Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Small-scale biomass gasification systems for power generation (<200 kW

class): A review
Yohanes Andre Situmorang a, Zhongkai Zhao a, Akihiro Yoshida a, b, Abuliti Abudula a,
Guoqing Guan a, b, *
a
Graduate School of Science and Technology, Hirosaki University, 1-Bunkyocho, Hirosaki, 036-8560, Japan
b
Energy Conversion Engineering Laboratory, Institute of Regional Innovation (IRI), Hirosaki University, Aomori, 030-0813, Japan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Biomass gasification to provide gas fuels for power generation is considered as one of the best ways for
Biomass energy substituting fossil fuels. Large scale unit of biomass gasification with capacity over 2 MW is preferably chosen due
Small scale biomass gasification to its efficiency to investment ratio even though collecting large amount of biomass takes high cost. To effectively
Gas engine
utilize the biomass resources in local and regional areas, it is expected to apply more small-scale biomass gasifiers
Power generation
with a capacity less than 200 kW for a small community or even a family. This will make bioenergy more popular
Synthesis gas
Challenges and prospects in our daily life. In this review, developed gasification techniques and the effects of biomass composition,
gasifying agents, biomass particle size, operating condition of gasification (temperature and pressure) on the
gasification efficiency, and type of gasifier are introduced at first and then, the research and development (R&D)
and application progresses of the small-scale biomass gasification systems with capacities of 10–200 kW over the
world are summarized, and the challenges and prospects in the future renewable energy markets are analyzed
and discussed. European, North American and Asia areas are developing and begin to apply various small-scale
biomass gasification systems, and African, Latin America, and Oceania countries should be the growing and
promising potential regions for the application of this technique in the future, especially in the developing
countries. In addition, lowering investment cost and making supporting policies are significantly required to
utilize such small-scale renewable energy system.

production, the increasing of environmental awareness, and the risk on

1. Introduction nuclear energy utilization make the world trying to find new alternative
energy with more sustainability, more environmental friendly, and
Electricity plays an important role in industrial sector. As shown in higher safety. Recently, renewable energy sources such as biomass,
Fig. 1, electricity is the largest energy sector consumed in US in 2017, solar, wind and geothermal energy are considered to be able to replace
which is about 37.23 QBtu [1], and most of countries especially those the fossil fuels and nuclear as the main energy sources for electricity
developed and some developing countries are in the similar situation generation in the future. The projection of energy utilization until 2040
[2]. Nowadays, the new concepts for future society development like in some studies shows that the increase of renewable energy utilization
industry 4.0 and digitalization era have been proposed, and the elec­ will continue whereas the coal and nuclear energy utilization will be on
tricity supply will become more and more important than before. As stagnant trend or even declining [4]. Thus, development and applica­
reported in Evolving Transition scenario by British Petroleum (BP) study tions of renewable energy technologies are expected to grow rapidly in
[3], almost 70% of the increase in primary energy will be used for power the near future. Especially, the contribution to global energy mix to
generation because power demand will arise three times more quickly replace the role of fossil fuels and nuclear energy is becoming more and
compared to other forms of energy. more necessary [5,6]. Renewable energy such as biomass, solar, wind,
To date, power generation still depends on two main sources: fossil hydropower, geothermal, and wives and tides of the ocean can be
fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil; and nuclear energy. As shown in replenished continuously or within a moderate time frame [6,7]. How­
Fig. 2, coal is the most used source to produce electricity with about ever, the utilization ways for different renewable energy resources are
39.3% utilization around the world [2]. The declining of fossil fuel different from those for the traditional ones. Especially, the renewable

* Corresponding author. Energy Conversion Engineering Laboratory, Institute of Regional Innovation (IRI), Hirosaki University, Aomori, 030-0813, Japan.
E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Guan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109486
Received 6 January 2019; Received in revised form 2 October 2019; Accepted 8 October 2019
Available online 22 October 2019
1364-0321/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

List of acronyms Units

QBtu quadrillion Btu (1 QBtu ¼ 1.07 � 106 J)
CHP combined heat and power kW kilowatt
IGCC integrated gasification combined cycle kWe kilowatt-electric
ER equivalence ratio kWh kilowatt hour
MSW municipal solid waste MW megawatt
BFBG bubbling fluidized bed gasifier MWe megawatt-electric
CFBG circulating fluidized bed gasifier GWe gigawatt-electric
ICE internal combustion engine EJ exajoules
SI spark ignition €/kWe Euro per kilowatt-electric
CI compression ignition USD/kWe U.S. Dollar per kilowatt-electric
LCOE levelized cost of electricity USD/kWh U.S. Dollar per kilowatt hour(s)
LCA life cycle assessment �
C degrees celcius
GHG greenhouse gas km kilometers
mm milimeters

energy has high potential for the rural area where it is difficult to get the
conventional energy [8].
Among all renewable energy sources, biomass is considered as the
most available one. As shown in Fig. 3, biomass contributes about 50%
of renewable energy sources [9]. Biomass is non-fossilized and biode­
gradable organic materials derived from plants, algae and animals [10].
Dried biomass is composed of lignin, cellulose and hemicellulose, and
small amounts of extractives such as proteins, lipids, simple sugars and
starches [11]. Cellulose commonly is the largest fraction of wood and
grass biomass with about 38–50% of its total weight [8]. Easy and
abundant availability, wide spreading, renewability and sustainability,
and versatility are the main characteristic of biomass energy source.
However, biomass has lower heating value than coal, and as the solid
material it is more difficult to transport than liquid fuels [7].
In particular, biomass resources are widespread and can be classified
into many different types, including forestry, agricultural crops and
residues, dedicated energy crops, industrial waste and residues, animal
residues, municipal solid waste (MSW), and sewage [6,8,12–14].
Forestry plantations and residues, such as trees, shrubs and scrub,
bushes, palms, and bamboos are classified as woody biomass, while
agricultural crops and residues including dedicating energy crops, in­ Fig. 2. Percentage of power generation resources utilized over the world [2].
dustrial waste and residues, animal manure, and domestic waste are
classified as non-woody biomass and processed waste [15]. As shown in
Fig. 4, among biomass resources, agricultural crops and residues and

Fig. 1. U S. energy consumption per sector in 2017 [1].

2
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

pyrolysis, gasification, and hydrothermal liquefaction. Meanwhile, the

biological processes include three main routes, i.e., fermentation, aer­
obic and anaerobic digestion, and enzymatic or acid hydrolysis [14].
Generally, thermochemical process can convert solid biomass into en­
ergy in the form of gas by involving heat whereas the bio-chemical
process is used to convert other forms of biomass into gas and liquid
fuels and chemicals by involving microorganism [20].
Among the biochemical processes, the anaerobic digestion is the
most effective way to produce energy, by which biogas containing
methane (50–75%), carbon dioxide (20–35%), and trace amounts of
impurities such as hydrogen sulfide and moisture can be effectively
obtained from the wet biomass [21]. This technology has been widely
applied in Europe, Asia, and North America, and many biogas plants
were built for the last 20 years. Biogas is normally used as the fuel for
power generation by combustion of it in the internal combustion engine.
In Europe region, many countries have already made policies to input
biogas into natural gas grid or use directly as the vehicle fuel [22–24].
Asian countries like China, India, and Indonesia have their own house­
Fig. 3. Percentage of renewable energy resources availability over the
hold biogas programs, by which the biogas is normally provided for
world [9].
cooking and electricity generation in house or small community [25].
The popular biomass sources for generating biogas through anaerobic
digestion process are animal manures from pigs, cows, and chickens and
industrial waste water, such as palm oil mill effluent (POME) from palm
oil industry [22,26]. For other biochemical processes such as fermen­
tation and enzymatic or acid hydrolysis, the main product is alcohol,
especially bioethanol, which is a popular alternative fuel and has been
widely used as automotive fuel by mixing it with gasoline. It is
confirmed that blending 10% of bioethanol into 90% gasoline can be
used as the fuel for modern cars without changing the engine type. In
Brazil, 18–27.5% of bioethanol blended with gasoline has been widely
provided in gasoline stands. Meanwhile in Europe, 5% of bioethanol
Fig. 4. Percentage of biomass resources [6]. blended with gasoline is generally provided [27,28]. Recently, it is also
found that hydrogen fuel can be generated through fermentation. Dark
fermentation and photo-fermentation are two possible ways to obtain
industrial and domestic wastes are the most produced ones with 27%
biohydrogen from biomass. However, the yield is still low and more
and 30% for each part respectively [6]. Although forestry only produces
researches are still needed [21].
around 23% of biomass, due to its relatively high heating value, woody
Nowadays, among all thermochemical pathways, direct combustion
biomass is the most promising resource and its importance and demand
is the most widely utilized process for biomass conversion. It contributes
will increase significantly in the future [12]. Worldwide primary energy
to over 97% of biomass utilization as energy production around the
supply of forest biomass is estimated at about 56 EJ and overall woody
world [10]. Electricity production capacity based on direct combustion
biomass could provide about 90% of all primary energy annually sources
process that has already installed globally is estimated at 40 GWe [15].
from all biomass sources [16].
Recently, co-firing 5–10% of biomass with coal in combined heat and
More importantly, biomass is considered as the main energy source
power (CHP) process or co-generation of electricity is commonly known
and the largest potential alternative of replacing fossil fuels that could
in the world. Combustion is a process that used excess oxygen to burn
suffice fuel supply in the future sustainability. As such, biomass is even
biomass for heat generation. In contrast, pyrolysis is a thermochemical
classified as 4th rank largest energy source after coal, oil, and natural gas
process that occurs without the presence of oxygen, but only by heat can
[6], and shares 14% of world’s final energy consumption in 2014 [15,
decomposes biomass into three different products i.e., bio-oil or tar,
17]. It is reported that biomass represents 3% energy consumption in
char, and incondensable gas [20]. By using different heating rates fast,
industrialized countries and 33% in developing countries [18].
intermediate, and slow pyrolysis processes can be achieved. Herein, fast
Compared to other renewable energy sources, biomass energy is cheaper
pyrolysis is the most common process to produce bio-oil from the
and can generate energy more economically. Biomass production is
biomass and the obtained bio-oil can be further reformed into vehicle
around 8 times higher than the total annual world energy consumption
fuel or valuable chemicals [29].
from other renewable energy sources and currently the largest renew­
Even though the direct combustion is the simplest and most widely
able energy source, with estimated production at 146 million metric
applied process, its thermal efficiency is very low. To solve this problem,
tons a year by mostly wild plants growth [6,12]. Moreover, biomass can
gasification process was developed and has been considered as a more
be used for several sectors, such as heat, power generation, biofuels, and
attractive thermochemical process with much higher efficiency. Besides,
bio-chemicals production (e.g. solvents, adhesives, plastics, inks, and
it can satisfy various purposes such as providing heat, electricity, fuels,
lubricants) [19]. Especially, biomass is also considered as the only
and synthesis of chemicals [30]. Moreover, gasification has many other
renewable energy source that can replace liquid fossil fuels.
advantages such as lower emission of NOx and SOx, lower reaction
Two main ways to convert biomass into energy are the thermo­
temperature, and less requirement of oxygen [31]. Especially, for the
chemical process and the bio-chemical/biological process. Generally,
power generation, it has much higher overall electric efficiency [32].
the thermochemical processes is more efficient than the biological one
Thusly, the gasification should be more suitable for small to medium
due to its short reaction time and high conversion efficiency. For
scale power generation systems. It is reported that, the gasification is
example, lignin can be completely decomposed by the thermochemical
economically feasible for capacities from 5 kWe onwards [33]. There­
process but only partly decomposed by the biological one [11]. Ther­
fore, gasification is expected to be widely applied for the biomass energy
mochemical processes include direct combustion, torrefaction,
conversion in the future. Fig. 5 summarizes various main paths to

3
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

convert biomass into energy [14,20]. cannot be decomposed are called char. The pyrolysis step occurs at a
One of constraints in biomass energy utilization including biomass temperature from ca. 220 � C [30,35]. In the presence of gasifying agent
gasification is biomass feedstock collection, which can increase the cost of oxygen, oxidation or partial combustion is the third step, in which the
of biomass collecting or disturb the process of energy generation. Many volatile compounds and char will be oxidized to CO, CO2, and H2O. This
large-scale biomass gasification system tends to experience this prob­ step usually occurs at a temperature over 700 � C which is the exothermic
lem. Thusly, small scale biomass gasification system, especially with reaction and can supply energy for the pyrolysis and steam gasification
capacity lower than 200 kW, is more preferable which can effectively processes. Reduction step occurs in the presence of other gasifying
utilize locally produced biomass and simultaneously resolve the biomass agents such as steam and CO2, in which the volatile compounds and char
collection problem. To discuss the current state, progress, and utilization will react with these gasifying agents to produce CO, CH4, and H2. These
of the small-scale biomass gasification power generation systems, in this are endothermic reactions, which usually occur at a temperature over
review, recent development of small-scale biomass gasification systems 800 � C, and the last remained residue in the gasifier is ash [36]. In
in the world are summarized in intention to exhibit prospect and chal­ general, a gasification process involves many reactions occurred
lenges in this particular matter. simultaneously. Some reactions are endothermic and the others are
exothermic, and the exothermic process can supply heat for the endo­
2. Gasification technologies thermic one. Table 1 lists the main reactions in the gasification process.
Since gasification itself is a complex process, its efficiency will be
Gasification is a thermochemical process that converts organic or influenced by many factors, which include biomass composition, gasi­
carbonaceous materials into valuable gases, usually called as synthesis fying agents, biomass particle size, operating condition of gasification
gas (syngas), which mainly contains CO, H2, CO2, and CH4 in the pres­ (temperature and pressure), and type of gasifier.
ence of gasifying agent (e.g., controlled amount of air or oxygen, steam,
CO2, or a mixture of these) at a temperature higher than 700 � C [29].
Over 180 years ago, gasification has already been used to produce 2.1. Biomass composition
combustible fuels from organic materials in France, and since 1920,
most of American towns and cities were connected with gas supply Different biomasses always have different compositions, and even
network based on gasification system for cooking and lighting. During the different parts of a same biomass could have different compositions
the World War II, gasification process was used to produce syngas for and characteristics. Actually, heterogeneity of biomass is one of disad­
liquid fuels synthesis based on Fischer-Tropsch process. Since oil crisis in vantages of biomass gasification since it is difficult to determine the
1973, over 12,000 large scale gasifiers with an average capacity of 1 MW optimum operating conditions and final product properties [36]. The
have been built in about 30 years period in America [30]. basic analyses of biomass properties mainly include proximate and ul­
Gasification process generally includes 4 primary steps: heating/ timate analysis, and heating value measurement. By proximate analysis,
drying, decomposition or pyrolysis, oxidation or partial combustion moisture, volatile matter, fixed carbon, and ash contents in the biomass
and/or reduction or gasification. The heating/drying is the first step, in can be known. The moisture content is one of important properties of
which the moisture content in the biomass is vaporized. The typical biomass as it determines energy required at the heating/drying step of
moisture content of fresh biomass is in the range of 30–60%. This step gasification [37]. The volatile matter consists of gases and organic va­
occurs sometimes until a temperature of around 200 C so that the
�
pors including paraffinic and aromatic hydrocarbons and sulfuric com­
moisture content decreases below 15%, which is the optimum moisture pounds resulting from the decomposition at the pyrolysis process whilst
condition for gasification [29,34]. The second step is pyrolysis reaction, the fixed carbon is nonvolatile hydrocarbon fraction of biomass. Tar
in which hemicellulose, cellulose and lignin in the biomass are decom­ from volatile matter in the biomass always results in some troubles in
posed into volatile compounds and solid residues. The volatile com­ gasification process. Meanwhile, by the ultimate analysis, the compo­
pounds consist of small gas molecules and liquid products called tar. The sitions of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, and sulfur in the biomass
component mainly containing solid carbonaceous components that can be known. The carbon content includes fixed carbon in char and
volatile carbon in volatile matters [38]. Components in biomass can be

Fig. 5. Biomass energy conversion pathways [14,20].

4
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

Table 1 2.3. Biomass particle size

Gasification main reactions (Heat of reactions at 25 � C) [34,36].
No. Reaction Type of reaction Biomass particle size has direct impact on the gasification result. In
general, smaller particle size brings in higher gas yield and energy ef­
1 C þ CO2 ↔ 2CO þ172 kJ/ Carbon reaction (Boudouard)
mol ficiency as it has larger specific surface area for the gasification re­
2 C þ H2O ↔ CO þ H2 þ131 kJ/ Carbon reaction (Primary steam actions. Also, the smaller particle size can induce faster heat transfer and
mol reforming) reaction rate [31]. As a result, the gasification with smaller biomass
3 C þ H2O ↔ CO2 þ þ90 kJ/mol Carbon reaction (Secondary steam particle size produces more syngas and less tar as well as char yields. On
H2 reforming)
4 C þ 2H2 ↔ CH4 74.8 kJ/ Hydrogasification
the contrary, the larger biomass particle size the larger heat resistance,
mol resulting in more char produced due to the incomplete decomposition
5 C þ 0.5O2 → CO 111 kJ/ Oxidation reactions process [42].
mol Although the smaller biomass particle size is favorable, it is neces­
6 C þ O2 → CO2 394 kJ/
sary to consider that the energy consumption for reducing the particle
mol
7 CO þ 0.5O2 → CO2 284 kJ/ size should decrease overall energy efficiency. Different types of gas­
mol ifiers have been designed to handle different particle sizes of biomass.
8 CH4 þ 2O2 ↔ CO2 803 kJ/ For example, the entrained flow gasifier is very sensitive to the particle
þ H2O mol size, and it needs the particle size less than 0.15 mm [40]. Although
9 H2 þ 0.5O2 → H2O 242 kJ/
mol
several studies indicate that the effect of particle size is less important
10 CO þ H2O ↔ CO2 þ 41.2 kJ/ Shift reaction than other factors, upstream processing of biomass before supplied to
H2 mol gasifier is still needed to concern.
11 2CO þ 2H2 → CH4 247 kJ/ Methanization reactions
þ CO2 mol
2.4. Operating conditions
12 CO þ 3H2 ↔ CH4 þ 206 kJ/
H2O mol
15 CO2 þ 4H2 → CH4 165 kJ/ Operating conditions of gasification mainly include temperature and
þ 2H2O mol pressure. Temperature is the most important key factor in the gasifica­
13 CH4 þ H2O ↔ CO þ þ206 kJ/ Steam reactions tion process since it directly controls the overall process and the final
3H2 mol
14 CH4 þ 0.5O2 → CO 36 kJ/mol
gasification result. In general, gas composition and yield, gas heating
þ 2H2 value, tar and char produced, carbon conversion, and cold gas efficiency
are all affected by temperature. Higher gasification temperature results
in higher CO and H2 and less tar contents in the gas product with higher
also classified as lignin, hemicellulose, and cellulose. These three com­ heating value. Also, the cold gas efficiency and carbon conversion in­
ponents have different decomposition characteristics in the gasification crease with the increase in temperature [43]. Meanwhile, other factors
process. The more lignin content of biomass, the slower decomposition such as biomass composition and particle size affect the requirement for
of biomass becomes, and a higher temperature for the gasification is the gasification temperature. For instances, biomass with higher lignin
required but a lower gas yield is obtained [39]. content requires higher temperature to obtain more gas product. Also,
larger particle size needs higher temperature to break biomass structure
2.2. Gasifying agents [44]. Normally, gasification is held at a temperature over than 700 � C,
and for the steam gasification, the temperature should be over 750 � C
The gasifying agent always plays an important role in gasification since the spontaneous steam reforming reaction can only occur at such
reaction. Different gasifying agents give different reactivity and gas conditions.
compositions. To date, air or oxygen, steam, carbon dioxide, or their Gasification normally runs at a constant pressure. Nowadays, at­
mixtures are applied for the gasification. Which gasifying agent used for mospheric gasification and pressurized gasification are generally
gasification process depends on the desired gas composition and energy investigated and applied. The atmospheric gasification is more common
consumption [34]. Air is the most common used gasifying agent as it is for the small-scale gasifier since its investment cost is low. In contrast,
cheap and readily available. However, since its high nitrogen content the pressurized gasification is more efficient and gives a higher gasifi­
lowers the heating value of syngas produced, pure oxygen or cation efficiency with lower amount of tar. Moreover, the syngas from
oxygen-rich air is proposed to produce the syngas with higher heating the pressurized gasification is already at the pressurized condition,
value, but it will increase the operating cost due to high energy required which is better for the subsequent utilization. However, the investment
to separate oxygen and nitrogen in air. By using air as the gasifying cost is higher [37]. In addition, from the view of point of chemical
agent, partial oxidation occurs in the gasifier depends on air to fuel ratio equilibrium, it should be noted that the gasification prefers to be done at
or equivalence ratio (ER) between air and biomass used. Normally, ER low pressure and high temperature [42].
value is set to be lower than 1 to avoid complete combustion. Also, ER
ratio is considered as the most important factor to determine final 2.5. Type of gasifier
heating value of syngas obtained. To control the production of tar and
char, reasonable range for ER of gasification process is about 0.2–0.4. Gasifier is the reactor vessel where gasification reactions take place.
Steam is considered as the gasifying agent to obtain more hydrogen and Selecting the type of gasifier depends on the upstream process related to
lower tar in the gasification process whereas the cost is not as high as the biomass properties, product requirements, and gasifying agent. To date,
partial oxidation by using pure oxygen generated from air. However, three types of biomass gasifiers, i.e., fixed bed gasifier, fluidized bed
more energy is required due to the endothermic reactions for primary gasifier, and entrained flow gasifier, are widely applied.
and secondary steam reactions and water gas shift reaction [34,37,40].
Moreover, to solve the slow reaction rate in the steam gasification 2.5.1. Fixed bed gasifier
process, air-steam mixture is always used. In this case, the exothermic Fixed bed or moving bed gasifier is the oldest yet simplest gasifica­
partial oxidations can provide energy for the endothermic reactions. tion system. It is also the most economic one and suitable for the small-
Mixing air with a 40–70 mol% of steam was reported to obtain the scale gasification process. Two types of fixed bed gasifiers, i.e., updraft
optimum gas quality, gas production, and cold gas efficiency in the and downdraft gasifiers, are generally used. In the updraft gasifier,
entrained bed gasifier [41]. biomass is introduced from the top side of vertical vessel reactor with

5
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

the gasifying agent from the bottom side. As such, it is also known as a 2.5.2. Fluidized bed gasifier
counter-current gasifier because biomass and gasifying agents contact The fluidized bed gasifier has enhanced mixing capability and heat
with each other in the counter-current direction. The schematic process transfer rate than the fixed bed gasifier by adopting fluidization mech­
of this type of gasifier is shown in Fig. 6(a). This type is an effective way anism. In the fluidized bed gasifier, the reaction temperature has more
for gasification with a high thermal efficiency since the sensible heat of homogeneous distribution. The decomposition of biomass in the fluid­
hot gas is used for the heating/drying step within the system before ized bed gasifier occurs rapidly with great mixing condition between
leaving from the top side of gasifier at a low temperature (between 200 biomass and gasifying agent, which results in higher reaction rate as
and 400 � C). Therefore, this type of gasifier has high tolerance of well as high efficiency and conversion. This temperature uniformity can
moisture content and can handle biomass with moisture content up to be easily achieved by utilization of bed materials to assist the fluidiza­
60% on wet basis. Moreover, the updraft gasifier also has wide range tion of biomass [49], which allows biomass gasification in the fluidized
tolerance for the particle size, in which 5–100 mm particle size can be bed under nearly isothermal condition. In general, the biomass fluidized
processed [30,45]. However, even though it has high thermal efficiency bed gasification process generally operates at the temperature in the
and low pressure drop, the updraft gasifier is less likely to be used since range of 800–1000 � C [37].
more tar is generally generated in it because the tar from the pyrolysis The bed materials play an important role as heat storage for energy
zone flows upward to the cooler region and cannot reach the high generated from the exothermic reactions and provide it for the endo­
temperature zone so that it has no chance to be converted into gases [35, thermic reactions which need energy. Commonly, inert materials are
46]. used as the bed materials. Silica sand is the most popular one since it is
The downdraft gasifier is the opposite of updraft process in the way inert, cheap with high heat capacity. However, since some alkali com­
of the gasifying agents introduced into the reactor. As shown in Fig. 6(b), pounds contain in the biomass, during the gasification process, these
in downdraft system the gasifying agent is fed in at the top or at sides of alkaline compounds could react with silica to form alkali-silicates at
gasifier, and at the same time, the biomass is also introduced from the high temperatures, resulting in agglomeration. Thus, some natural rock
same top side of reactor. As such, the direction of contact becomes co- materials such as olivine and dolomites can be used to substitute silica
current. That is to say, the contact of biomass and gasifying agent sand. In-bed additives like calcium oxide and kaolin can be also added
takes place along with the gasification steps, resulting better quality of into the fluidized bed to help reducing agglomeration. Recently, some
the produced gas which leaves the reactor from bottom side. In this case, bed materials with catalytic activity are also considered in order to
the tar production is low since the devolatilization products can reach reduce the gasification temperature and enhance the syngas quality and
the high temperature oxidation zone despite the residence time in that gasification efficiency [36].
zone is not long enough to convert all the tar completely [45]. However, The fluidized bed gasifier can treat a large amount of biomass
the heat transfer between hot and cold zones inside the reactor is very continuously and is easily scaled up. Thusly, it is suitable for the medium
poor, causing the tolerance of moisture content is lower. Thusly, only to large scale gasification systems with high cold gas efficiency. It is
biomass with a moisture content lower than 30% is acceptable to be reported that the conversion in the fluidized bed gasifier can reach up to
processed. Moreover, the biomass residence time in the reactor is shorter 95%, but the biomass particle size should be less than 20 mm [30,45].
because the biomass moves downward faster due to the drag force is Moreover, tar formation is still the main problem in this system.
aligned in the same direction as the gravity. As such, the efficiency of Bubbling fluidized bed gasifier (BFBG) and circulating fluidized bed
carbon conversion is lower than that in the updraft gasifier. In addition, gasifier (CFBG) are two main types of fluidized bed gasifiers. BFBG
blocking, channeling, and bridging occurs in this gasifier so that the operates at a fluidization velocity normally below than 5 m/s or in range
uniform particle size is required to prevent these phenomena. In general, of 1–3 m/s to create particle and bubble emulsions in the bed. The
acceptable particle size for this type is in the range from 40 to 100 mm. gasifying agent serves as the fluidization gas. This type of gasifier pro­
This type gasifier is suitable for the small-scale power plant application vides good flexibility for handling the biomass materials so that it is
with the typical capacity in the range of 10 kW-1 MW [47, 48]. suitable for wide range of biomass types. The major disadvantage is its
low efficiency since the gasification takes place in fluidization phase

Fig. 6. Schematic of (a) updraft and (b) downdraft gasifier designs [30].

6
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

where low dissemination of gasifying agent from bubble state to emul­ Table 2
sion state always exists [37,50]. To date, tar formation is still the main Comparison of three types of gasifiers [36,54,55].
problem in this system. In contrast, CFBG operates at three to five times Type of gasifier Advantages and disadvantages
higher fluidization velocity than BFBG, and the fluidization phase per­
Fixed bed Updraft Wide range of particle size (5–100 mm) and
forms in a turbulent state. It drives better mixing of biomass with the bed gasifier moisture (up to 60%) handling.
materials and gasifying agent in a short residence time, which can High carbon conversion.
improve the heat transfer and enhance the reaction rate. Since the solid High tar production.
amounts in the freeboard segment are too high so that the recirculation High particles content in gas.
Suitable for small- medium scale gasification
of solid particles is required. As a result, CFBG has better gasification plant.
efficiency and higher carbon conversion with very low tar yield. Since a Simple design, low investment cost, simple
large amount of materials can be well operated in a CFBG, it is more operability.
suitable for the large-scale gasification system. However, CFBG design is Downdraft Moderate range of particle size (40–100 mm) and
moisture (up to 30%) handling.
much more complex and higher investment and operating cost are
Lower carbon conversion and efficiency than
necessary [51]. Fig. 7 shows the schematic of both BFBG and CFBG updraft.
designs. Low tar production.
Low particles content in gas.
2.5.3. Entrained flow gasifier Suitable for small-scale gasification plant.
Simple design, low investment cost, simple
Entrained flow gasifier is suitable for handling very fine particles, operability.
normally with particle sizes less than 75–100 μm. It is firstly designed to Fluidized bed Bubbling Various biomass handling.
gasify the fine coal at high temperatures ranged from 1400 to 1800 � C gasifier Require uniform particle size.
and high pressure of 20–70 bar to ensure all tar decomposition for the High carbon conversion and efficiency.
Low tar production.
generation of tar-free-syngas. Residence time in it is very short, only
Uniform gas quality.
around 1–5 s. Due to small particle size and high temperature and Suitable for medium scale gasification capacity.
pressure, the carbon conversion is almost 100%. However, high in­ Circulating Various biomass handling.
vestment and operating cost are also necessary. Nowadays, it is most Require uniform particle size.
applied in the commercial coal processing with Integrated Gasification Very high carbon conversion and efficiency.
Low tar production.
Combined Cycle (IGCC) system. Some companies and institutes such as
Uniform gas quality.
CHOREN, Range Fuels, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Pearson Technol­ Suitable for medium-large scale gasification
ogy, and Karlsruhe Institute of Technology also applied it for biomass capacity.
gasification [51–53]. Complex design, high investment cost, and
difficult operability.
Table 2 summarizes the above three types of gasifiers [37,54,55].
Entrained flow gasifier Not suitable for biomass.
More details on the comparison of the fixed bed and fluidized bed gas­ Fine particle size is required.
ifiers can be found in the literature [55]. Parameters discussed above are Very high carbon conversion and efficiency.
effecting each other in determining gasification efficiency. Since gasi­ (Almost) Free tar production.
fication itself consists of many complex reactions, those external pa­ Suitable for large scale capacity.
Complex design, high investment cost, difficult
rameters should control the final result of overall gasification process.
operability.
Therefore, it is necessary to carefully consider the gasification system
design in order to bring better quality of syngas, better system efficiency,
and lower investment as well as operating cost. In addition, full un­
derstanding the composition and energy density of biomass feedstock is

Fig. 7. Schematic of (a) bubbling (b) circulating fluidized bed gasifier [30].

7
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

also important. For example, moisture content information guides to the earth and limited by climate, geographical environment and season.
suitable pre-treatment method to reduce the moisture content to the It always takes a high cost to collect biomass from mountains and
level that can be handled by the selected gasifier. Proximate and ulti­ agriculture lands. It is more feasible to utilize biomass energy directly in
mate analysis helps to determine ER value and/or steam to carbon ratio the biomass production areas such as villages and rural areas with
for gasifying agent used in the process. Moreover, before selecting the abundant biomass resources. Thusly, the small-scale gasification power
type of gasifier and its operating conditions, it is required to know the plants with capacities in the range of 10–200 kWe should be available
purpose of the syngas utilization at first, and before designing gasifier and as such, the regional biomass energy can be fully and cheaply used.
suitable residence time should be considered for gasification reaction to This is very important strategy in the future. Herein, the research and
be occurred. Meanwhile, selecting the proper temperature is also development (R&D) and application states on the small scale gasifica­
important for determining of the carbon conversion, syngas amount and tion systems for power generation (<200 kWe) around the world are
composition, and impurities generated that leads to the selection of reviewed and the challenges and prospects on it are out-looked.
proper end process. By conceiving all information about those param­
eters, the most effective and efficient gasification system can be 4.1. Asia
arranged.
Asia is the area where biomass gasification technology is most widely
3. Syngas utilization applied in the world. Many Asian countries are still in the developing
stage and have abundant biomass resources. In recent years, to solve the
Synthesis gas or syngas is the main product from a gasification energy and environmental issues, many Asian countries pay more and
process. Synthesis gas term is used because the product gases mainly more attentions on the development and application of biomass energy
contain CO and H2, which are the basic chemicals to produce many and more and more small-scale biomass gasification systems have been
complex chemicals for various applications such as hydrogen produc­ developed and utilized in daily life.
tion, synthetic liquid fuels through Fischer-Tropsch process, synthetic
natural gas (S-NG), synthetic chemicals like ammonia, methanol and its 4.1.1. China
derivatives, and dimethyl ether. Syngas is also a popular alternative China is a leader on utilizing gasification technology in Asia, but
energy source for power generation [35]. mainly to convert coal into energy and chemicals. Besides coal, China
Conventionally, direct combustion of syngas is used to generate has enormous amount of biomass resources mainly from agricultural
steam for power generation via steam turbine, but this way limits the and forest sectors. However, in the past, these biomass resources were
total electricity efficiency due to the theoretical thermal efficiency burned out outside or let them naturally rotted, resulting in serious
limitation of steam turbine. Thus, the syngas is directly used in gas environmental problems. Thusly, how to completely and effectively
turbine for power generation. CHP and IGCC generation system are two utilize them becomes urgent issue. One of the solutions is to transfer
most popular technologies to utilize syngas for the large scale power them to electricity by using gasification technology.
generation, in which combustion of hot syngas in gas turbine to generate Appearance of biomass gasification power plant in China can be
power in topping cycle and steam generation from hot exhaust gas of gas traced back to 1960s when a 60 kW rice hull gasification power gener­
turbine to generate power from steam turbine through heat recovery ation system was applied. Nowadays, the gasification system with ca­
generator are combined. Such processes have much more advantages pacities 160–200 kW are still applied in many small rice husk
over the direct combustion due to their high thermal efficiency and low gasification power plants [59]. In China, CHP system becomes more and
NOx and SOx emissions. To date, the IGCC electricity efficiency has more popular, in which sometimes biomass gasification system is
reached over 42% [56]. included. The CHP system to combine gasifier for power generation with
Alternative method to generate power from syngas is by using in­ heating and cooking application is generally the most economic
ternal combustion engine (ICE), which is the most vital technology for configuration used since the surplus energy can be supplied to electricity
power generation with variable power outputs. Its advantages include grid that extends to most rural areas in China. For example, one CHP
low cost, reliable, high operating efficiency, and flexible for mobile as gasification system with 200 kW capacity by using corn stalks as the fuel
well as stationery applications. Moreover, ICE technology is not so can serve about 200 households in a village [60]. Nowadays, in China,
sensitive to gas impurities compared to gas turbine so that it has cost the development of biomass gasification technology is being undertaken
competitiveness. In ICE, spark ignition (SI) in carbureted and port in­ by many institutes, and most of them are the members of China Biomass
jection type and dual-fuel compression ignition (CI) are two operation Development Center (CBDC). Recently, a small 10 kW gasification
ways. Like Otto/gasoline engine, SI needs air and spark to combust power generation system for the utilization of sawdust and a 160 kW
syngas in a combustion chamber. In comparison, CI works like diesel gasification power generation system by using rice husk have been
engine that needs compression to auto-ignite the syngas while diesel commercialized. Both of them used downdraft flow-type gasifiers with
used as pilot fuel and syngas introduced through engine intake air to air as the gasifying agent [61]. Some companies have successfully
provide the bulk of the fuel charged. Herein, the syngas can substitute commercialized biomass power plants with capacity 200 kW to 5.5 MW,
60–90% of diesel fuel required to operate the engine at the same power which are summarized in Table 3.
level. Compared to CI way, SI is more suitable for syngas engines [57,
58]. 4.1.2. Japan
Syngas from biomass gasification is a potential electricity source for Since the oil crisis in 1970s, Japan has already started to do R&D in
village and rural areas. However, the substantial challenges for this biomass energy utilization. In 2002, a committee named “Biomass
application is development of small-scale gasification system with Nippon Strategy” was created to expand biomass utilization and develop
acceptable investment cost equipped with efficient clean gas technology various technologies for the application of biomass energy. Most areas of
to support appropriate operation of gas engines and a flexible system to Japan are decentralized and the regional areas seem to be more suitable
utilize various types of biomass [31]. for biomass energy utilization [62]. To date, many small-scale biomass
gasification power plants with capacity ranged from 35 to 200 kW have
4. Small-scale gasification systems for power generation been installed around Japan. But most of them use woody biomass as the
fuel source. Also, almost all these small-scale power plants apply a CHP
Many large-scale biomass-based power generation plants have been system in order to increase the total energy efficiency. Table 4 sum­
built in the world. However, some of them face the problem of biomass maries the small-scale biomass gasification power plants located around
resource shortages. Unlike fossil fuels, biomass are widely distributed on Japan and the makers of these system [63].

8
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

Table 3 In 2009, Ankur Scientific built 20 kWe biomass gasification system in

Small-scale biomass gasification systems commercialized in China [30]. Maharashtra to provide electricity to school and hostel with total 1200
Company/ Gasifier types Capacity Biomass students and two 10 kWe gasifiers to provide electricity to 150 people at
organization the remote village of Kandhal, Odisha. Another project is a 10 kWe
Huairou Wood Downdraft 200 kW Sawdust biomass gasification system to electrify 100 houses in Thakurwadi.
Equipment Meanwhile, Ankur Scientific has also some other projects outside India
Huantai Integrate Gas Downdraft 300 kW Crop residues [66]. Also in 2009, Saran Renewable Energy Pvt Ltd successfully applied
Supply System biomass gasification system with a capacity of 128 kW which replaced
Tianyan Ltd. Downdraft 200 kW Agriculture and forestry
waste
diesel generators to electrify farms and households in Bihar for a dis­
Tianyan Ltd. Fluidized bed 1 MW Agriculture and forestry tance of 1.5 km [67].
waste
GIEC Circulating 200- Agriculture and forestry 4.1.4. Bangladesh
fluidized bed 1200 kW waste
As an agrarian country, biomass energy has very high potential in
GIEC Circulating 5.5 MW Rice husk, straw, wood
fluidized bed sawdust, peanut hull Bangladesh. Nevertheless, development of biomass gasification is still
not massive in Bangladesh since Bangladesh more focuses on biogas
development and over 22,000 biogas plants have been installed. The
pioneer biomass gasification project is two 125 kWe rice husk gasifiers
Table 4
built at Gaspur village in Kapasia of Gazipur District. Unfortunately, this
Small-scale biomass gasification systems launched in Japan [63].
project is now facing some problems since it locates in rural area where
Company/organization Type of gasifier Capacity Feedstock
it lacks of skilled operators, improper guidelines, poor management,
Chugai Ro Co., Ltd. Rotary Kiln 15–180 kW Woody/ lack of government control, and technical and financial problems [68].
herbaceous
Tsukishima Kikai Co., Downdraft 100–200 kW Woody
4.1.5. Thailand
Ltd
Kawasaki Heavy Downdraft 100–200 kW Woody Thailand is the most developed country on biomass energy utiliza­
Industries, Ltd. Fluidized bed 150 kW Woody tion in Southeast Asia. In 2011, it is reported that 14 biomass gasifica­
Satake Corporation Downdraft 10–100 kW Woody/ tion power plants with a total capacity of 5.4 MWe were installed in
herbaceous/
Thailand [69]. As a tropical country with abundant biomass resource,
agricultural
residue the government also supports the development by implementing
Shinko Plantech Co., Updraft 55 kW Manure acceptable feed in tariff, which is good for renewable energy business
Ltd, Otomo Co., and climate in the country. Nowadays, development of biomass gasification
Toyo System Co., Ltd systems in Thailand is still on going. Table 5 summaries the small-scale
Yagi Kensetsu Co. and Two-step steam 30 kW Wasted wood chip
biomass gasification systems set up in Thailand.
Ube Techno Eng. Co., reforming
Ltd
Tokyo Gas Co., Ltd and Circulated 157 kW Sludge 4.2. Europe
Takuma Co., Ltd Fluidized bed
Meidensha Corporation Updraft 36 kW Woody
Biomass gasification technology is very developed in Europe region.
Shimizu Corporation Suspension/ 30 kW Woody waste
external heat type paper Especially, many small scale biomass gasification systems were firstly
gasification developed in Europe for research and demonstration purposes. In 1993,
Yanmar Holdings Co. Downdraft 35 kW a 100 kWe downdraft biomass gasifier was developed at Agricultural
Ltd College in Ennishillen, Nothern Ireland. Thereafter, in 1996, a France
company Martezo developed a 135 kWe downdraft biomass gasifier at
4.1.3. India Hølgild, Denmark [70]. Many countries are now leading for the utili­
Biomass gasification has been rapidly utilized in India in recent years zation of gasification across Europe region.
and many small-scale gasification systems have been developed and
applied. The first installed biomass gasifier in India was developed by 4.2.1. Germany
Indian Institute of Science in 1988 at Hosahalli, a village located at Germany is one of countries in Europe that has high concern about
100 km away from Bangalore in Tumkur District, Karnataka. This is a renewable energy. In 2017, renewable energy contributes 13.1% of total
dual fuel biomass gasification system coupled with diesel engine with a energy consumption in Germany, in which biomass energy occupies
total capacity of 3.75 kWe to supply electricity for domestic and street 54.1% and among all bioenergy generated from biomass, the biogas
lighting and pipe drinking water supplying for 45 households. In 1997, obtained from anaerobic digestion process contributes the most with
this system was improved to a capacity of 20 kWe. Another success story approximately 63.2% [71]. Meanwhile, biomass gasification
is the construction of five biomass gasification systems with each ca­
pacity of 100 kWe for electrification of 5 villages with more than 10,000 Table 5
people in Gosaba Island of Sundarbans, West Bengal, around 115 km far Small-scale biomass gasification systems launched in Thailand [69].
from Calcutta in 1997. With the support from the government, Ministry Type of Capacity Feedstock Remarks
of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), as a part of Global Environment Gasifier
Facility (GEF) with partners from the United Nations Development Downdraft 20 kWe Rice husk Community Demonstration Plant at
Programme (UNDP), has many projects to implement bio-energy, Ban Non Muay
especially biomass gasification for rural energy. One of the projects is Downdraft 10 kWe Woodchip Developed by Naresuan University
Downdraft 100 kWe Rice husk and Developed by Suranaree University
Biomass Energy for Rural India (BERI), which was undertaken by the wood of Technology co-operated by Satake
Government of Karnataka, implemented in 5 village clusters with total Co. (Japan)
of 26 villages in the state of Karnataka. Six gasification power plants Downdraft 100 kWe Woodchip Prachuap Khiri Khan Province
were built with total capacity 880 kWe in this project [64,65]. Downdraft 30 kWe Charcoal Developed by Rajamangala
University of Technology
Ankur Scientific, one of the companies that support biomass gasifi­
Downdraft 80 kWe Woodchip and For water pumping system at
cation in India, has some small projects for rural electrification in India. corn cob Ubonratchthani province

9
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

development in Germany was started in 1994 and two German com­ Table 6
panies became the leader of this area. One is Bio-Heizstoffwerk Berlin Companies and technology suppliers of small scale biomass gasification power
GmbH, who provided the biomass gasifiers with capacities ranged from plants in Europe [75,82,83].
10 to 500 kWe for different clients. The other is Wamsler Umwelttechnik Companies and technology suppliers Country Type of gasifier
GmbH, who provided larger scale biomass gasifiers with capacities from Burkhardt Germany Downdraft
600 kW to 11 MW [69]. About 50 wood gasifiers were built from 2000 to AHT Pyrogas Germany Downdraft
2010, and 25 among them installed at 2008 with capacities ranging from Spanner Re2 GmbH Germany Downdraft
10 to 270 kW. In 2011, a biomass gasifier with a capacity of 300 kW was Holzenergie Wegscheld GmbH Germany Downdrat
BR Energy Group Switzerland Fixed bed
installed in the recycling park of Brandholz in Usingen [67]. IEA Bio­
DASAG Switzerland Stratified
energy Conference in Berlin in 2015 reported that until 2014 nearly Xylowatt Belgium Downdraft
about 400 biomass gasification plants have been built in Germany which SRC Gazel Belgium –
provide about 35 MW electricity in the country. Some companies like Urbas Energietechnik Austria Fixed bed
Burkhardt GmbH, Spanner Re2 GmbH, and Holzenergie Wegscheid Bio&Watt Italy Downdraft
DTU Denmark Two-stage downdraft
GmbH are managing more than 5 small-scale biomass gasification plants Shawton Engineering UK Downdraft
each [72].

4.2.2. Denmark Theoritically, the biomass gasification power plant should be more
Denmark is another country in Europe with high concern about suitable for them. However, until now, only a few biomass gasification
biomass gasification development. The Danish government has a target power generation systems can be found in Africa zone. Biomass gasifi­
for using 100% renewable energy system in 2050 and is trying to fully cation utilization in Africa started in early 1990 when a rice husk gasi­
recover electricity from it in 2035. R&D program about electricity from fication unit was operated in Molodo, Mali [67]. Unfortunately, since
biomass in Denmark has already started since 2003 [73]. Even before then, biomass gasification project in Africa is developed slowly, espe­
such a program was starting, a two-stage gasifier named “Viking” was cially the small-scale ones. One of small-scale biomass gasification
developed by Technical University of Denmark (DTU) in 2002 with a power plants with dual engine developed by Ankur Scientific (India) is
capacity of 75 kW by using woodchip as the feedstock [74]. Nowadays, located in Mukono, Uganda with a capacity of about 10 kWe and
Denmark has three large-scale CHP biomass gasification plants with operated in 2006 using eucalyptus as the feedstock [84]. In 2010,
capacities of 3.5 MWe, 5.5 MW, and 20 MW, respectively. Babcock & Eecofuels, a renewable energy company at South Africa, launched a
Wilcox Vølund, one of gasification technology supplier in Denmark has 120 kW biomass gasification power plant at Honeydew, Johannesburg
been successfully commercialized a small scale biomass gasification [85]. Also in South Africa, a downdraft gasifier with a capacity of
CHP project with capacity 650 kWe called Harbøre Plant [75]. Other 30–500 kW developed by SystBM Johansson gas producer to utilize
plants are in pilot or demonstration status with the medium-scale ca­ woody biomass wastes [30]. Meanwhile, some large scale biomass
pacity higher than 500 kWe [73,76]. gasification power plants can be found in Tanzania, Uganda, and
Burundi. Many published documents discussed the potential of biomass
4.2.3. Sweden gasification power generation systems in African countries but not so
Sweden’s interest in biomass energy was started from the year of many implementations have been found until now.
1970 with the goal of at least 50% energy of the country in 2020 sup­
ported by renewable energy [73]. Even so, implementation of biomass 4.4. North America
gasification technology in Sweden is not as fast as that in Denmark or
Germany. One large-scale biomass gasification plant with a capacity of Gasification technology thrived in America in 1920 as many Amer­
80–100 MW was operated in 2016 financed by NER300 program [77]. A ican towns were connected with a gas supply system for cooking and
commercial small-scale biomass gasification plant named Emamejeriet lighting. As the most developed country, the power generation and
CHP biomass gasification plant was also built in Hultsfred with a ca­ distribution systems have been perfectly established. The purpose of
pacity of about 100 kWe. Another gasification plant by Chemrec was biomass gasification in America is to substitute fossil fuel utilization, and
used for the conversion of black liquor to bio-DME. R&D about the the capacity of biomass gasification power plants always have large
biomass gasification in Sweden is still ongoing [78]. capacity to support grid distribution. It is reported that there are 188
biomass based power plants throughout America, the largest one has a
4.2.4. Other European Countries capacity of about 117 MW [86,87]. Biomass Magazine reported that the
Only a few information on the small-scale biomass gasification pro­ biomass based power plants in America have a total capacity of 23,
jects can be found in other countries in Europe. In Austria, some com­ 035 MW, but only two of them have the capacity below 1 MW: one is
mercial CHP wood gasification power plants were operated in 2008, City of Covington Waste-To-Energy Gasification Plant in Tennessee, a
which were developed by Urbas Energietechnik with capacities of gasification based power plant with a capacity of 125 kW operated since
around 100–150 kWe [79]. In Italy, about 152 biomass gasification 2013, and the other is Sullivan County Biomass Project in New Hamp­
power plants had been installed by 2016 with a total capacity over than shire with a capacity of 40 kW [87]. In Canada, National Energy Board of
30 MWe, with about 81% of these biomass power plants have capacities Canada reported that there are approximately 70 biomass based power
between 20 and 200 kWe and supply about 45% power distribution in plants operated in Canada in 2015 with a total capacity of 2408 MW but
Italy [80]. In Switzerland, two biomass gasification power plants have no plants with a capacity lower than 10 MW [88].
been operated, one is a 45 kW downdraft gasifier since 2012 and the
other is a 125 kW downdraft gasifier since 2015 [81]. Table 6 summaries 4.5. Other parts of the World
some small scale biomass gasification companies and technologies
suppliers originated from Europe [75,82,83]. 4.5.1. Central America
Central America comprises many island countries between North
4.3. Africa America and South America. Their geographical condition causes
countries in this region to have no fossil fuels supply. In 2013, about
Many African countries are agrarian with many forestry biomass 62% power generation in Central America region supplied by renewable
resources, and at the same time, many African countries still have big energy, but primarily hydropower. In the same year, biomass energy
problem with their electricity generation and distribution system. contributes about 38% of total energy use in Central America. But those

10
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

biomass energy is utilized traditionally, primarily for cooking and gasification system is more important, especially in the developing and
household utilization [89]. Even though biomass is mostly used for undeveloped countries. To date, almost all commercial small-scale
energy supply in Central America, development of biomass gasification biomass gasification system use the fixed-bed type gasifiers, e.g.,
is not applied in this region. Two projects financed by UNIDO can be downdraft and updraft gasifiers, with low gasification efficiency. For
found in Cuba. That is, one medium-scale biomass gasification project scaling up the applications of the small-scale biomass gasification sys­
with a capacity of 0.5–2 MW was built at La Melvis and one small-scale tem for power generation, it is necessary to develop new-type gasifiers
project with a capacity of 50 kW at Cocodrillo [90]. In Costa Rica, three with high efficiency but low cost.
small scale biomass gasification projects with capacity of 20 kW can be
found at Puriscal, Heredia, and Cartago [91]. Due to the increase of 5.1.1. New type gasifier development
energy demand, their biomass potential, and limitation on energy sup­ Fluidized-bed type gasifiers, especially circulating fluidized bed
ply, biomass gasification in Central America can be pushed more to gasifiers such as the dual-bed gasifier with a high a efficiency have been
flourish. widely applied in large-scale power generation systems. How to minia­
turize such systems and let them work efficiently in the small-scale is full
4.5.2. South America of challenge. Especially, the novel small-scale biomass gasification sys­
Even though South America region has a great potential for the tem should be suitable for various types of biomass. The present small
biomass production and utilization for energy, the popular renewable gasifiers are more suitable for the high quality biomass resources like
energy utilization in South America is also hydropower. For instance, woody biomass. For some low-quality biomass resources such as rice
Brazil is now rank the third in the world for hydroelectricity generation husk, straw, and wood barks, a large amount of tar and ash will be
[92]. However, the main biomass utilization for energy is bioethanol produced which could make some troubles in these small-scale systems.
production from sugarcane. In 2018, bioethanol production in Brazil Hence, the new type small-scale biomass gasification system should
reached more than 30 billion liters which is converted from 61% sug­ consider the tar and ash problems. It is reported that the tar amount can
arcane production in the country [93]. For the biomass gasification, very be minimized by using two-stage gasification system combined with
limited information can be found while some small projects are reported pyrolysis process upfront [10]. However, this design will enlarge the
in Chile, Argentina, Colombia and Ecuador. Both of Universidad gasifier size and increase the operation difficulty and making cost. The
Nacional de Colombia in Colombia and Universidad de las Fuerzas Ar­ other way is the post treatment of tar in the produced gas by syngas
madas in Ecuador made 10 kW prototype projects for biomass gasifica­ cleaning system or using catalysts. Moreover, if a separated biomass
tion. While in Argentina, biomass gasification pilot project with a gasification system as shown in Fig. 8, in which biomass pyrolysis,
capacity of 380 kVA was built at Resitencia [91]. biochar gasification and tar reforming are performed separately like
those in a large-scale triple-bed gasification system [99,100], can be
4.5.3. Australia and Oceania designed and realized, the gasification efficiency could improve sharply.
Renewable energy utilization in Australia is quite developed. In
2016, the renewable energy contributes to 16% electricity generation 5.1.2. Economic analysis
with 10% of it comes from biomass or 1.4% of total generation. Economic topic on a biomass gasification system for the power
Australian government also concerns much about the renewable energy, generation purpose will always be related to the cost on building the
it is represented by their policy called Renewable Energy Target, in power generation system and the financial profit by selling the gener­
which at least 20% of electricity in Australia by 2020 will come from the ated electricity. While the cost spent represented by the investment cost
renewable energy. In 2018, about 127 MW electricity in Australia of the project, the minimum electricity price reflected by levelized cost
generated from wood wastes processed in 16 power stations [94,95]. of electricity (LCOE). An economic analysis for the biomass gasification
Unfortunately, there is no commercial biomass gasification plant re­
ported to be located across all Australia region. Only combustion
method is applied for the generation of heat and power.
Renewable energy supports 39.6% of primary energy generation in
New Zealand in 2017, with geothermal energy of about 55.4%. Woody
biomass energy supplies 16.8% of renewable energy contribution or
6.6% of total energy generation [96]. Currently, there are no commer­
cial biomass gasification systems applied in New Zealand although a
R&D test facility of biomass gasification with a capacity of 1.5 MW is in
operation in Rotorua which used the technology of Agder Biocom from
Norway through a joint venture of Waiariki Institute of Technology
(WIT) and EECA. University of Canterbury is now focusing on R&D for
the integration of syngas/producer gas systems for the electricity gen­
eration from forest residues [97,98]. In other Pacific island countries
and Papua New Guinea, limited information can be obtained for their
recent biomass gasification development.

5. Trends and perspectives

5.1. Techno-economic analysis

Medium and large-scale biomass gasification systems with capacities

over than 1 MW are becoming the first choice for power generation all
over the world, especially in the developed countries since they not only
have lower investment cost per energy amount generated, but also
significantly affect the power distribution in one country or region.
However, for the full utilization of biomass energy in regional or remote Fig. 8. Schematic diagram of novel three-bed gasification system including
areas, development and application of the small-scale biomass pyrolyzer, gasifier, and tar reformer reactor [100].

11
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

power plant in rural areas in Indonesia [101] indicated that the fixed 5.3. Practical implication
bed downdraft technology coupled with internal combustion engine has
a total investment of 563 USD/kWe with LCOE at 0.084 USD/kWh, in Even though the technologies about gasification are now quite
which around 24% of investment is for the gasification unit, 54% for the established and many technology suppliers are able to supply appro­
gas engine and electrical supporting system, and the rest is for any other priate technology for the small-scale biomass gasification system but the
cost, such as procurement and transportation of raw materials. Other implementations are still limited. One of the main challenge is still the
study on the feasibility of small-scale biomass gasification power plant cost to build a small-scale biomass gasification power generation sys­
in Brazil [102] indicated that the capital cost for the power plant is about tems. Especially, it is still too high for those developing and undeveloped
1267 USD/kWe with a LCOE at 0.53 USD/kWh. Carrara in his thesis countries. Accordingly, the researches on the development of lower
reported that for the gasification system coupling with internal gas en­ budget technologies with high efficiency are required. Foreign invest­
gine combustion with a capacity of 100 kWe has the investment cost ment to build some pilot projects and willingness from local government
about 1200–3300 €/kWe (906–2491 USD/kWe based on 2010 exchange to support through proper feed-in-tariff setting in the developing and
rate) whereas the cost of 1 MW and 5 MW systems are 900–1800 €/kWe undeveloped countries are still expected. Collaboration from technology
and 700–1300 €/kWe, respectively [103]. As summarized by Interna­ and machinery suppliers can make commercialization and industriali­
tional Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) [104], for the small-scale zation of small-scale biomass gasification power generation systems
fixed-bed biomass gasification power plants (up to 600 kW) with inter­ become more reliable.
nal combustion engine, the average LCOE value is ranged from 0.065 to
0.24 USD/kWh. Although the cost for the application of small-scale 6. Conclusions
biomass gasification power systems in different countries are different,
the cost is still high for massive applications. Biomass is a very potentially alternative energy source, which can be
effectively converted to electricity by the gasification process. Biomass
5.2. Environmental and policy analysis energy has many advantages environmentally and economically when
compared to fossil fuel applications. Biomass energy is actually very
5.2.1. Environmental analysis suitable for the scattered and localized utilization, and the small-scale
Environmental issues on the utilization of biomass gasification sys­ biomass gasification power generation system is a very important
tem can be considered from two points i.e., biomass cultivation and technology for the local electricity supply, especially where the elec­
impact on the environment from biomass gasification itself. Biomass trification ratio is still low and electricity distribution system is not well
cultivation brings effect on the land use, land opening, water usage, and established.
fertilizer application on soil. Meanwhile, the impacts on the environ­ Many countries and regions have huge market potentials for the
ment from the biomass gasification specifically include greenhouse gas application of the small-scale biomass gasification system. Asian coun­
(GHG) emission and release of hazardous gas and particles. Many re­ tries, especially in the Southeast Asian region near equator area, are now
ports on life cycle assessment (LCA) on bioenergy utilization concluded in deeply concern about developing the small-scale biomass gasification
that the perennial energy crops cultivation can reduce GHG emission power generation systems. The same advantages are also possessed by
about 5 mg/ha of fossil-C and 40–50% of NO2 emission compared to some African and South American countries. In addition, Island regions
fossil fuels. Another LCA report also indicated that the cultivation of such as Central America and Oceania hold large potential since they
perennial grasses on the marginal land and the utilization of them for have limitation on energy supply. Unfortunately, since the cost of
power generation can save about 13 tCO2 eq./ha/year [105]. As such, the developing small-scale biomass gasification system is still high, the
application of small-scale biomass gasification system just accommo­ implementations in those countries and regions are very slow.
dates the small amount of biomass resources while the impact on the Every stakeholder holds a significant role on the implementation of
land-use should be low. Meanwhile, it can fully utilize local produced the small-scale biomass gasification power generation systems. While
biomass or agricultural residues, which is also benefit for the regional the local government is securing the business climate through policy
environment since it is also easier to control the GHG emission and the making, the collaboration between local and foreign investments with
release of hazardous materials. technology suppliers could accelerate commercialization and industri­
alization of the system. It is expected that the local community in agri­
5.2.2. Policy analysis culture and plantation area gives huge contribution on biomass
Government support on bioenergy development policy in a country feedstock procurement. As such, the small-scale biomass gasification
is usually pictured as the feed in tariff and incentive value. While LCOE system will be widely applied in the world, and the biomass residues can
can be described as the average minimum price of electricity as the be fully and effectively used for our energy requirements.
power plant project has breakeven point at its lifetime, feed in tariffs are
described as electricity prices that are paid to energy producers for en­ Acknowledgements
ergy produced and distributed by the electricity grid. Therefore, if the
project can be decided as profitable one, the feed in tariff should be This work is supported by Institute of Regional Innovation and Hir­
higher than LCOE of the project while the extra incentive value can osaki University, Japan. Y. A. Situmorang gratefully acknowledges the
decrease the investment cost to lower the LCOE. In the Indonesia case scholarship from Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and
study mentioned above, the feed in tariff is ranged in 0.067–0.116 USD/ Technology (MEXT) of Japan, and Z. Zhao greatly acknowledges China
kWh that makes the project might be slightly profitable [101]. However, Scholarship Council (CSC), China.
in the Brazil case, the feed in tariff is only 0.12 USD/kWh, which is 4.4
times lower than the LCOE, indicating that the project is not profitable at References
all [102]. Compared to IRENA’s average LCOE value [104], both case
studies seem to have problem to make profit from the projects. Thusly, to [1] IEA. Monthly energy review June 2018. International Energy Agency; 2018.
[2] IEA. Key world energy statistics. International Energy Agency; 2017.
support the small-scale biomass gasification power generation devel­ [3] BP. Energy outlook 2018. British Petroleum Energy Economics; 2018.
opment, the country should have proper policy that makes business [4] IEA. International energy outlook 2017. International Energy Agency; 2017.
climate realizing profitable project. [5] Boehm RF, Yang H, Yan J. Introduction: renewable energy. Handbook of clean
energy systems. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2015. p. 1–7.
[6] Ladanai S, Vinterb€ack J. Global potential of sustainable biomass for energy. SLU;
2009.

12
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

[7] Madadian E, Lefsrud M, Lee CAP, Roy Y. Green energy production: the potential [43] Taba LE, Irfan MF, Daud WAMW, Chakrabarti MH. The effect of temperature on
of using biomass gasification. J Green Eng 2014;4:101–16. various parameters in coal, biomass and co-gasification: a review. Renew Sustain
[8] Kontor SB. Potential of biomass gasification and combustion technology for Energy Rev 2012;16:5584–96.
small- and medium-scale applications in Ghana. Vaasan Ammattikorkeakoulu [44] Lv PM, Xiong ZH, Chang J, Wu CZ, Chen Y, Zhu JX. An experimental study on
University of Applied Science 2013:4–5. biomass air–steam gasification in a fluidized bed. Bioresour Technol 2004;95:
[9] IEA. Electricity from biomass: from small to large scale. IEA Bioenergy 2013:4–7. 95–101.
ExCo:2015:02. [45] Kouhia M. Biomass gasification. Department of Energy Technology Aalto
[10] Bhavanam A, Sastry RC. Biomass gasification processes in downdraft fixed bed University School of Engineering; 2011.
reactors: a review. In: International Journal of Chemical Engineering and [46] Kumar Y. Biomass gasification - a review. Int J Eng Stud Tech Approach 2015;01:
Applications. vol. 2; 2011. p. 425–33. 12–28.
[11] Zhang L, Xu CC, Champagne P. Overview of recent advances in thermo-chemical [47] Susastriawan AAP, Saptoadi H, Purnomo. Small-scale downdraft gasifiers for
conversion of biomass. Energy Convers Manag 2010;51:969–82. biomass gasification: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;76:989–1003.
[12] Balat M, Ayar G. Biomass energy in the world, use of biomass and potential [48] Mahinpey N, Gomez A. Review of gasification fundamentals and new findings:
trends. Energy Sources 2005;27:931–40. reactors, feedstock, and kinetic studies. Chem Eng Sci 2016;148:14–31.
[13] IEA. Biomass for power generation and CHP. IEA Energy Technology Essential [49] Patra TK, Sheth PN. Biomass gasification models for downdraft gasifier: a state of
2007:1–4. ETE03. the art review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;50:583–93.
[14] Chowdhury NuR. Advances and trends in woody biomass gasification. Energy [50] Ahmad AA, Zawawi NA, Kasim FH, Khasri A. Assessing the gasification
Engineering and Management Tecnico Lisboa; 2014. performance of biomass: a review on biomass gasification process conditions,
[15] Johansson TB, McCormick K, Neij L, Turkenburg W. The potentials of renewable optimization and economic evaluation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;53:
energy. In: International Conference for Renewable Energies; 2004. 1333–47.
[16] WEC. World energy resources. World Energy Council; 2016. [51] Motta IL, Miranda NT, Filho RM, Maciel MRW. Biomass gasification in fluidized
[17] REN21. Renewables 2016 global status report. Renewable Energy Policy Network beds: a review of biomass moisture content and operating pressure effects. Renew
for the 21st Century; 2016. Sustain Energy Rev 2018;94:998–1023.
[18] Engstr€om F. Overview of power generation from biomass. In: Gasification [52] G€oktepe B. Entrained flow gasification of biomass. Department of Engineering
Technology Conference; 1999. p. 1–13. Sciences and Mathematics Luleå University of Technology; 2015.
[19] Ashton S, McDonell L, Barnes K. Woody biomass desk guide & toolkit. USDA [53] Qin K. Entrained flow gasification of biomass. Technical University of Denmark;
Forest Service; 2014. 2012.
[20] Kundu K, Chatterjee A, Bhattacharyya T, Roy M, Kaur A. Thermochemical [54] Couto N, Rouboa A, Silva V, Monteiro E, Bouziane K. Influence of the biomass
conversion of biomass to bioenergy: a review. In: Singh A, Agarwal R, Agarwal A, gasification processes on the final composition of syngas Energy Procedia 2013;
Dhar A, Shukla M, editors. Prospects of Alternative Transportation Fuels. Energy, 36:596–606.
Environment, and Sustainability. Singapore: Springer; 2018. [55] Warnecke R. Gasification of biomass: comparison of fixed bed and fluidized bed
[21] Gouveia L, Passarinho PC. Biomass conversion technologies: biological/ gasifier. Biomass Bioenergy 2000;18:489–97.
biochemical conversion of biomass. In: Rabaçal M, Ferreira A, Silva C, Costa M, [56] Wang L, Weller CL, Jones DD, Hanna MA. Contemporary issues in thermal
editors. Biorefineries. Lecture Notes in Energy, vol. 57. Cham: Springer; 2017. gasification of biomass and its application to electricity and fuel production.
[22] Weiland P. Biogas production: current state and perspectives. Appl Microbiol Biomass Bioenergy 2008;32:573–81.
Biotechnol 2010;85:849–60. [57] Ftwi Yohaness H, Rashid A, Aziz A, Sulaiman SA. Trends of syngas as a fuel in
[23] Hoo PY, Hashim H, Ho WS, Tan ST. Successful biogas implementation – a mini- internal combustion engines. Adv Mech Eng 2014:1–10. https://doi.org/
review on biogas utilization. Energy Policies Econ Incentives Chem Eng Tran 10.1155/2014/401587. 401587.
2017;61:1495–500. [58] Bates RP, D€ olle K. Syngas use in internal combustion engines - a review. Adv Res
[24] Holm-Nielsen JB, Seadi TA, Oleskowicz-Popiel P. The future of anaerobic 2017;10:1–8.
digestion and biogas utilization. Bioresour Technol 2009;100:5478–84. [59] Wu CZ, Huang H, Zheng SP, Yin XL. An economic analysis of biomass gasification
[25] Bedi AS, Sparrow R, Tasciotti L. The impact of a household biogas programme on and power generation in China. Bioresour Technol 2002;83:65–70.
energy use and expenditure in East Java. Energy Econ 2017;68:66–76. [60] Jingjing L, Xing Z, DeLaquil P, Larson ED. Biomass energy in China and its
[26] Chin MJ, Poh PE, Tey BT, Chan ES, Chin KL. Biogas from palm oil mill effluent potential. Energy for Sustainable Development; 2001.
(POME): opportunities and challenges from Malaysia’s perspective. Renew [61] Zhenhong Y, Chuang-zhi W, Li S. An assessment of the possibilities for transfer of
Sustain Energy Rev 2013;26:717–26. European biomass gasification technology to China: survey study of biomass
[27] Zabochnicka-Swiątek
� M, Sławik L. Bioethanol - production and utilization. Arch gasification in China. IEA Bioenergy Task 1998;33.
Combust 2010;30:237–46. [62] Furutani Y, Norinaga K, Kudo S, Hayashi J, Watanabe T. Current situation and
[28] Belincanta J, Alchorne JA, da Silva MT. The brazilian experience with ethanol future scope of biomass gasification in Japan. Evergr Joint J Nov Carbon Res Sci
fuel: aspects of production, use, quality and distribution logistics. Braz J Chem Green Asia Strategy 2017;04:24–9.
Eng 2016;33:1091–102. [63] IEA. Country report: Japan. IEA Bioenergy Task 2012;33.
[29] Dhyani V, Bhaskar T. A comprehensive review on the pyrolysis of lignocellulosic [64] Dasappa S, Subbukrishna DN, Suresh KC, Paul PJ, Prabhu GS. Operational
biomass. Renew Energy 2018;129:695–716. experience on a grid connected 100 kWe biomass gasification power plant in
[30] Sansaniwal SK, Pal K, Rosen MA, Tyagi SK. Recent advances in the development Karnataka, India. Energy Sustain Dev 2011;15:231–9.
of biomass gasification technology: a comprehensive review. Renew Sustain [65] Ghosh S, Das TK, Jash T. Sustainability of decentralized woodfuel-based power
Energy Rev 2017;72:363–84. plant: an experience in India. Energy 2004;29:155–66.
[31] Kumar A, Jones DD, Hanna MA. Thermochemical biomass gasification: a review [66] Ankur Scientific. Rural electrification in Odisha, India. 2018. http://www.ankurs
of the current status of the technology. Energies 2009;2:556–81. cientific.com/case-study-power-generation.html. [Accessed 15 August 2018].
[32] Boerrigter H, Rauch R. Syngas production and utilisation. In: Knoef HAM, editor. [67] Dimpl E. Small-scale electricity generation from biomass part I: biomass
Handbook biomass gasification. Biomass Technology Group; 2005. p. 211–30. gasification. GIZ; 2011.
[33] Kirubakaran V, Sivaramakrishnan V, Nalini R, Sekar T, Premalatha M, [68] Hasan MM, Mustafi NN, Hashem MA. Prospects of biomass gasification as an
Subramanian P. A review on gasification of biomass. Renew Sustain Energy Rev energy source in Bangladesh. In: International Conference on Mechanical
2009;13:179–86. Engineering. ICME09-TH-03; 2009. Dhaka, Bangladesh.
[34] Guan G, Kaewpanha M, Hao X, Abudula A. Catalytic steam reforming of biomass [69] Assanee N, Boonwan C. State of the art of biomass gasification power plants in
tar: prospects and challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;58:450–61. Thailand. Energy Procedia 2011;9:299–305.
[35] Basu P. Biomass gasification, pyrolysis and torrefaction. second ed. Elsevier Inc.; [70] Beenackers AACM. Biomass gasification in moving beds, a review of European
2013. technologies. Renew Energy 1999;16:1180–6.
[36] Ramos A, Monteiro E, Silva V, Rouboa A. Co-gasification and recent [71] FNR. Bioenergy in Germany fact and figures 2019. FNR; 2019.
developments on waste-to-energy conversion: a review. Renew Sustain Energy [72] Wagener-Lohse G. Latest development in German biomass gasification process for
Rev 2018;81:380–98. Power and Heat. In: IEA Bioenergy Conference 2015. Berlin; 2015.
[37] Ruiz JA, Juarez MC, Morales MP, Munoz P, Mendivil MA. Biomass gasification for [73] Ridjan I, Mathiesen BV, Connolly D. A review of biomass gasification technologies
electricity generation: review of current technology barriers. Renew Sustain in Denmark and Sweden. Aalborg Universitet; 2013.
Energy Rev 2013;18:174–83. [74] Gøbel B, Henriksen UB, Ahrenfeldt J, Jensen TK, Hindsgaul C, Bentzen JD, et al.
[38] Speight JG. Handbook of coal analysis. second ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2015. Status - 2000 hours of operation with the viking gasifier. DTU Orbit; 2004.
[39] Burhenne L, Messmer J, Aicher T, Laborie M-P. The effect of the biomass [75] Hansen MT, Christiansen IS. Thermal biomass gasification in Denmark. In: IEA
components lignin, cellulose and hemicellulose on TGA and fixed bed pyrolysis. Task 33 Country Report. IEA Bioenergy; 2019.
J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 2013;101:177–84. [76] IEA. IEA bioenergy agreement: 2013-2015 task 33: thermal gasification of
[40] Sikarwar VS, Zhao M, Clough P, Yao J, Zhong X, Memon MZ, et al. An overview of biomass first semi-annual task meeting. IEA Bioenergy; 2013.
advances in biomass gasification. Energy Environ Sci 2016;9:2939–77. https:// [77] Hrbek J. Status report on thermal biomass gasification in countries participating
doi.org/10.1039/C6EE00935B. in IEA Bioenergy Task 33. Vienna University of Technology; 2016. p. 34–6.
[41] Hern� andez JJ, Aranda G, Barba J, Mendoza JM. Effect of steam content in the [78] Waldheim L. IEA bioenergy task 33: Country report Sweden. IEA Bioenergy;
air–steam flow on biomass entrained flow gasification. Fuel Process Technol 2018.
2012;99:43–55. [79] IEA. Country report: Austria. IEA Bioenergy Task 2014;33.
[42] Parthasarathy P, Narayanan KS. Hydrogen production from steam gasification of [80] Barisano D. Biomass gasification for power production: Country report - Italy.
biomass: influence of process parameters on hydrogen yield - a review. Renew Innsbruck: ENEA; 2017.
Energy 2014;66:570–9.

13
Y.A. Situmorang et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 117 (2020) 109486

[81] Rüegsegger M. Gasification survey country: Switzerland. IEA Bioenergy Task [94] Stucley C. Overview of bioenergy in Australia. Rural Industries research
2015;33. development corporation. Australian Government; 2010.
[82] Williams RB, Kaffka S. Biomass gasification-draft. Public interest energy research [95] IEA. Country Reports: Australia Bioenergy policies and status of implementation.
(PIER) program. California Biomass Collaborative; 2015. IEA Bioenergy; 2018.
[83] Baratieri M. Technology overview: main small-scale gasification technologies, [96] Whakatutuki H. Energy in New Zealand 18. New Zealand: Ministry of Business,
point of strength and critical issues. Free University of Bolzano; 2019. Innovation, and Employment; 2018.
[84] Muzee K. Biomass gasification - the East African study. PISCES; 2012. [97] Hall P, Gifford J. Bioenergy Option for New Zealand: a situation analysis of
[85] Engineering News. EECOfuels launches biomass-powered gasification plant. biomass resources and conversion technologies. Scion; 2008.
2010. http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/print-version/eecofuels-unveils-afri [98] Pang S. Update on biomass gasification in New Zealand. University of Canterbury;
cas-first-biomass-powered-gasification-plant-2010-11-23. [Accessed 17 August 2013.
2018]. [99] Guan G, Fushimi C, Tsutsumi A, Ishizuka M, Matsuda S, Hatano H, et al. High-
[86] Biomass power association. U.S. Biomass power facilities. 2018. http://www.us density circulating fluidized bed gasifier for advanced IGCC/IGFC—advantages
abiomass.org/docs/biomass_map.pdf. [Accessed 18 August 2018]. and challenges. Particuology 2010;8:602–6.
[87] Biomass Magazine. U.S. Biomass power plants. 2017. http://biomassmagazine. [100] Situmorang YA, Zhao Z, Yoshida A, et al. Potential power generation on a small-
com/plants/listplants/biomass/US/. [Accessed 18 August 2018]. scale separated –type biomass gasification system. Energy 2019;179:19–29.
[88] NEB. Canada’s adoption of renewable power sources – energy market analysis. [101] Susanto H, Suria T, Pranolo SH. Economic analysis of biomass gasification for
National Energy Board Canada; 2017. generating electricity in rural areas in Indonesia. Mater Sci Eng 2017;334.
[89] Dolezal A, Majano AM, Ochs A, Palencia R. The way forward for renewable [102] Fracaro GPM, Souza SNM, Medeiros M, Formentini DF, Marques CA. Economic
energy in Central America. Worldwatch Institute; 2013. feasibility of biomass gasification for small-scale electricity generation in Brazil.
[90] Masera D, Faaij A. Renewable energy for inclusive and sustainable development. World Renewable Energy Congress 2011:295–302.
The Case of Biomass Gasification. UNIDO; 2014. [103] Carrara S. Small scale biomass power generation. University of Bergamo; 2010.
[91] Moya R, tenorio C, oporto G. Short rotation wood crops in Latin American: a [104] IRENA. Renewable energy technologies: cost analysis series. International
review on status and potential uses as biofuel. Energies 2019;12(705):1–20. Renewable Energy Agency; 2012.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en12040705. [105] Wu Y, Zhao F, Liu S, et al. Bioenergy production and environmental impacts.
[92] Morshed FA, Zewuster M. Energy monitor. Group Economics ABN Amro; 2018. Geosci Lett 2018;5.
[93] Barros S. Brazil biofuels annual report 2018. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service;
2018.

14