discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233726394
CITATIONS
READS
46
2,670
2 authors, including:
Jos L. Louzada
Universidade de Trs-os-Montes e Alto Douro
146 PUBLICATIONS 669 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 2 6 3 4 e2 6 3 9
Available at www.sciencedirect.com
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/biombioe
article info
abstract
Article history:
The calorific values of wood pellets from different wood species were determined using
a Parr 6300 bomb calorimeter, following the CEN/TS 14918:2005. The aim of this study was
the thermo characterization of the wood pellets. Softwoods had a high calorific value
15 February 2011
between 19660.02 and 20360.45 kJ/kg, and the hardwoods had a ranging interval between
17631.66 and 20809.47 kJ/kg, in accordance to Phyllis distribution of HHV. The highest HHV
(Higher Heating Value) and LHV (Low Heating Value) were obtained by Bowdichia nitida
Keywords:
(20360.45 kJ/kg). Pinus pinaster was the softwood with the highest LHV (16935.72 kJ/kg).
Fagus sylvatica was the National hardwood with the highest HHV (19132.47 kJ/kg). Fraxinus
angustifolia was the National hardwood with the highest LHV (16450.82 kJ/kg). Eucalyptus
Moisture
(20809.47e17907.85 kJ/kg). Cedrus atlantica was the softwood with the highest HHV
Wood pellets
Linear regression
1.
Introduction
b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 2 6 3 4 e2 6 3 9
2.
2635
3.
m2 m3
100
m2 m1
2636
b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 2 6 3 4 e2 6 3 9
Table 3 e Mean SD (CV %) of Higher and Low Heating values, moisture content (Mar) of the samples.
Species
HHV (kJ/kg)
LHV (kJ/kg)
Mar (%)
Pinus pinaster
Pseudotsuga menziesii
Cedrus atlantica
Castanea sativa
Eucalyptus globulus
Fagus sylvatica
Quercus robur
Fraxinus angustifolia
Prunus avium
Salix babilonica
Populus euro-americana.
Acer pseudoplatanus
Chlorophora excelsa
Entandrophragma cyli.
Gossweilerodendron b.
Bowdichia nitida
Hymenaea courbaril
10.3
8.8
17.8
11.1
11.5
11.0
11.4
7.3
8.0
9.2
7.5
9.7
8.8
11.4
10.3
8.0
9.8
Sample
P4
P8
P12
P1
P2
P3
P5
P6
P7
P9
P10
P11
P13
P14
P15
P16
P17
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
100
100 Mad
Mean (kJ/kg)
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
E
E
E
E
E
E
F
F
F
F
F
F
G
G
G
20809.47
20499.80
20360.45
20314.74
20237.89
19660.02
19296.38
19132.47
19090.90
19053.87
18791.20
18754.86
18696.82
18637.91
18279.41
18256.48
17631.66
2637
b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 2 6 3 4 e2 6 3 9
Mean (kJ/kg)
Bowdichia nitida
A
Chlorophora excelsa
A B
Gossweilerodendron b.
B
Pinus pinaster
B C
Pseudotsuga menziesii
B C D
Fraxinus angustifolia
C D E
Hymenaea courbaril
D E F
Populus euro-americana.
D E F G
Fagus sylvatica
E F G H
Entandrophragma cyli.
F G H
Cedrus atlantica
F G H
Acer pseudoplatanus
F G H
Prunus avium
F G H
Castanea sativa
G H
Salix babilonica
H
Quercus robur
H
Eucalyptus globulus
I
17907.85
17287.67
17170.12
16935.72
16704.30
16450.82
16183.69
16130.08
15818.67
15691.61
15629.71
15615.05
15552.33
15468.56
15372.32
15361.13
14411.54
100 Mar
0; 02443 Mar
100
4.
18000
17500
The Table 3 shows mean; standard deviation; coefficient of
variation of HHVeLHV and moisture content (Mar) for all the
samples. There are differences between the Higher Heating
Values and Low Heating Values for the different species. The
HHV is greater since it is the sum of the LHV and the heat
released by the condensation of water vapour. With exception
of B. nitida and Hymenea courbaril (Tropical residues), the mean
HHVeLHV corresponding to softwood are higher than the
other Fig. 1, as a consequence of oil and resins production [26].
Their study has the same result. Also Demirbas [27] says that
softwoods are considered to have greater HHVs because of
their resin or extractive contents. Variation among the
samples (reflecting intraspecific variation and measurement
error) was relatively low with an average variation of 1.2%.
r=0.386 (n.s.)
17000
16500
16000
15500
15000
14500
14000
6
10
12
14
16
18
Mar(%)
Fig. 2 e Linear fit of Low Heating Value (LHV) by moisture
(Mar).
2638
b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 2 6 3 4 e2 6 3 9
a
a
a
b
a
b
16030.1
(919.6)
16423.2
(696.9)
15575.6
(568.8)
16423.2
(696.9)
15575.6
(568.8)
16848.2
(894.3)
a
a
a
a
a
b
9.6 a
(1.5)
12.3 a
(4.8)
9.6 a
(1.7)
12.3 a
(4.8)
9.6 a
(1.7)
9.7 a
(1.3)
5.
Conclusions
references
b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 2 6 3 4 e2 6 3 9
2639