidization velocity
Based on the methodology suggested by Kunii and Levenspiel
[21], experimental tests were carried out in order to establish the
minimum fluidization velocities of the pre-selected bed particles.
The tests to acquire the minimum fluidization velocities used in the
present work were performed in a cold fluidized bed at room
temperature and with visualization of the phenomena, once the
test section was an acrylic tube. The test section comprises also an
Artek™ radial compressor, model ACRRB 7.5 and a frequency
inverter WEG, model CFW08. The constructive details of the
equipment are described by Bianchi et al. [34].
2.2. Fuels
The fuels used were coal and wood sawdust. Mixtures were
made with wood quantities from 5 to 15% in mass basis. From
simulation in a drop tube furnace using combined burning of low
rank coal with palm cluster, Darmawan et al. [35] observed better
results in terms of temperature and gas composition for mixtures
between 10 and 25% of biomass mixed with coal.
2.2.1. Mineral coal
The coal used in this study is the EC 4500 type and was supplied
by Copelmi Mineraça ~o LTDA, in January of 2016. The company also
provided some information that will be presented in the results.
2.2.2. Biomass
The biomass used in this study, furnished by Capivaras Industry
and Trade LTDA, was a wood residue from the processing of pine
logs for the manufacture of wood boards in its plant located in the
city of Criciúma - SC. The wood residues were collected directly
from the conveyor belt of the circular saw. This equipment uses
water to cool the cutting blade, so the residue comes out with high
humidity.
2.3. Thermogravimetric analysis
A thermogravimetric analysis of the fuels was performed using a
TGA brand LECO™ Corporation, model 701/604100700 and
applying the method known as "Coal constant".
In this way, it is possible to determine the humidity, ash content,
volatile matter content and the fixed carbon content (by differ-
ence). For this purpose, the following methods were used: ASTM
D7582-15 for hygroscopic moisture, ash, volatile matter and fixed
carbon by macro thermogravimetric analysis, and ASTM D 3172-13
for proximate analysis of coals and coke.
2.4. Bubbling fluidized bed combustor
For the experimental tests, a laboratory scale bubbling fluidized
bed reactor was used, composed of a cylindrical combustion
chamber of 120 mm internal diameter, 4 mm thick walls, and
height of 1620 mm, made of stainless steel AISI 310.
The combustor has at its base a plenum chamber, responsible for
stabilizing the flow and absorbing pressure fluctuations of the inlet
gas, before the perforated air distribution plate in the lower base of
the combustion chamber. The plenum has the same diameter of the
combustion chamber and useful height of 385 mm.
To avoid a large temperature gradient on the combustor wall
and to ensure the stabilization of the system temperature, an
electric furnace divided in 3 heating zones with 3800 W each, was
erected around the cylindrical body of the equipment, allowing the
furnace to be heated to temperatures close to 1000
C, also
providing the initial heating of the system in the starting process.
The upper outlet of the combustion chamber was connected to a
4 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882

Stairmand-type solid-gas separation cyclone [21] with an internal

cylindrical body with 80 mm reference diameter.
A rotary type flow meter with a range of 0e400 L/min at
ambient temperature and pressure (21
C and 101.3 kPa) and a
needle valve provided a known flow of air to the test bench. The air
was heated to 500
C by a 3 kW electric air heater before being
inserted into the plenum chamber.
The fuel supply system was provided with a helical feeder type
valve with steel body and screw in polyamide adapted for low flow
and with reasonable precision of adjustment and control. The
feeder was driven by a DC motor with 0e24 V variable power
supply and an analog variable voltage regulator.
The fuel is fed into the reactor 400 mm above the distributor
plate. To prevent premature heating and possible volatilization of
the lighter fractions, the tilted feeder tube was provided with a
water jacket, thus maintaining the temperature appropriate to the
best performance of the equipment.
The air distributor located at the base of the combustor was a
perforated plate type constructed according to the methodology
proposed by Basu [1]. The distributor plate has 384 holes of 1 mm in
diameter and triangular arrangement with pitch to diameter ratio
of 5.5. To prevent the sand from falling through the holes into the
plenum chamber, a 200 mm stainless steel screen was placed on the
top of the distributor. The Silagra 1108 silica and alumina fiber,
commercially named Silplate™ 1108 from Unifrax was chosen due
to the difficulties imposed by the plate holes manufacturing and the
possibility of buckling effect on steel due to temperature variation.
For the ash removal system and bed level maintenance, the plate
was modified to have a central hole through which a 34 mm outer
diameter drain was positioned to allow variation in bed height and
particle removal of the combustor at the end of the experiments.
The equipment also has several type K thermocouples posi-
Fig. 1. Schematic of the bubbling fluidized bed combustor. 1 - inlet air pre-heater, 2 e
tioned near the wall of the combustor, as can be seen in Fig. 1, one in
plenum chamber, 3 e distributor plate, 4 - combustion chamber, 5 - insulation, 6 -
the plenum chamber, to monitor the primary air temperature, 6 feeder, 7 - silo, 8 - thermocouple, 9 - pressure tap, 10 - electric oven, 11 - cyclone.
thermocouples distributed in the combustion chamber, for process
temperatures acquisition, and one thermocouple at the air heater
output to control the heating temperature thereof (not shown in combustion tests: the excess air ratio, the biomass percentage
Fig. 1). mixed with coal and the fluidization velocity.
Thermocouples L1, L2 and L3 were positioned in or close to the For comparison purposes, combustion tests were carried out
bed, respectively 75 mm, 200 mm and 320 mm above the distrib- using only coal, varying the excess air ratio and the fluidization
utor, which means that L3 is on the top of the expanded bed. velocity, and the flue gas components concentration from these
Thermocouples F1, F2 and F3 were at the freeboard, respectively tests were used as reference for the evaluation of the combined
720 mm, 1170 mm and 1600 mm above the distributor, at the top of fuels combustion results. Casting sand was selected as bed material
the freeboard. between two candidate particulates, considering Geldart’s classi-
Pressure taps were also distributed along the structure of the fication and minimum fluidization characteristics.
equipment to monitor the pressure drop as well as check bed The fluidization velocities indicated in Table 1 are relative to the
fluidization. Fig. 1 presents the experimental apparatus. An induced minimum fluidization velocity of the sand. The air flow rates used
draft fan (EAC 1/2 MAR model by Artek™ with a frequency inverter in this work were determined using the selected fluidization ve-
WEG, model CFW100) was also used after the cyclone so the reactor locities and the air excesses were obtained for each fluidization
operated under a slight depression (50e200 Pa) condition, avoiding velocity by changing fuel feed rate. In this way, it was possible to set
the backflow of combustion gas through the feeding tube. the operating speeds in terms of the fluidization velocity. Table 1
A portable gas analyzer of ECIL brand Chemist 500 was used to provides the operational parameters that were tested comprising
evaluate the concentration of combustion gases: O2, CO, NO (cor- the 16 different conditions of the test matrix.
rected internally to NOx), SO2, CO2 and CxHy. The measurements The condition to initiate the fuel feeding was attained when the
were carried out downflow the cyclone, to avoid saturation of the temperature in the bed reached a value around 650
C and the
analyzer filters by particulates, and preserve the equipment. internal pressure of the freeboard became stable. This temperature
Concentration measurements of CO2, CO, NOx in parts per
million (ppm) were converted to mg/Nm3 (273 K and 1 atm), as
suggested by Clarke [36], and corrected to constant oxygen (O2)
Table 1
fraction of 7%, as demanded in environmental regulations and to System operational parameters.
allow comparisons at different excess air ratios.
Parameters Values

2.5. Experimental approach Excess air ratio (%) 50 and 70

Biomass (by mass) (%) 0; 5; 10 and 15
Fluidization velocity (m/s) 3 and 6 umf
Three main parameters were evaluated for the execution of the
 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882
was defined from the ignition point proposed by Garcia [25]
considering the volatile matter of coal and far exceeding the igni-
tion point.
Fuel samples were mixed manually, since the small quantities
used per test day (up to 10 kg) do not require specific equipment for
good homogeneity. Subsequently the mixture was conditioned in
the feed silo from where it is fed into the combustion chamber at
the feed rate established in the test matrix. After bed temperatures
stabilization, data from the flue gas and the temperature conditions
of the equipment were acquired. The procedure was done for each
condition of the test matrix.
For each test performed, three flue gas samples were taken at
intervals ranging from 3 to 5 min. Temperature information along
the reactor was monitored by supervisory software on the Field-
Chart NOVUSTM platform. Data were stored for subsequent
appreciation.
2.6. Measurement uncertainty
The random errors analysis of experimental uncertainty is a
result of small independent and uncontrollable uncertainty sour-
ces, estimated through statistical analysis. The total uncertainty
was achieved performing the method of propagation of indepen-
dent uncertainties, as proposed by Kline and McClintock [37]. This
method was applied to the results of chemical species concentra-
tion and temperature.
For the uncertainty regarding the measurement of temperature
both equipment accuracy and statistics were considered. This value
is consistent with the uncertainty in measuring the standard de-
viation during the operation. The uncertainty of the thermocouple
in the measured range was also considered. Thus, the propagation
of the uncertainties for temperature yields the value of ±4 K.
Several measurements were made for each operational condi-
tions tested in this work, considering various chemical species.
Thus, the measurements uncertainty related to the emissions were
propagated with those reported by the equipment manufacturer
information. Since the measurement uncertainty is different case
by case, the insertion of error bars in the graphs would be
confusing. Therefore, a statement with the maximum and mini-
mum uncertainties is provided for each gas measurement.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Analysis of inert material
Table 2 shows the main characteristics of the casting sand par-
ticles used in the bed.
Applying the methodology described for the determination of
the minimum fluidization velocity of the bed particles, velocity
graphs were set by the pressure drop and the velocities were
defined from the intersection of the characteristic curves of the
fluidized regime and the flow deceleration in the bed [38].
Duplicate tests were performed using two bed heights, defined
as one and two times the tube diameter of the experimental
apparatus (typical values for application in bubbling fluidized
Table 2
Physical characterization of casting sand.
Characteristic Methods
Granulometry (mm) DNER-ME 080/94
Actual density (kg/m3) NBR 9745 (1987)
Bulk density (kg/m3) NBR 8630 (1984)
Sauter mean diameter (mm)
Geldart’s classification
5
beds). Table 3 shows the velocities measured.
Pang et al. [39] showed that the minimum fluidization velocity
variation with temperature depends upon the particle size. The
minimum fluidization velocity decreases with an increase in tem-
perature, considering small particles (Geldart’s group B). The trend
is reversed for large particles (Geldart’s group D). Operating tem-
perature in a fluidized bed affects the interphase momentum ex-
change coefficient, and consequently, the drag force exerted by the
gas on the particle. The value of interphase momentum exchange
coefficient increases with an increase in temperature for Geldart’s
group B particles, whereas, it decreases for group D particles.
Nevertheless, solid phase axial velocity decreases with an increase
in temperature for both group B and D particles [39].
Agu et al. [40] developed correlations to estimate the residence
time necessary for complete conversion of biomass using bed
temperature and pressure time histories. It was found that the
residence time decreases with increasing air flowrate, as in this
work. Also, the model of Agu et al. [40] used the predicted amount
of biomass accumulated in the bed for determination of the mini-
mum fluidization velocity, slugging velocity and other bubble-
induced bed properties.
3.2. Characterization of the fuels
To carry out the stoichiometry calculations of the fuels and
mixtures used in this study, the ultimate analysis of the mineral
coal and biomass was carried out. Also, sizing bands were defined
based on the grain size test and the decision making considered the
characteristics of the equipment such as combustion chamber
diameter, associated velocities and feeder geometry.
For the design of the combustor feeder and subsequent tests, it
was necessary to prepare the coal using a roller mill to pulverize it.
The granulometric test using the DNER-ME 080/94 method was
applied to the coal powder. The analysis of the biomass, Pinus
residue, used as received, showed that its calorific value is similar to
that of the CE 4500 coal, however, presenting higher moisture
content when compared to the mineral coal. Table 4 shows the
characteristics of these fuels.
From the ultimate analysis, three main differences are observed:
nitrogen and sulfur content are much greater for coal, what may
have an effect in nitrogen and sulfur oxides emissions, and the high
oxygen content in biomass, resulting in smaller air needs and an
easier combustion.
The granulometric analysis of coal was performed using DNER-
ME 080/94 and a significant percentage of fines (particles below
0.3 mm) was observed, indicating the high friability of the Brazilian
southern coal when subjected to mechanical processing. The par-
ticle diameters selected were in the range of 0.59e2.00 mm aiming
the operation stability. Particulates smaller than 0.5 mm tend to be
more easily entrained by the fluidization gas and particles larger
than 2.00 mm do not perform well in the feeders used in the tests.
Samples were obtained using a batch type vibrating screen appa-
ratus. A classified coal sample was analyzed at the scanning elec-
tron microscopy to verify its geometric characteristics.
Fig. 2 shows the microscopic image of the coal. A relatively good
homogeneity of the particles of the classified sample was noted.
There were too few elongated grains, characterizing the good
sphericity of the fuel sample, ensuring good sliding through the
tilted feeder tube to the combustor. Also, some fines were observed,
Values aggregated to larger particles, which eventually favors the flow.
250e350 For biomass, after three days of natural drying of the residue, a
2263 wide particle size range was observed, but it was decided to discard
1514 particles below 0.59 mm and above 2.00 mm, to facilitate the
290 operation of the combustor avoiding inconsistencies with the
B
combustor bench scale, especially regarding the fuel feeder.
6 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882

Table 3
Minimum experimental fluidization velocity of bed particles.

Particle Mean diameter (mm) Bed Height (m) Minimum fluidization velocity umf (m/s)

Casting sand 295 0.114 0.122

0.114 0.124
0.228 0.161
0.228 0.158

Table 4
Characteristics of the fuels.

Characteristic Methods CE 4500 Biomass Type 1

Higher Heating Value (kJ/kg) ASTM D 5865-13 19,121 19,550

Lower Heating Value (kJ/kg) Calorimetric Pump Isoperibol 18,368 18,190
Total delivery humidity (%) ASTM D2013/D2013M-12 13.45 19.91
Hygroscopic humidity (%) ASTM D7582-15 1.57 3.54
Ultimate analysis
Carbon (%) ASTM D5373-2014 48.32 52.44
Hydrogen (%) ASTM D5373-2014 3.46 6.29
Nitrogen (%) ASTM D5373-2014 0.84 0.04
Oxygen þ Halogens (%) ASTM D3176-15 8.39 41.23
Proximate analysis
Ashes (%) TEG 701 Thermogravimetric 37.68 n.d.
Volatile Matter (%) TEG 701 Thermogravimetric 28.26 87.92
Fixed Carbon (%) TEG 701 Thermogravimetric 34.06 12.08
Total Sulfur (%) ASTM D4239-14E2 1.31 n.d.

Classified biomass was also analyzed by scanning electron mi-

croscopy, showed in Fig. 3, and different from those of coal, it has
more elongated profiles following the fibers that are characteristic
of this type of material. Due to the lower sphericity, a greater dif-
ficulty in sliding along the tilted feeder tube of the combustor was
expected.
The biomass density values lower than that of coal also suggest
complexity in the gravity type fuel feeding, indicating greater flow
difficulty when used alone or added in large proportions to coal.
Therefore, to secure the homogeneity of the mixture, it was decided
to use up to 15% by mass of biomass in the mixture with mineral
coal in this work.

3.2.1. Thermogravimetry
According to the method presented previously, thermogravi-
metric analysis of the fuels was carried out to determine the

Fig. 3. Biomass scanning electron microscopy.

composition of hygroscopic moisture, volatile content, ash content

and fixed carbon. Table 5 presents the results found.
The thermogravimetric curves (TGA) of the fuels are shown in
Fig. 4.
The higher moisture loss of the biomass in the first temperature
interval (0e105
C) as well as a large difference in the mass loss for
biomass in the period of volatiles loss (250e950
C) was observed.

Table 5
Fuel proximate analysis.

Analysis/Testing Coal Copelmi CE 4500 (%) Pinus Biomass (%)

Hygroscopic moisture 5.12 11.45

Ash content 37.68 0.35
Volatile material content 27.45 74.32
Fixed carbon content 34.87 25.33
Fig. 2. CE4500 scanning electron microscopy.
 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882 7

Fig. 4. Mass loss of fuels subjected to thermogravimetric analysis.

At the third level (600e750
C) relative to fixed carbon loss, it is
noted that coal mass loss is higher than biomass and also spent
more time in this step to reach a constant mass.
For a better understanding of the phenomena associated to the
test, the thermogravimetric derivative curves from the base fuels
were analyzed, as shown in Fig. 5. Before pyrolysis, biomass initi-
ates the water loss in a faster way than coal. The higher peak for
biomass in the curve derived at the second interval (250e950
C)
infers that the volatiles release starts at a lower temperature and
occurs much faster than coal, indicating that the diffusivity and
external convection is greater for biomass.
For the fixed carbon burning region, no significant difference
was observed in the reaction rate of the fuels from the burning
peak. However, coal required a longer time for all carbonaceous
contents to be converted compared to biomass. In this way it is
possible to verify a higher reactivity in the combustion of biomass
fixed carbon despite of the higher fixed carbon content in the coal.
3.3. Operating conditions
The bed height at rest was 240 mm and the fuel was fed at a
height 160 mm above the bed of particles. During fluidization, that
means up to 60 mm above the bed.
During the experiments bed temperatures were kept between
800 and 860
C and operation was considered in steady state. The
average temperatures read on the thermocouples inside the bed
and the freeboard were as follows: L1, L2 and L3 ¼ 837
C;
F1 ¼ 852
C, F2 ¼ 821
C and F3 ¼ 800
C. In the denser region (L1,
L2 and L3) the thermal inertia of the sand bed is responsible for the
stable temperatures despite the inherent intermittency of the
screw feeder. Only L3 point, located at the top of the bed, at tran-
sition zone, undergoes a slight downward fluctuation, probably
caused by the cold fuel entering the zone.
The freeboard thermocouple F1 is the closest to the bed and
suffers significant variation of temperatures caused by feeding
intermittence. It was noted that when a larger amount of fuel is
released by the feeder, the fast combustion of the volatiles heats the
lower zone of the freeboard, causing a pulsating effect on the
temperature at the F1 position.
The F2 and F3 positions located in the middle and top of the
freeboard, follow in a smoother way the temperature fluctuations
presented by the thermocouple F1, demonstrating that the burning
of the volatiles is concentrated in the region closer to the feeder
(400 mm above the distributor plate).

Fig. 5. DTG analysis of the thermogravimetric derivatives curves of fuels.

8 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882
A significant decrease in temperature at position F3 (top of the
combustor) was observed, which must have been caused by the
heat transfer to the uninsulated metal parts.
3.3.1. Analysis of ashes by loss on ignition
To evaluate the combustion efficiency, ash samples collected at
the cyclone were evaluated through the loss on ignition analysis.
The methodology was based on ASTM C25-17. Table 6 presents the
results obtained.
The results show that the fuel conversion was very good for all
the fuel mixtures tested, thus the conditions employed in the test
matrix were adequate to combustion using bubbling fluidized bed.
Ashes presented a light gray aspect and there was no significant
change in carbon concentration in the ashes with the increase of
biomass in the mixture suggesting that the biomass had sufficient
residence time to achieve a good carbon conversion.
3.4. Analysis of the temperature in the combustor
Fig. 6 shows the average bed temperature of thermocouples L1,
L2 and L3 (refer to Fig. 1) as a function of the fuels and conditions
used. The denomination C100B0 is a sample with 100% of coal and
0% of biomass, and so on.
The increase of biomass portion in the fuel mixture leads to an
increase in the system temperature. A slight increase in tempera-
ture is also observed for higher fluidization rates due to the increase
in turbulence, leading to higher heat and mass transfer rates. On the
other hand, it is possible to verify a lower bed temperature differ-
ence among the various fuel mixtures when operated at the higher
fluidization velocity (6 umf) caused by the greater turbulence
leading to a better mixing. The temperature is slightly reduced for
greater excess air ratio, which means in practice less fuel for the
same air quantity to be heated.
The rise in the mean temperature of the system is due to the
increase in the biomass fraction in the mixture, as can be observed
from the average bed temperature in the steady state operation.
This is mainly due to the smaller concentrations of inert material in
the biomass when compared to the high ash content coal used. The
higher operating temperatures of the equipment are decisive fac-
tors in heat and power applications.
All operating conditions showed a stable operation of the
equipment as a function of temperature homogeneity, mainly with
mixtures containing up to 10% biomass. However, in the burning of
the mixture with 15% of biomass in the fluidization regime of 6 umf
there was greater difficulty to obtain system stability due to the
high turbulence and the increase of the volatile content. Bharath
et al. [41] applied rice husk and coal in a lab-scale bubbling bed
reactor, Indian coal with 36% ash and Indian rice husk with 22% ash,
considering proper particle sizes, air flow rates and steam flow
rates. The results showed that when rice husk is added, all the
performance metrics presented an upward trend. The authors
concluded that a proper choice of fluidizing regime, particle sizes
and equivalence ratio contribute to optimum performance.
Table 6
Loss on ignition analysis for ashes.
Biomass fraction (%) Weight loss (%)
0 1.44
5 1.10
10 1.05
15 1.29
3.5. Emissions analysis
3.5.1. CO2 emissions
The concentration of CO2 in the exhaust gases is usually asso-
ciated with combustion efficiency and quality. Thus, an increase in
concentration is expected when the operating conditions are
improved through better mixing (turbulence), suitable tempera-
ture and excess air. Fig. 7 shows the results of CO2 concentration
found during the tests. Measurement uncertainties for CO2 pre-
sented the highest and lowest values of 1.4 and 0.7%, at condition of,
l ¼ 1.5, 3 umf, C95B05 and, l ¼ 1.5, 3 umf, C85B15, respectively.
Although slight, an increase in CO2 production is observed for
larger excess air ratio and also for higher fluidization rates. In
addition, increasing the biomass portion in the coal blend leads to a
reduction in CO2 concentration. The increase in CO2 concentration
with excess air ratio means that probably there is a better com-
bustion due to the increased air availability. This trend is clearly
more pronounced for higher fluidization velocity, which means
higher turbulence. Considering that biomass presents more oxygen
in its composition, an increase in CO2 concentration would be ex-
pected, what didn’t happen, indicating a worse combustion due
probably to biomass particles devolatilization and volatiles partial
burning above the fluidized bed.
Biomass has a larger volatile fraction and its flames tend to be
longer in cofiring cases, widening the reaction zone [9]. In this
widespread combustion zone, the residence time is lower than
required for a complete combustion. Therefore, the results for
cofiring presents lower CO2 and higher CO (as shown in the next
section). Although differences in CO2 concentrations do not exceed
2e3% when increasing biomass fraction, there is a tendency to
decrease CO2 concentration, mainly for lower operating speeds (3
umf). One of the possible reasons for this behavior is the premature
drag of volatiles released by the biomass before a complete con-
version. With increased fluidization air velocity (6 umf), a lower
tendency to decrease CO2 concentrations relative to the amount of
biomass was observed, probably due to the greater turbulence both
at the bed and at the freeboard, which enhances also the com-
bustion efficiency of the 100% coal fuel.
The results of other authors corroborate with those achieved in
this work. Kook et al. [42] found that as the reaction temperature
and equivalence ratio were increased, the concentrations of CO2 gas
decreased, what agree with the observed in the present work
(Fig. 6). Slight increases in CxHy concentrations were also observed
by Refs. [42] with increasing the bed temperature. Kumar and Singh
[43] employed four kinds of biomass with coal in a bubbling flu-
idized bed in air fired and oxycombustion. The measured per-
centages of NOx, CO2 and other gases are highly influenced by air
flowrate. Also, the emissions and combustion efficiency were
investigated. The effect of particle size distribution on combustion
efficiency is additionally studied. The experimental results show
that a maximum combustion efficiency of 97% was accomplished
with 75%coal/25%biomass.
3.5.2. CO emissions
Carbon monoxide is also widely used for the qualitative analysis
of combustion efficiency. This component has its concentration
limited by environmental legislation and its control is necessary for
legal compliance. Fig. 8 shows the CO data acquired during the
experiments. Measurement uncertainties for CO presented the
highest and lowest values of 51.3 and 7.4 mg/m3, at conditions of,
l ¼ 1.7, 6 umf, C85B15 and, l ¼ 1.5, 6 umf, C95B05, respectively.
Increasing the amount of biomass in the mixture leads to an
increase in CO production in accordance with the already shown
CO2 reduction. As expected, a reduction in CO production is
observed for higher excess air and higher fluidization rate.
 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882 9

Fig. 6. Bed temperature for 3 umf (left) and 6 umf (right). - - C100B0,  - C95B05, :- C90B10 and, ;- C85B15.

Fig. 7. Influence of biomass on CO2 emissions at 3 umf (left) and 6 umf (right). - - C100B0,  - C95B05, :- C90B10 and, ;- C85B15.

Fig. 8. Influence of biomass on CO emissions to 3 umf (left) and 6 umf (right). - - C100B0,  - C95B05, :- C90B10 and, ;- C85B15.

Nevertheless, CO production increases for the 15% biomass con-
centration at higher fluidization rate, probably due to some insta-
bility during the operation that might have affected the results.
The moisture inside biomass vaporizes first, then volatile gases
are burned depending on the heating rates, and lastly the char
oxidation occurs. Those processes depend on fuel properties such
as particle size, moisture and volatile fraction. Once volatiles are
partly released before reaching the bed, it undergoes an incomplete
combustion at the freeboard, heating the region over the bed. This
is corroborated by the presence of higher levels of CO and the
10 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882
reduction of O2 consumption. The biomass char is fluidized
together with the coal and burns very quickly.
Despite the increase of CO concentration with the addition of
biomass in all the tests, the values obtained are low. A better
combustion is obtained with higher excess air ratio and greater
fluidization velocity. This suggests that complete oxidation of
biomass volatiles in the freeboard region did not occur.
In a similar work, Xie et al. [44] investigated experimentally the
emissions in a bench scale circulating fluidized bed combustor for
coal combustion and co-firing coal and biomass. It was observed
that an increase in the biomass shares resulted in an increase of the
CO concentration. According to the authors, biomasses are less
dense than coal having a smaller terminal velocity than that of coal
or sand, leading to devolatilization and char combustion occurring
well above the bed, where O2 concentration is already lower. The
high volatile content of the biomass also favors the reduction of O2
concentration, leading to a worse combustion efficiency, corrobo-
rated by the slightly higher levels of CO and lower levels of CO2.
3.5.3. NOx emissions
Nitrogen oxides are found in exhaust gases from boilers and
combustors in the industry. Considering the formation routes (fuel
NOx, thermal NOx and immediate NOx), due to the composition of
the fuels used and the technologies applied in this study, NOx
measured concentrations are possibly more related to the fuel
mechanism. Fig. 9 shows the concentrations of NOx found in the
tests. Measurement uncertainties for NOx presented the highest
and lowest values of 150.8 and 12.5 mg/m3, at condition of, l ¼ 1.5,
3 umf, C90B10 and, l ¼ 1.5, 6 umf, C90B10, respectively.
An increase in the NOx production is observed for larger excess
air ratio and, for mixtures with higher biomass fraction, a slight
increase for higher fluidization rates. Moreover, the increase of the
biomass portion in the fuel mixture leads to a reduction in the NOx
production due to the lower amount of nitrogen in the biomass in
relation to the coal.
It is possible to observe that for the higher fluidization (6 umf) a
small tendency to decrease NOx formation when the biomass mass
fraction in the fuel mixture was increased. However, for the fluid-
ization condition of 3 umf, the mixture with 15% of biomass showed
a decrease of almost 30% compared to coal alone for an excess air
ratio of 1.7.
In addition, a small increase in concentrations were observed as
a function of the excess air in the tests. However, emissions of NOx
present a more complex dependency on the nitrogen content of
Fig. 9. Influence of biomass on NOx emissions at 3 umf (left) and 6 umf (right). - - C100B0,  - C95B05,
fuels. Gong et al. [45] observed that total nitrogen oxide emissions
increase with the bed temperature while decrease with the oper-
ating pressure. The results show that most operating parameters
have an opposite effect on NOx and N2O emissions, and the N2O
emissions mainly depend on the bed temperature. Increasing the
operating pressure can significantly suppress the fuel-N conversion
to NOx but enhance its conversion to N2O. With the rise of the
excess air level and fluidization number, NOx emissions grow
distinctly while N2O emissions remain almost unchanged.
Wisut et al. [46] observed that at different bed temperatures, the
total conversion of fuel-nitrogen into NOx and N2O was almost
constant, but the increase of bed temperature enhances the NOx
production as well as N2O reduction.
3.5.4. CxHy emissions
CxHy are hydrocarbons produced during the pyrolysis and
burning reactions of fuels. The presence of CxHy as well as CO in
exhaust gases are indicators of incomplete oxidation of fuels. Fig. 10
shows the results of CxHy concentrations found during the tests.
Measurement uncertainties for CxHy presented the highest and
lowest values of 0.17 and 0.041%, at condition of, l ¼ 1.7, 3 umf,
C100B0 and, l ¼ 1.7, 3 umf, C90B10, respectively.
The increase of the biomass portion in the coal mixture leads to
an increase in the production of CxHy. Despite the higher volatile
content, the presence of biomass produces more unburned hy-
drocarbons, mainly because the system was not specifically
developed for the proper burning of volatiles, which causes a
dispersion in the flame and incomplete burning at this stage of
combustion.
An increase in CxHy production is also observed for higher
fluidization rates due to the greater difficulty in burning the vola-
tiles, which were blown out of the combustion region. In this sit-
uation, fuel residence time is decreased and there is no time for a
complete conversion. Turbulence, which had a small positive effect
on CO emissions, did not help in the case of CxHy as there was a
clear increase in emissions at higher air speed. On the other hand,
the production of CxHy is reduced with the increase of excess air, as
expected.
3.5.5. SO2 emissions
The sulfur compounds were evaluated considering the biomass
fractions in the fuel as can be observed in Fig. 11.
An increase in the concentrations of SO2 is observed for all the
fuel mixtures directly linked to the increase of the fluidization
:- C90B10 and, ;- C85B15.
 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882 11

Fig. 10. Influence of biomass on emissions of CxHy at 3 umf (left) and 6 umf (right). - - C100B0,  - C95B05, :- C90B10 and, ;- C85B15.

Fig. 11. Influence of biomass on SO2 emissions to 3 umf (left) and 6 umf (right). - - C100B0,  - C95B05, :- C90B10 and, ;- C85B15.

velocities suggesting that turbulence favors the formation of this
component. Measurement uncertainties for SO2 presented the
highest and lowest values of 273.9 and 105.7 mg/m3, at condition of
l ¼ 1.5, 3 umf, C100B0 and, l ¼ 1.5, 3 umf, C90B10, respectively.
According to these uncertainties, differences related to biomass
fractions are not conclusive.
Sulfur content in biomass is lower than in coal and therefore,
lower SO2 emissions, mainly as a result of dilution, were expected,
but the interaction with ash and sand components into the bed may
have catalyzed sulfur oxidation reactions. The sulfur chemical ki-
netics and interaction with ash were not considered in this work.
According to Xie et al. [44], in co-firing, biomass share increases
SO2 emissions, nevertheless they observed that the relationship
between SO2 emission and fuel sulfur content was non-linear.
Helmer et al. [47] observed many advantages of firing wood/coal
mixtures over the burning of each fuel individually. According to
the authors, wood in the mixture slightly reduced SO2 emissions,
but combustion temperature and excess air were more crucial pa-
rameters influencing SO2 and NOx emissions.
4. Conclusions
The bed fluidized at most conditions initially proposed. Results
presented are for conditions where fluidization performed
satisfactorily. Ash analysis at both the cyclone and the bed after the
tests indicated good conversion with small percentages of uncon-
verted material. Images analyses suggest that biomass may present
feeding problems due to its low sphericity.
Concerning biomass fraction in the mixture, its increase led to a
slight increase in both CO and CxHy concentrations. CO2 and NOx
concentrations decrease when biomass fraction increases, while for
SO2 there was no significant change in its concentration, despite the
reduced sulfur percentage in biomass composition.
The average temperature of the system increased with more
biomass in the mixture. The results presented here might be
explained mostly due to the high volatiles percentage of biomass
and its high reactivity, showed in TGA analysis. When the fuel is
introduced above the fluidized bed, part of these volatiles is
released and burn before reaching the bed, what is perceived
through the large fluctuations in freeboard temperature, which
increase when the biomass fraction was increased, corresponding
to feeder intermittence. The combustion of the volatiles at the
freeboard is not enhanced by turbulence as in the bed and the
lower residence time impair its completeness, what explain higher
CO and CxHy and smaller CO2 concentrations when biomass is
increased. NOx decrease is explained due to the smaller amount of
nitrogen in biomass composition, confirming that fuel NOx is the
main mechanism, since temperatures are too low for thermal NOx.
12 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882
Considering temperature, one possible reason to its increase
with more biomass is the higher percentage of inert material in
coal, since both fuels have equivalent heating values.
As expected, increasing excess air decreases system tempera-
tures. The emissions of CO, CxHy and SO2 also decreased with
greater excess air ratio, mainly due to greater air availability for a
better combustion. The increase in CO2 concentration is due to the
same reason, while the relative stability of NOx emissions might be
attributed to bed temperature, according to literature.
The best mixing due to turbulence when using the 6 umf fluid-
ization regime led to a smaller difference in bed temperatures
when the fuel blend was varied. The most important parameters
that change with fluidization regime are turbulence and residence
time for the reactions. Apparently, at the 6 umf fluidization regime,
turbulence improved overall combustion indicated by smaller CO
and greater CO2 concentrations, but the smaller residence time
increased CxHy concentrations.
The combined burning of Brazilian mineral coal with pine wood
biomass is a potential solution for the minimization of greenhouse
gases, presenting good operation and control behavior for con-
centrations of up to 10% biomass in the mixture and fluidization
regimes up to 6 umf, requiring only trivial NOx and SOx control
devices for compliance with legislation.
In general, greater excess air ratio and fluidization velocity
achieved better results and the main difficulties were related to the
release of volatiles before biomass reaches the bed, leading to
greater emissions due to partial conversion.
Declaration of competing interest
Dr. Wander reports grants from CNPq - Conselho Nacional de
Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnolo
gico, during the conduction of
the study.
CNPq is a traditional Brazilian funding agency that gave funds to
build the reactor and some scholarships for students.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Paulo R. Wander: Methodology, Writing - review & editing,

vio M. Bianchi: Methodology, Investigation, Re-
Supervision. Fla
sources. Nattan R. Caetano: Writing - original draft, Formal anal-
ysis. Marcos A. Klunk: Writing - original draft, Formal analysis,
Visualization. Maria Luiza S. Indrusiak: Methodology, Writing -
review & editing, Funding acquisition.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the Brazilian agency CNPq (National
Council of Technological and Scientific Development e Brasília, DF,
Brazil) for the research funding (Proc. 40.6902/2013-5), and the
generous assistance of all the people from the company who
granted us access to their database and perception information.
Author Flavio M. Bianchi also acknowledges CNPq for the grants
(Proc. 375968/2015-6 and 374288/2016-0)
References
[1] Basu P. Combustion and gasification in fluidized beds. first ed. Boca Raton:
Taylor & Francis; 2006, ISBN 978-0849333965.
[2] Collot AG. Matching gasification technologies to coal properties. Int J Coal Geol
2006;65:191e212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2005.05.003.
[3] Catalun~ a R, Shah Z, Venturi V, Caetano NR, Da Silva BP, Azevedo CMN, Da
Silva R, Suarez PAZ, Oliveira LP. Production process of di-amyl ether and its
use as an additive in the formulation of aviation fuels. Fuel 2018;228:226e33.
https://doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2018.04.167.
[4] Flegkas S, Birkelbach F, Winter F, Freiberger N, Werner A. Fluidized bed re-
actors for solid-gas thermochemical energy storage concepts - modelling and
process limitations. Energy 2018;143:615e23. https://doi:10.1016/j.energy.
2017.11.065.
~ a R, Vielmo HA. Analysis of the effect on the mechanical
[5] Caetano NR, Catalun
injection engine using doped diesel fuel by ethanol and bio-oil. International
Review of Mechanical Engineering 2015a;9(2):124e8. https://doi:10.15866/
ireme.v9i2.4341.
[6] Caetano NR, Soares D, Nunes RP, Pereira FM, Schneider PS, Vielmo HA, van der
Laan FT. A comparison of experimental results of soot production in laminar
premixed flames. Open Eng 2015b;5:213e9. https://doi:10.1515/eng-2015-
0016.
[7] Akram M, Tan CK, Garwood R, Thai SM. Vinasse e a potential biofuel e cofiring
with coal in a fluidised bed combustor. Fuel 2015;158:1006e15. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.06.036.
[8] Hu M-C, Huang A-L, Wen T-H. GIS-based biomass resource utilization for rice
straw cofiring in the Taiwanese power market. Energy 2013;55:354e60.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.03.013.
[9] Ndibe C, Grathwohl S, Paneru M, Maier J, Scheffknecht G. Emissions reduction
and deposits characteristics during cofiring of high shares of torrefied biomass
in a 500 kW pulverized coal furnace. Fuel 2015a;156:177e89. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2015.04.017.
[10] Loeffler D, Anderson N. Emissions tradeoffs associated with cofiring forest
biomass with coal: a case study in Colorado, USA. Appl Energy 2014;113:
67e77. https://doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.07.011.
[11] Narayanan KV, Natarajan E. Experimental studies on cofiring of coal and
biomass blends in India. Renew Energy 2007;32(15):2548e58. https://doi:10.
1016/j.renene.2006.12.018.
[12] Collazo J, Pazo
JA, Granada E, Saavedra A,
Eguía P. Determination of the spe-
cific heat of biomass materials and the combustion energy of coke by DSC
analysis. Energy 2012;45(1):746e52. https://doi:10.1016/j.energy.2012.07.
018.
[13] Ndibe C, Maier J, Scheffknecht G. Combustion, cofiring and emissions char-
acteristics of torrefied biomass in a drop tube reactor. Biomass Bioenergy
2015b;79:105e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.05.010.
[14] Huang C-W, Li Y-H, Xiao K-L, Lasek J. Cofiring characteristics of coal blended
with torrefied Miscanthus biochar optimized with three Taguchi indexes.
Energy 2019;172:566e79. https://doi:10.1016/j.energy.2019.01.168.
[15] Caetano NR, Venturini MS, Centeno FR, Lemmertz CK, Kyprianidis KG.
Assessment of mathematical models for prediction of thermal radiation heat
loss from laminar and turbulent jet non-premixed flames. Thermal Science
and Engineering Progress 2018;7:241e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tsep.2018.06.008.
[16] Barmina I, Valdmanis R, Zake M. The effects of biomass co-gasification and co-
firing on the development of combustion dynamics. Energy 2018;146:4e12.
https://doi:10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.140.

rez-Jeldres R, Cornejo P, Flores M, Gordon A, García X. A modeling approach
[17] Pe
to co-firing biomass/coal blends in pulverized coal utility boilers: synergistic
effects and emissions profiles. Energy 2017;120:663e74. https://doi:10.1016/
j.energy.2016.11.116.
[18] Tan P, Ma L, Xia J, Fang Q, Zhang C, Chen G. Co-firing sludge in a pulverized
coal-fired utility boiler: combustion characteristics and economic impacts.
Energy 2017;119:392e9. https://doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.12.084.
[19] Mun T-Y, Tumsa TZ, Lee U, Yang W. Performance evaluation of co-firing
various kinds of biomass with low rank coals in a 500 MWe coal-fired po-
wer plant. Energy 2016;115:954e62. https://doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.09.
060.
[20] Catalun ~ a R, Shah Z, Pelisson L, Caetano NR, Da Silva R, Azevedo C. Biodiesel
glycerides from the soybean ethylic route incomplete conversion on the diesel
engines combustion process. J Braz Chem Soc 2017;28:2447e54. https://
doi.org/10.21577/0103-5053.20170100.
[21] Kunii D, Levenspiel O. Fluidization engineering. second ed. Washington:
Butterworth-Heinemann; 1991.
[22] Cremasco MA. Operaço ~ es Unit
arias em Sistemas Particulados e Fluid-
odina^micos. second ed. Sa ~o Paulo: Blucher; 2014, ISBN 978-85-212-0855-6.
[23] Geldart D. Types of gas fluidization. Powder Technol 1973;7(5):285e92.
https://doi:10.1016/0032-5910(73)80037-3.
[24] Grace JR, Avidan AA, Knowlton TM. Circulating fluidized beds. Heidelberg:
Springer Netherlands; 1997, ISBN 978-94-010-6530-6.
[25] Garcia R. Combustíveis e Combust~ ao Industrial. second ed. Rio de Janeiro:
^ncia; 2013. -13: 978-85-719-3303-3.
Intercie
[26] Miller BG, Tillman DA. Combustion engineering issues for solid fuel systems.
Burlington, MA: Academic Press; 2008, ISBN 978-01-237-3611-6.
[27] Turns SR. An introduction to combustion: concepts and applications. third ed.
New York: McGraw-Hill; 2012. ISBN13: 9780073380193.
[28] Obras-Loscertales M, Mendiara T, Rufas A, Diego LF, García-Labiano F, Gaya
n P,
Abad A, Ada
nez J. NO and N2O emissions in oxy-fuel combustion of coal in a
bubbling fluidized bed combustor. Fuel 2015;150:146e53. https://doi:10.
1016/j.fuel.2015.02.023. j.fuel.2015.02.023.
[29] Jones JM, Ross AB, Mitchell EJS, Lea-Langton AR, Williams A, Bartle KD.
Organic carbon emissions from the co-firing of coal and wood in a fixed bed
combustor. Fuel 2017;195:226e31. https://doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2017.01.061.
[30] Jurado N, Simms NJ, Anthony EJ, Oakey JE. Effect of co-firing coal and biomass
blends on the gaseous environments and ash deposition during pilot-scale
oxy-combustion trials. Fuel 2017;197:145e58. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.fuel.2017.01.111.
[31]

Riaza J, Alvarez L, Gil MV, Pevida C, Pis JJ, Rubiera F. Ignition and NO emissions
 P.R. Wander et al. / Energy 203 (2020) 117882
of coal and biomass blends under different oxy-fuel atmospheres. Energy
Procedia 2013;37:1405e12. https://doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.016.
[32] Aho M, Envall T, Kauppinen J. Corrosivity of flue gases during co-firing Chinese
biomass with coal at fluidised bed conditions. Fuel Process Technol 2013;105:
82e8. https://doi:10.1016/j.fuproc.2011.05.020.
[33] Foust AS, Wenzel LA, Clump CW, Maus L, Andersen BL. Princípio das operaço ~ es
unit

arias. second ed. Rio de Janeiro: LTC; 1982, ISBN 978-8521610380.
[34] Bianchi FM, Aquino TF, Kestering DA, Dalpont G, MArcello RR, Neto JM,
Indrusiak MLS, Zinani F, Wander PR. Bancada Experimental para Estudos de
~o de Combustíveis So
Fluidizaça
lidos em Sistemas de Leito Fluidizado Circu-
lante. Gramado: Anais do 4
CBCM; 2013.
[35] Darmawan A, Budianto D, Aziz M, Tokimatsu K. Cofiring assessment of
hydrothermally-treated empty fruit bunch and low rank coal in a drop tube
furnace. Energy Procedia 2017;105:1545e50. https://doi:10.1016/j.egypro.
2017.03.473.
[36] Clarke AG. Industrial air pollution monitoring. Heidelberg: Springer
Netherlands; 1998, ISBN 978-94-010-7143-7.
[37] Kline S, McClintock F. Describing uncertainties in single-sample experiments.
Mech Eng 1953;75:3e8.
[38] Zhang D, Fan P, Wu D, Li Y. Pressure drop across a fixed bed reactor with
mechanical failure of catalyst pellets described by simplified ergun’s equation.
China Particuol 2005;3(1e2):23e5. https://doi:10.1016/s1672-2515(07)
60157-2.
[39] Pang L, Shao Y, Zhong W, Liu H. Experimental investigation on the coal
combustion in a pressurized fluidized bed. Energy 2018;165:1119e28.
https://doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.09.198.
[40] Agu CE, Pfeifer C, Eikeland M, Tokheim L-A, Moldestad BME. Measurement
and characterization of biomass mean residence time in an air-blown
13
bubbling fluidized bed gasification reactor. Fuel 2019;253:1414e23. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.05.103.
[41] Bharath M, Raghavan V, Prasad BVSSS, Chakravarthy SR. Co-gasification of
Indian rice husk and Indian coal with high-ash in bubbling fluidized bed
gasification reactor. Appl Therm Eng 2018;137:608e15. https://doi:10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2018.04.035.
[42] Kook JW, Choi HM, Kim BH, Ra HW, Yoon SJ, Mun TY, et al. Gasification and tar
removal characteristics of rice husk in a bubbling fluidized bed reactor. Fuel
2016;181:942e50. https://doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2016.05.027.
[43] Kumar R, Singh RI. An investigation in 20 kW th oxygen-enriched bubbling
fluidized bed combustor using coal and biomass. Fuel Process Technol
2016;148:256e68. https://doi:10.1016/j.fuproc.2016.02.037.
[44] Xie J, Yang X, Zhang L, Ding T, Song W, Lin W. Emissions of SO2, NO and N2O
in a circulating fluidized bed combustor during co-firing coal and biomass.
J Environ Sci 2007;19(1):109e16. https://doi:10.1016/s1001-0742(07)60018-
7.
[45] Gong Z, Shao Y, Pang L, Zhong W, Chen C. Study on the emission character-
istics of nitrogen oxides with coal combustion in pressurized fluidized bed.
Chin J Chem Eng 2019;27(5):1177e83. https://doi:10.1016/j.cjche.2018.07.
020.
[46] Wisut W, et al. Combustion and emission characteristics of a Thai lignite
with a bubbling fluidized bed. Hokkaido Kogvo Gijutsu Kenkyusho Hokoku,
70, 14-20, in 98/04003 Combustion and emission characteristics of a Thai
lignite with a bubbling fluidized bed. Fuel Energy Abstr 1998;39(5):374e5.
https://doi:10.1016/s0140-6701(98)93998-4.
[47] Helmer WA, Stokke DD, Sun J. A case study of fluidized-bed combustion of
wood/coal mixtures. Part A. The effect of wood particle size. For Prod J
1999;48(3):46e9.