1 s2.0 S036031992402384X Main

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 77 (2024) 405–419
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/he
A review of recent advancement in plasma gasification: A promising

solution for waste management and energy production
Vedraj Nagar * , Rajneesh Kaushal
Mechanical Engineering Department, National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra, Kurukshetra, 136119, India
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Handling Editor: Dr V Palma This paper presents a detailed review of the plasma gasification process for waste disposal. Due to Shifting
economies and consumerism culture, ample change can be seen across the globe in the form of rapid industri
Keywords: alisation and burgeoning urbanisation, which results in a massive increase in waste generation. Plasma gasifi
Plasma gasification cation technology is an emerging solution for processing a wide range of waste making it a highly sustainable,
Waste to energy
efficient, and ecologically sound process. This literature review discusses the feasibility of the plasma gasification
Circular economy
method and its superiority over other conventional waste disposal techniques. A comprehensive analysis of
Waste management
Syngas different methods of plasma generation for gasification is done in this literature review. The review paper
Sustainability presents a detailed coverup of the entire process of plasma gasification and post-processes. The article discusses
the notable advancement, current scenario, and possibilities in plasma gasification methodology in terms of the
design of plasma torch, modelling of gasifiers, generation of syngas, and power production. It provides an
overview of advanced simulation tools helpful in the analysis of the Waste-to-Energy (WtE) process. This liter
ature review aims to provide an overview of the recent advances in plasma gasification, highlighting the tech
nical aspects, environmental benefits, and economic viability of the technology. It also reviews the latest research
and developments in plasma gasification and discusses the challenges and limitations of the technology, as well
as the future prospects and potential applications.
Abbreviations
MSW Municipal solid PG Plasma gasification

waste
1. Introduction
DC Direct current ANSYS Commercial CFD software
RF Radiofrequency TERRA 3D model reconstruction software Since the beginning of industrialisation, countless types of materials
MW Microwave Aspen Chemical process optimisation have been processed to make the life of people easier. As a result, the
plus software
increasing pace of development gave rise to environmental pollution.
DBD Dielectric barrier EPSILON Thermodynamic simulation
discharge software There is a tremendous increase in the factors contributing to waste
AC Alternating current MATLAB Design and analysis software generation. The waste from households, commercials, industries, etc.
LHV Lower heat value HTR High-temperature region Collectively termed as municipal solid waste (MSW) [1] has become a
CGE Cold gas efficiency LTR Low-temperature zone major environmental challenge worldwide. Despite being an eco-eater, a
CCE Carbon conversion ESW Electronic switch waste
efficiency
significant increase is expected in the future due to burgeoning urban
ECE Energy conversion CKPW Computer keyboard plastic waste isation and industrialisation posing a major environmental and social
efficiency challenge. On the outskirts of megacities, mountains of hazardous trash
WtE Waste-to-Energy VOS Software tool for constructing and have been created, endangering both flora and fauna. According to a
viewer visualising bibliometric network
World Bank investigation, worldwide yearly generation of MSW is
NTP Non-Thermal
Plasma estimated to be 2.01 billion metric tonnes, with an increase to 3.40
billion metric tonnes by 2050. The report claims that 5.5% of the waste
produced today is composted, while 13.5% is recycled. According to the
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (V. Nagar), [email protected] (R. Kaushal).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.06.180
Received 26 December 2023; Received in revised form 11 April 2024; Accepted 12 June 2024
Available online 18 June 2024
0360-3199/© 2024 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and
similar technologies.
V. Nagar and R. Kaushal International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 77 (2024) 405–419
survey, between one-third and forty percent of waste produced globally time, high-temperature melting of inorganics and minerals results in a
is disposed of improperly, burning or dumping it outside [2]. An esti dense, inert, non-leachable vitrified slag [15]. Plasma can be formed
mated 65 million tonnes of waste are produced in India each year, of from air, O2, steam, N2, Ar, CO2, or a mixture of these gases [16]. Hence,
which approximately 62 million tonnes are municipal solid waste plasma gasification turns out a promising source for generating renew
(MSW) [3]. out of which, only 75–80% of the MSW is collected and able energy from solid waste also supporting UN Sustainable Develop
22–28% is processed and treated. In 2041, the total urban MSW ment Goals 7 (affordable and clean energy), 12 (responsible
generated in India is estimated to be 230 million tons per year. Of the consumption and production), and 13 (climate action) by preventing
total solid waste generated in the country, 50% is treated, 18.4% is waste from going to landfills and by repurposing resources [17]
landfilled, and 31.7% remains unaccounted [4]. About 70% of the waste collectively reinforcing the concept of the circular economy. Plasma
generated is collected, of which about 12 million tonnes are treated, and gasification of waste, as contrasted with typical incineration, reliably
31 million tonnes are dumped in landfill sites. Determining a standard destroys highly toxic dioxins, benzo(a) pyrene, and furans [18]. The
for MSW composition is challenging due to the lack of particular data high temperature breaks down all the tars, char, and dioxins resulting in
available. However, according to the World Bank reports [2], an esti cleaner syngas than conventional gasification [19]. Table 1 [20] shows a
mate of the worldwide MSW composition can be shown as a pie chart, comparison of the plasma gasification process with the conventional
Fig. 1. methods.
Waste management options are explored and recycling approaches A considerable study in the field of plasma-assisted gasification for
are favoured to construct a circular economy for a sustainable future. waste management is underway. The review paper covers different as
However, the approach is restricted due to the complexity and pects of plasma gasification and ongoing development thoroughly. The
contamination of waste. Conventional waste management methods,
such as incineration, landfilling, and anaerobic digestion [5] have
Table 1
several limitations, including high greenhouse gas emissions, air pollu
Comparison of Plasma gasification with the conventional methods.
tion, and land degradation. These conventional waste processing tech
niques are also incompetent in terms of energy recovery and resource Factors Incineration Conventional Plasma gasification
Gasification
utilisation [6]. Waste-to-Energy (WtE) is a resource recovery method
that overcome the disadvantages of both recycling and disposal. Incin Input Heat Heat Plasma
Process High- Heat-induced Plasma-mediated
eration continued to be the workhorse of the WtE sector because of its
temperature conversion of transformation of
effectiveness and appropriateness for integration with electrical grid combustion of organic substances organic materials
systems. However, the technology did not turn out to be efficient enough waste material into gas into syngas
to fill the gap. This rising gap can be filled by adopting a sustainable and Oxygen feed Unlimited Controlled feed Controlled feed
efficient WtE technique that can address these challenges and turn out to Output Flue gases, Ash, Syngas. Slag, heat Syngas (mainly H
Heat and CO), slag, heat
be a reliable source of energy. Gasification, another WtE method, does
Feedstock MSW, hazardous MSW, biomass, Refuse-derived fuel,
high-temperature partial oxidation of waste into syngas majorly con waste, medical Industrial waste, biomass, Industrial
taining H2 and CO [7]. This thermochemical process serves the purpose waste hazardous waste, waste, hazardous
to a great extent but the generation of tar as a by-product hamper its and solid waste and solid
hydrocarbons hydrocarbons
productivity. The solution is addressed through plasma-assisted gasifi
Emissions CO2, NOx. SOx. CO2, CO, NOx, CO2, C, NOx, SOx,
cation. Plasma “the fourth state of matter” is a highly ionised Dioxins and SOx, and and particulate
quasi-neutral gas capable of achieving a temperature high enough for furans particulate matter matter
the thermal destruction of waste [8–10]. Advantages Volume Generate energy Syngas production
Plasma gasification has emerged as a promising WtE solution that reduction of and do volume with low tar content
waste (up to reduction and the ability to
can transform waste into valuable products while minimising environ
96%) handle a large variety
mental impact [11,12]. The technical advancement in plasma technol of feedstocks, high
ogy offers wide and deep adaptation of the technology accepted as an conversion efficiency
environmentally friendly method for the treatment of waste [13,14]. Disadvantages High emissions High emissions High capital and
produce toxic produce toxic operating costs,
This WtE method treats waste material at very high temperatures in a
gases, limited gases, limited complex technology
controlled environment that results in complete decomposition and feedstock feedstock
breakdown of the wastes into simpler molecules. The organic fraction of availability availability
feedstock is decomposed into its constituent elements and converted References [21–24] [24–26] [12,24]
into synthesis gas whose main constituents are CO and H2. At the same
Fig. 1. Global MSW composition estimate.
406
graph below in Fig. 2 represents the number of year-wise literature impurities.

reviewed in this paper. A total of 517 authors and co-authors have been
identified. A network between these authors has been created using 2.1. Plasma gasifier
VOSviewer to show the connectivity in the field. A total of 91 links have
been established. The network has 5 clusters with 21 items considering a High-temperature plasma aids in gasifying biomass or other hydro
minimum cluster size of 1. The network is shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 4 shows carbons during plasma gasification. For MSW and other solid waste
the Network based on the co-occurrence of the keywords with a mini products, it is exceptionally suited. Because the process involves the
mum co-occurrence of 2. A total of 62 keywords have been identified thermal decomposition of carbonaceous material into pieces of com
making 8 clusters and 232 linkages. When the keywords are narrowed pounds in an oxygen-starved atmosphere, this process may alternatively
down to 5 main keywords, the linkage is narrowed to a single cluster be known as “plasma pyrolysis.” The plasma gun, which generates a
with 8 linkages (see Fig. 5). powerful electric arc between two electrodes separated apart in a closed
vessel while an inert gas is pushed through it, is the central component
2. Principle and methodology of plasma gasification of the procedure (see Fig. 8).
The temperature of the arc is extremely high in the range of
The basic principle of plasma gasification involves the usage of 13000 ◦ C. However, the temperature downstream i.e., the location
highly ionised gas plasma for the thermal destruction of waste to pro where the waste material comes in contact with the arc is much lower
duce synthesis gas (syngas) [27–29] which can be utilised for energy (2700–4500 ◦ C). The temperature downstream is still high enough to
[30,31], synthesized for fuel [32], or processed to produce hydrogen pyrolyze complicated hydrocarbon into straightforward gases like CO
[33] and/or other desired chemicals [34]. The composition of produced and H2. Paulino et al. [55] carried out the thermodynamic analysis of the
gas is dominated by carbon monooxide and hydrogen followed by car reactor and determined the best operating point of the reactor i.e., en
bon dioxide and a range of hydrocarbons (CxHy) such as Methane (CH4) ergy yield from syngas is maximum. The study shows a maximum energy
and a few others [35–37]. The syngas composition is a function of yield of 2.25 at 1040 K.
several parameters including gasification method, feedstock type, The gasification of degraded biomass takes place in the reactor’s two
operating temperatures, gasification agent [38], mass flow rates, resi high-temperature and low-temperature zones (HTR and LTR, respec
dence time, etc. [39,40]. The methodology involves five main steps: tively). The HTR and LTR sections of the reactor use an equilibrium
preparation of feedstock, plasma generation, syngas production and technique to operate the reactor by using direct Gibbs free energy
treatment, syngas utilisation process and residue management shown minimization to determine the equilibrium syngas composition [19,56].
schematically in Fig. 6. The HTR denotes the region in and around the plasma tail flame jet
A schematic representation of the plasma gasification process is where the feed material comes into direct contact with the plasma gas
illustrated in Fig. 7. The plasma gasification system comprises a power- and most of the biomass’s elemental components are gasified. The
operated plasma generator attached to the plasma reactor, a scrubbing temperature in this area of the reactor can reach up to 2500 ◦ C. The
and cleaning assembly, and a gas outlet. The initial components (Hopper several shift reactions that take place in the LTR include the chemical
and Shredder) are used for the preparation of feedstock before sending it species created in the HTR reacting with one another until an equilib
to the plasma gasifier. Feedstock composition greatly affects the process rium state is established. Temperatures in this reactor component range
output and efficiency. A combination of various feedstock is preferred from 800 to 1200 ◦ C [57].
for higher efficiency of gasification. A vast variety of materials involving A typical plasma reactor generates ample temperature that causes
wood, agriculture residue, MSW, e-waste [41], medical residues [42], the breakdown of the tar products and the destruction of harmful dioxins
coal [43], and toxic radioactive waste were tested and the efficiency of and furans. The chemical reactions occurring during the plasma gasifi
the PG process was studied. Table 2 below categorises the different types cation are shown in Table 3 [58]. However, the life span of the reactor is
of feedstocks for the plasma gasification process. greatly affected by this temperature and the presence of chlorine in
The waste from different sources represented by W1, W2, W3, and W4 waste. Because energy for plasma gasification comes from an indepen
is shredded into smaller pieces and supplied to the gasification chamber dent energy source-electricity rather than from the partial combustion of
at a controlled feed rate. P1 and P2 represent the plasma torch producing feed or gasification products, this method has the advantage of being
high-temperature flame. The gas is then passed through different relatively insensitive to the quality of the feedstock [10].
treatment processes i.e., cyclone particle separator, catalytic converter,
and scrubber to make syngas more valuable and less contaminated with 2.2. Chemical reactions during PG process
Gasification of waste involves multiple complex reactions. The pro

cess involves both heterogeneous (solid-gas) and homogeneous (gas-
gas) reactions. Amongst these, three are independent gasification re
actions: Boudouard reaction (2), Water-Gas reaction (3) and Methana
tion reaction (4). In the gas phase, these reactions can be reduced to only
two: Water–gas shift reaction (5) which is the combination of the re
actions (2) and (3), and methane-steam reforming reaction (6) which is
the combination of the reactions (3) and (4). The chemical reactions
occurring during the plasma gasification are shown in Table 3 [58,59].
2.3. Calculation of results
The performance of the gasification process is evaluated by consid

ering several parameters including cold gas efficiency (CGE), carbon
conversion efficiency (CCE), lower heating value (LHV), higher heating
value (HHV), and others. Below discussed are formulas used in the
plasma gasification process to calculate the output:
The steam-to-carbon ratio (S/C) is the ratio between the mass flow
Fig. 2. Year-wise data of literature reviewed. rates of steam and feedstock (the latter is also multiplied by the feed
407
Fig. 3. Author and co-author network.
Fig. 4. Network of keywords identified.
Fig. 5. Network of narrowed-down keywords.
Fig. 6. Crucial steps in plasma gasification.
408
Fig. 7. Plasma gasification process.
Table 2
Classification of the feedstocks.
Category Feedstock Reference
MSW Household waste, commercial waste, industrial [29,

waste 44–46]
Biomass Wood, agricultural residues, energy crops, algae [37]
Plastic waste Plastic bags, containers, packaging, electronic [41]
waste
Medical waste Infectious and contaminated waste, [47–49]
pharmaceutical waste
Hazardous waste Chemical waste, toxic waste, radioactive waste [50–52]
Automobile Used tyres and rubber claddings [53]
waste
Sewage sludge Sludge from wastewater treatment plants [54]
stock’s carbon content). The S/C ratio influences how much hydrogen
and carbon dioxide will be formed during the processing of the feedstock
thus playing a vital role in the composition of the generated product and
can be calculated using Eq. (5.2.1) [61]:
msteam
S/C = (5.2.1)
yc × mfeedstock
where msteam and mfeedstock is the mass flow rate of steam and feedstock
(kg/second), respectively, yc is the carbon content in the feedstock (wt
%).
Hydrogen yield can be calculated according to Eq. (5.2.2) [62]:
mH2 synthesis gas Fig. 8. Plasma gasifier.
H2yield = × 100% (5.2.2)
mfeedstock
ond), mfeedstock is a mass flow rate of the injected feedstock (kg/second).
Where H2yield is hydrogen yield (%), mH2 synthesis gas = mass flow rate of Eq. (5.2.4) is beneficial for the produced synthesis gas net calorific
hydrogen generated in the synthesis gas (kg/second) and, mfeedstock =
value calculation [62]:
mass flow rate of the injected feedstock (kg/second).
Carbon monoxide yield can be expressed by Eq. (5.2.3) [62]: LHVsyngas = 10.78H2 (%) + 12.63CO(%) + 35.88CH4 (%) + …
mCO synthesis gas + XCx Hy (%) (5.2.4)
COyield = × 100% (5.2.3)
mfeedstock
where LHVsyngas is a lower heating value of synthesis gas (MJ/Nm3), H2,
where COyield is carbon monoxide yield (%), mCO synthesis gas is a mass CO, CH4, CxHy are gaseous products content in the producer gas (%).
flow rate of carbon monoxide generated in the synthesis gas (kg/sec Cold gas efficiency (CGE) is the ratio of the output energy of syngas
409
Table 3 ond), LHVsynthesis gas is a lower heating value of synthesis gas (MJ/nm3),
Chemical processes occurring during the PG process. XM,IN is a mass flow rate of injected feedstock (kg/second), LHVM,IN is a
Sr Reaction Equation Enthalpy References lower heating value of injected feedstock (MJ/kg).
1 Oxidation 1 ΔH = − Endothermic
CO + O2 ↔
reaction 2 283 kJ/ 2.4. Advantage of PG method
CO2 mol
1 ΔH = −
H2 + O2 ↔
2 242 kJ/
Plasma gasification offers several advantages as a WtE technology
H2 O mol which has contributed to its growing popularity in recent years. The
2 Boudouard C + CO2 ↔ ΔH = Exothermic [36]
reaction 2CO
utmost advantage of PG is its ability to lessen the environmental impact
172 kJ/
mol of waste disposal [65]. The capability of processing of all types of wastes
3 Water-gas C + H2 O ↔ Exothermic [38]
ΔH =
without emitting harmful pollutants makes the plasma gasification
reaction CO + H2 131 kJ/
mol process earth-friendly. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions can be ach
4 Methanation C + 2H2 ↔ ΔH = − Endothermic [38] ieved by substituting fossil fuels with syngas and reducing the need for
reaction CH4 75 kJ/
mol new materials by using inert slag as building material. Tang et al. [66]
5 Water-gas CO2 + H2 ↔ Endothermic [60]
prepared glass-ceramic foams from the MSW slag produced by the
ΔH = −
shift reaction CO + H2 O 41 kJ/
mol plasma gasification process.
6 Methane- CH4 + ΔH = Exothermic [38]
steam H2 O ↔ CO + The syngas obtained from the gasification of waste can be used as a
206 kJ/
reforming 3H2 mol substitute for natural gas, reducing the dependence on fossil fuels [67].
reaction In addition, the syngas can be utilised as a feedstock for the synthesis of
chemicals and fuels, supporting the concepts of circular economy and
resource conservation [12]. Syngas, produced by plasma gasification, is
to the input energy of feedstock and can be calculated according to Eq.
a clean energy source that has a wide range of uses. The syngas can be
(5.2.5):
utilised as a fuel in industrial processes, for heating, and for the pro
∑
ṁg LHVg ṁsyngas .(LHV)syngas duction of electricity [54]. This can lessen dependency on fossil fuels,
CGE = ∑ = diversify the energy mix, and increase the production of renewable
ṁb LHVb ṁfeed .(LHV)feed + ṁ
˙ .LHVH + ṁCO .LHVCO + ṁCH .LHVCH energy.
(m
=
H2 2 4 4
× 100 The capability of handling a variety of waste streams, eliminates the
ṁfeed .(LHV)feed + ṁ need for multiple treatment techniques for different kinds of trash,
(5.2.5) making it a flexible waste management solution [68,69]. Furthermore,
Carbon conversion efficiency (CCE) is the ratio of carbon content in an integrated waste management system that is customised to the
syngas to the carbon content in the feedstock. The value can be calcu unique requirements of a community or region can be created by
lated according to Eq. (5.2.6): combining plasma gasification with other waste treatment technologies
( ) like composting and recycling. Fig. 9 represents a short summary of
ṁout,syngas yCO2 12 + yCO 12 + yCH4 12 benefits of PG process.
Csyngas 44 28 16
CCE = × 100 = × 100
Cfeed ṁin,feed . yc 3. Classification of plasma technologies
(5.2.6)
( ) Plasma-assisted gasification is generally carried out using low-
A/F temperature plasma that can be categorised into thermal and non-
Equivalence ratio (ER) = ( ) actual (5.2.7)
A/
F stiochiometric
ṁsteam
Steam fuel ratio (SFR) = (5.2.8)
ṁfeedstock
Specific energy requirement (SER), also known as specific energy
consumption, defines the amount of energy used to produce a product
unit. The SER can be expressed by the ratio between the used energy and
the amount of generated products [63,64]:
Pplasma
SER = (5.2.19)
msynthesis gas × Msynthesis gas
where SER is a specific energy requirement (kJ/mol, or kWh/kg), Pplasma

is a plasma torch power (kJ/second), msynthesis gas is the mass flow rate of
synthesis gas (mol/second), Msynthesis gas is a molar mass of synthesis gas
(kg/mol).
The energy conversion efficiency (ECE) can be expressed as a ratio of
produced synthesis gas chemical energy to feedstock (e.g., waste)
chemical energy with the addition of plasma energy and can be calcu
lated according to Eq. (5.2.10) [16]:
(H2 + CO)synthesis gas × LHVsynthesis gas
ECE = × 100% (5.2.10)
Pplasma + XM,IN × LHVM,IN
where (H2 + CO)synthesis gas is a mass flow rate of synthesis gas (kg/sec
Fig. 9. Advantages of Plasma technologies.
410
thermal plasmas depending on the degree of ionisation and the differ The two-stage plasma gasification process’s versatility in processing
ence in temperature between heavy particles and electrons [9,70]. Prior a variety of feedstocks, including heterogeneous MSW, is one of its
will exhibit a local thermodynamic equilibrium where all plasma com benefits. Complex organic compounds can be efficiently broken down
ponents i.e., electrons, ions, and neutrons have a uniform temperature into simpler molecules in the primary stage, which improves the effi
and this condition prevails throughout the column of the electric arc ciency of gasification in the secondary stage. Additionally, the two-stage
while the latter exhibits non-local thermodynamic equilibrium where design allows for flexibility in controlling the process parameters and
the electron’s temperature is higher compared to heavy components, optimizing syngas composition [83]. In the recent past, notable ad
such as ions and neutral particles. To carry out thermal destruction of vancements in gasification are done by coupling several fixed beds,
the waste, thermal plasma is preferred to achieve the desired tempera fluidised beds and entrained bed gasifiers with plasma converters [84].
ture [71]. Thermal plasmas have numerous advantages including high The result shows significant exergy destruction in the primary stage and
temperature and high energy density. Electrically generated thermal enhanced system performance.
plasma can reach a temperature of ~10,000 ◦ C or more, whereas only an To reduce the ample energy requirement necessary to process the
upper-temperature limit of 2,000 ◦ C can be achieved by burning fossil entire sample of waste when compared to the decomposition of only tar
fuels [72]. DC, AC and RF induced plasma are prominent methods in and minor impurities, this two-stage plasma treatment is favoured over
thermal plasma gasification techniques. DC leads the segment due to its the single stage [85]. This also helps to overcome limitations including
easy operation and high temperature capability. low conversion efficiency, relatively low outputs, and poor control over
The use of non-thermal plasmas (like DBD, corona discharge, sliding volatile chemical and tar emissions [86]. Due to the plasma converter’s
arc discharge, and gliding arc) is not much favoured for waste gasifi additional conversion of tars and chars into CO and CH4, the two-stage
cation citing its low temperature [73]. Generally, the temperature range arrangement enables more effective carbon conversion and
in the case of NTP remains below 103 K. However, the use of appropriate higher-quality syngas [85].
catalysts does serve the purpose, and positive results were obtained for
gasification using NTP [59]. Catalysts use helps in lowering the energy 4.2. DC plasma gasification
input and the plasma-catalytic process improves energy efficiency [74].
DBD and MW are a prominent technique in NTP category that showed DC plasma gasification technology employs a direct current (DC)
promising results in case of plasma-catalytic process [75]. The classifi plasma torch to create a high-temperature plasma arc. The plasma torch
cation of plasma amongst Thermal plasma and NTP is well illustrated in operates at temperatures exceeding 10,000 ◦ C [87], enabling the com
Fig. 10 [76,77]. plete decomposition and gasification of the MSW feedstock. The applied
high voltage to electrodes in a plasma gas medium breaks down the
4. Plasma gasification technologies gases into ions and electrons which cause the formation of plasma in the
medium [35]. DC plasma gasification offers advantages such as high
Based on the design of the plasma reactors and the method of plasma energy efficiency, enhanced syngas quality, and reduced environmental
formation, there are various types of plasma gasification technologies. emissions.
Every technology has its distinctive characteristics, benefits, and This thermal plasma method is mostly preferred for the gasification
drawbacks. An overview of the prominent plasma gasification technol of waste due to its capability of generating very high temperatures. AC
ogies used for MSW is given in the following section. plasma torch offers an advantage over DC in terms of efficiency but the
DC takes an edge over AC when it comes to stable operation and better
4.1. Two-stage plasma gasification control [88]. DC plasma working on air, a mixture of steam, air, CO2, and
CH4 has been developed. These devices work on a power ranging from 5
A popular method is two-stage plasma gasification, which consists of to 500 kW offering thermal efficiency in the range of 90–95% [89].
two distinct stages: a primary stage for pyrolysis and partial oxidation, DC plasma gasification systems typically include a primary plasma
and a secondary stage for full gasification of the pyrolysis products i.e., a reactor where the MSW is introduced, a gasification chamber, and a
gasification reactor [78] and a plasma reactor respectively [79,80]. In syngas cleaning system. The high temperatures achieved by the plasma
the first stage, syngas, char, and tar are produced by heating MSW to arc facilitate the breakdown of complex organic molecules and the
high temperatures in an oxygen-starved atmosphere. The secondary conversion of carbonaceous materials into syngas. The syngas is then
stage receives the syngas after that, and it undergoes additional pro subjected to a cleaning process to remove impurities, such as particulate
cessing in an oxygen-rich atmosphere at higher temperatures to matter, heavy metals, and sulphur compounds.
accomplish full gasification and syngas cleanup [40,81,82]. DC plasma method is categorised into the non-transferred and
transferred types shown in Fig. 11 [11] in (a) and (b) respectively. Prior
involves a cathode-anode arrangement where the anode is part of the
assembly, covering the anode to produce the electric arc while the later
Fig. 10. Classification of thermal plasma gasification. Fig. 11. DC plasma setup [11].
411
one i.e. transferred type mode uses the workpiece as the anode to hazardous waste.
develop the arc.
4.4. Microwave plasma gasification
4.3. RF plasma gasification
Microwave plasma gasification is a relatively newer technology that
Radiofrequency (RF) plasma gasification is another technology that utilizes microwave energy to generate a high-temperature plasma arc.
utilizes an RF plasma torch to generate a high-temperature plasma arc. The microwave plasma torch operates at frequencies ranging from
RF plasma torches operate at frequencies in the range of 13.56 MHz, hundreds of MHz to several GHz, creating a highly energized plasma
enabling efficient plasma generation and heat transfer. The electrodes flame for waste conversion and other applications. Magnetrons produce
will function as anodes for half of the cycle and cathodes for the other the microwave signal in a microwave. It travels via a so-called ‘wave
half due to the application of an alternate current between them. If the guide’. The plasma-forming gas is broken up into ions, electrons, and
electrodes are isolated, the discharge will be extinguished by the exci neutral particles by the microwave. It operates without an electrode
tation of an RF signal and the electrodes will be charged. RF discharge, setup, independent of the operational issues associated with electrode
on the other hand, gradually charges the electrodes in half cycles and usage. Compared to the other ways, it requires less voltage [35].
partially sequentially neutralises them. Electrodes are placed on the Microwave plasma gasification systems typically consist of a mi
reactor’s surface in RF plasma gasifiers, and gas is supplied from within crowave generator, a waveguide system to deliver microwave energy,
the reactor. Within the reactor, the gases are ionised by the supplied and a plasma reactor. The arrangement is schematically illustrated in
power, creating plasma [35]. Fig. 13 [91]. The waste feedstock is introduced into the plasma reactor,
RF plasma gasification systems typically consist of a primary cham where it interacts with the high-temperature plasma arc generated by
ber where the waste is introduced, a plasma torch assembly schemati the microwave energy. The resulting syngas are then processed and
cally shown in Fig. 12 [90], a syngas cooling and cleaning system, and a utilised for energy generation or other applications.
residue management system. The RF plasma torch generates a Microwave heating offers considerable decarburisation potential and
high-temperature plasma arc that efficiently breaks down the waste into is advantageous in terms of rapid and efficient heating, precise control
its constituent elements. The syngas produced is then cooled, cleaned, over plasma characteristics, and scalability [92]. This process turned out
and processed to meet specific requirements for downstream to be a promising technology for the production of hydrogen and syngas
applications. [93]. The technology has shown promise in handling different types of
RF plasma gasification offers advantages such as precise control over waste, including MSW, biomass, and hazardous waste [94]. Also, it
the plasma temperature and stability, which contribute to efficient shows promising results in the processing of hydrocarbon fuel [95,96].
waste conversion. The technology is known for its ability to handle Microwave-assisted pyrolysis and gasification are ideal for small-scale,
various types of waste streams, including MSW, industrial waste, and modular processes, like those found in remote areas or on mining sites
where on-demand generation is required [97].
Table 4 shows a comparison between DC plasma gasification, RF
plasma gasification, and Microwave plasma gasification [10,90,98,99].
Fig. 12. RF plasma setup [90]. Fig. 13. Microwave plasma setup [91].
412
Table 4 5.2. Selective use of plasma gas

Comparison of DC, RF, and microwave plasma methods.
Parameters DC arc RF plasma Microwave The use of advanced plasma gases and additives such as argon [100],
plasma plasma nitrogen, steam, and various others has been explored to enhance the
Thermal RF Reduced-
plasma pressure RF efficiency of the gasification process and to increase the output syngas
plasma composition. A handful of important deductions are summarized below
Temperature 5000–13000 3000–8000 K 300–3000 K 1200–6000 K
in Table 5.
K The literature shows that the use of CO2 and steam helps in
Gasification Inert/ Inert/ Inert/reactive Inert gases improving gasification performance. Zhang et al. performed gasification
agent reactive gases reactive gases analysis with a 100-kW plasma setup using CO2 and steam as gasifying
gases
agents and achieved a CGE value of 58.87% at a CO2 ratio of 0.15. The
Gas velocity High High Low Low
Cooling Required Required Not required Not required addition of steam favours the formation of H2 and CO2 and restrains the
Electrode Yes Electrodeless Electrodeless Electrodeless formation of CO. Higher yield of H2 is achieved when using steam as the
material gasifying agent. Regarding CO content, O2 is more favourable as a
Plasma Easy Difficult Easy Difficult gasifying agent followed by steam and air [46]. A combination of gases
ignition
Plasma Small Medium Large Large
can be used to achieve the optimised result. Greeff et al. [57] used argon
volume for swift ignition of arc and later continued with nitrogen for gasification
Power input From kW to Up to 100 kW Up to 5 kW Up to 10 kW purposes. The researcher compares the results of the simulation (ASPEN
range MW Plus) and the test run. (H2, CO) yield for the Aspen model and test run
Thermal 65–85% 40–50% 40–50% 95–100%
was (34.03, 42.99) and (39.01, 48.99), respectively.
efficiency
5.3. Improvements in gasifier design

5. Recent advancements in plasma gasification
A lot of work is done in the design, simulation, and properties of
The technology of plasma gasification has advanced significantly in gasifiers. Okati et al. [121] developed a model based on Gibbs free en
recent years intending to enhance its economic viability, environmental ergy minimization and implemented it in Aspen Plus. A combination of
performance, and efficiency. Techniques are being used to improve its MSW and coal has been used as feedstocks and the composition of
thermal and conversion efficiency. Additionally, PG possesses the syngas and hydrogen production were assessed and subjected to various
capability to recover valuable materials from waste, such as metals and parameters. The study shows that a higher amount of H2 is obtained at a
minerals, and does the volume reduction of waste that goes for disposal. low equivalence ratio and high steam-to-waste ratio. Also steam shows
Recent years showed significant advancements in PG technology, better H2 yield compared to another gasifying agent. Sakhraji et al.
ranging from improvements in plasma torch design [87,100,101] and [122] developed a mathematical model of an updraft plasma gasifier for
reactor configuration [102] to process optimisation and scale-up. The simulating the inside flow of the gasifier considering continuity, species
PG process is now more economical, environmentally friendly, and transport, heat transfer, turbulence, and chemical reactions. The results
efficient because of these developments. of this study demonstrate that the usage of plasma has a significant
impact on syngas quality. According to the temperature distribution, the
5.1. Plasma torch: designs and influencing factors updraft gasifier is actually running at a temperature of about 1000 K. It
is well acknowledged that raising the gasification temperature is ad
Optimizing the design and operating parameters of a plasma torch is vantageous since it speeds up reactions and changes the endothermic
one way to increase efficiency. Guo et al. [101] performed a gasification’s energy equilibrium. Bohorquez et al. [123] studied the
three-dimensional simulation for a DC non-transferred torch and pro effect on the performance of integrated plasma gasification combined
posed a method for the determination of arc-root attachment using the cycle (IPGCC) plant subjected to variable moisture content of MSW and
minimum total heat transfer rate principle. The study shows that an plasma temperature. The study was carried out on Aspen and was
increase in current value and a decrease in flow rate results in arc length compared with the literature. The model achieved a maximum effi
reduction. An increased current and flow rate leads to an increase in ciency of 32.5%. Ibrahimoglu et al. [102] investigated a novel down
temperature and velocity inside the plasma torch. Seeback’s Minimum draft plasma gasifier by performing a 3D analysis of the gasifier with the
energy principle is used by Paik et al. [103] to determine the position of help of ANSYS Fluent. The investigation focuses on the production of
arc-root attachment at the anode surface. The study is valuable in the hydrogen. The findings demonstrate that syngas with mole fractions of
design of plasma torches to avoid jet instabilities. Demir et al. [87] 18.4% H2 and 37.2% CO can be produced. Striugas et al. [54] analysed
modelled the DC argon plasma torch using Ansys fluent and determined the effect of using a plasma reactor as the secondary process on the
the position of the arc-root attachment. Effects of hydrodynamic and producer of gas. It was found that the destruction of hydrocarbon species
electromagnetic force were examined on the arc length. A shift in the arc like methane, acetylene, ethane, or propane during the plasma-aided
root towards input was observed after an increase in magnetic force. Jin processing of gaseous products alters the composition of the tars and
et al. [104] developed a highly stable low-power atmospheric induc the producing gas. The calorific value of the producing gas is decreased
tively coupled plasma (ICP) jet torch for optical fabrication, which can during plasma processing, while the gas yield and overall energy pro
sustain plasma at low power as well. Analysis considering the effect of duced are increased.
the radial confinement and axial pushing-off on the plasma was carried
out both through simulation and experimentally. The experimental 5.4. Use of catalysts
values showed 97.5% torch stability. Amarnath et al. [105] developed
an argon DC non-transferred plasma torch for material processing and Plasma-assisted waste gasification is an endothermic process that
studied its V–I characteristics with different discharge currents and gas requires a substantial amount of energy for the thermal cracking of
compositions. CH4 was used as a secondary mixing gas in an Ar-CO2 gas waste. The addition of catalysts to the plasma process is a developing
composition to produce a carbon-rich thermal plasma that deliver an field as plasma processes are energy-intensive [124]. Plasma-catalysis
electro-thermal of 73%. The study conducted by Mohsenian et al. [100] systems are generally applied for non-thermal plasma because of the
shows that a twin DC plasma torch results in a higher energy efficiency non-compatibility of plasma with catalysts at high-gas temperatures.
than the conventional single plasma torch setup. The type of plasma (i.e., thermal or non-thermal) is the key factor in the
413
Table 5
Summary of plasma models based on different plasma source.
Gasification Plasma Source Feedstock Syngas Major constituent (in CGE (in %) Reference
agent %)
Type Power (in H2 CO

kW)
Steam MW 4 Brown Coal 48 23 43 [91]

Air/N2 MW 6 Biomass 41 53 41 [106]
CO2, Steam DC 100 Solid/semisolid waste 15.66 17.56 75.68 [107]
Nitrogen, Argon DC 20.7 Non-homogeneous waste 39.1 48.9 68.6 [57]
Air MW 10 Coal 33.6 26.6 78.2 (max) [108]
CO2 MW 2 Mississippi lignite coal – – 87.1% [109]
CO2 Wyodak sub-bituminous – – 94%
coal
Steam – – MSW 21.3 – 62% [110]
Steam – 10 MSW + Raw wood 53.34 – – [111]
Argon DC 3 Polymer waste 70.45 – – [100]
Air – – MSW 50.66 – 57.64 [112]
Air MW 10 Coal 18.4 37.2 55.3% [102]
Air& Steam AC 100 Plastic waste 55.2–62.5 32.8–34.1 82% [113]
Water vapour DC 57 Waste glycerol 57.9 21 – [114]
Air DC – MSW 25 35 65.92 [115]
(NTA)
O2 DC – MSW 28 51 74.5 [15]
(NTA)
Air DC 5 Medical waste 54.7 17 28.5 [116]
Steam MW 6 Biomass 40–65 15–30 98 [117]
CO2 DC 1.6 Refused derived fuel 42.6 44.06 39.6 [118]
Steam MW 1.4 Sewage sludge 41.9–44.64 4.11–11.54 Energy recovery efficiency = 10.20 % (Steam/CO2 [119]
CO2 MW 1.4 Sewage sludge 31.74–35.28 14.22–25.26 = 36)
Steam – 54.9 Surgical mask waste 49.21 21.7 ECE = 51.7% [120]
selection of catalysts as the temperature plays a major impact on the The addition of catalysts plays a vital role in enhancing the reaction
catalyst. Some catalysts can’t withstand high temperatures. On the other rate and decreasing the activation energy of the thermochemical con
hand, some catalysis favours conversion at elevated temperatures. The version of waste [75,126]. Catalyst addition improves gas yield and
synergy between thermal plasma technologies and catalysts needs to be hydrogen selectivity at moderate temperatures. The temperature
studied for WtE conversion [125]. However, NTP showed positive re requirement of the reaction can be lowered by the use of suitable cata
sults and desired directional achievements for plasma catalysis lysts. The synergetic effect of using catalysts with plasma can guide the
approach. reaction in the desired direction, improving selectivity towards the
Table 6
Summary of important hybrid plasma models.
Hybrid System Feedstock Simulation tool Results Source
Plasma Chemical looping technology Electrical & electronic waste ASPEN Net overall energy efficiency: [136]
gasification CKPW = 72.35 %
ESW = 64.92 %
Plasma Alkaline water electrolysis Medical waste Aspen plus Energy efficiency = 67.42%, [48]
gasification Methanol synthesis MATLAB Exergy efficiency = 68.60%
supercritical CO2 cycle Investment break-even = 3.53 years
Plasma solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) Medical waste Aspen Plus Net power generation efficiency = 41.66% [137]
gasification sludge pyrolysis (SSG) EBSILON Energy utilisation efficiency = 64.95%
supercritical CO2 cycle Exergy efficiency = 41.25%
multi-stage flash desalination
Plasma Direct carbon fuel cell system MSW Aspen plus Overall efficiency = 79.5% [138]
gasification (DCFC) MATLAB
Plasma solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) Medical waste Aspen Plus Energy efficiency = 63.20% [49]
gasification steam turbine cycle MATLAB Exergy efficiency = 59.25%
automobile reforming Investment break-even = 3.25 years
Plasma Electrolysis process Biomass Aspen Plus Energy efficiency = 67.98% [139]
gasification Supercritical CO2 cycle MATLAB Exergy efficiency = 64.82%.
Plasma solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) MSW Aspen Plus Electrical efficiency = 40.9% [140]
gasification Chemical looping combustion exergy efficiency = 36.1%,
Pyrolysis CO2 gasification Oil sludge Aspen Plus Energy conversion efficiency = 36% [141]
Water shift process exergy efficiency = 32%
Calcium looping
Plasma coal-fired power generation MSW Aspen Plus Electrical efficiency = 35.16% [142]
gasification EBSILON
Plasma water-gas shift (WGS) Algae (Enteromorpha Cyanobacteria and Aspen Plus (Best results for Enteromorpha) exergy [143]
gasification acid gas removal (AGR) Sargassum) efficiency = 74.46%
pressure swing adsorption
(PSA)
Plasma Water shift process Microalgae Aspen Plus Energy efficiency = 35.4% [144]
gasification Exergy efficiency = 44.3%.
414
desired products while lowering undesirable ones [74,127]. Plasma 6.3. Technical limitations and scalability
catalysis can be categorised according to the placement of the catalyst.
While in plasma catalysis (IPC), the catalyst is positioned in the The high temperature and corrosive atmosphere can lead to plasma
discharge zone, post-plasma catalysis (PPC) refers to the process where torch erosion, which can shorten the lifetime of the torches and raise
the catalyst is positioned upstream of the plasma region. A variety of maintenance expenses. To address this problem, advancements in the
tests are conducted to check the feasibility of catalysts such as transition design and composition of plasma torches will be required, along with
metal catalysts [124,128] (e.g., Mn, Fe, Co, and Ni), noble metal cata process optimisation [12]. Plasma gasification plants’ ability to scale up
lysts [129] (e.g., Pt, Ru, and Rh), natural catalysts [130], zeolite cata can be difficult. Scaling up plasma gasification for handling the waste
lysts [131], and alkali catalysts [132] in the plasma catalysis system. management needs of big urban areas or industrial centers can be
Ni-based catalysts are preferred nowadays considering their high reac technically and economically hard, even though smaller-scale modular
tivity and dehydrogenation capacity [133,134]. Also, Ni-based catalysts systems have been investigated to increase economic viability. To better
are comparatively more affordable and can be regenerated easily [135]. the design and operation of large-scale plasma gasification plants, more
study and development are required [98].
5.5. Use of hybrid models

6.4. Integration with existing waste management systems
Integrating the plasma gasification process with other methods i.e.

There may be challenges integrating plasma gasification with exist
chemical looping, electrolysis process, water-gas shift reactions, etc.
ing waste management techniques. To accommodate the special features
result in efficiency improvement and exergy loss. Incorporating these
of the technology, plasma gasification plants may need to make changes
post-plasma methods benefits in achieving improvised energy effi
to the waste collecting, transportation, and processing infrastructure.
ciencies. Table 6 provides a list of hybrid systems used in processing
The smooth integration and compatibility of plasma gasification tech
diverse feedstock. Integrating the process is beneficial in processing
nology with current waste management systems will be essential for its
diverse feedstock making it a more versatile process.
effective application [148,149].
6. Challenges and future directions 6.5. Cost competitiveness
Developing countries like India stepping toward a developed nation It’s still difficult for plasma gasification to be cost-competitive.
require very high energy requirements to achieve these goals. However, Although there have been improvements in lowering capital and oper
development is not the end, it is an initiative for a harmonious future. ating costs, plasma gasification plants still demand a large investment
Clean energy and effective waste management are important pillars to [150]. To show plasma gasification’s economic viability and competi
achieve sustainable development goals. Waste treatment through tiveness, it will be essential to compare its costs with those of alternative
plasma is a useful and productive method in this journey. While recent waste management and energy recovery methods, such as landfilling,
advancements in plasma gasification have shown promising results, incineration, and renewable energy [151]. Table 7 provides an
there are still challenges that need to be addressed for the widespread approximate of the technological and economic viability of the process
deployment of the technology. The plasma gasification of waste can [152].
result in valuable gases like hydrogen [145] that are considered as future The continuous advancement of thermal plasma technologies for
fuel [146]. Some of the key challenges are listed with their possible waste conversion, along with the growing range of real-world applica
remedies. tions, indicates a reduction in technological gaps and sustained progress
in this field of application. The ongoing problem mostly with the energy
6.1. Regulatory and social acceptance needed during the gasification process may seem a positive solution. The
growing development in the field of renewable energy (solar, wind, etc.)
The deployment of plasma gasification technology is significantly improves their share in electricity generation. Hybrid systems that
affected by regulatory frameworks and social acceptance, which might combine plasma gasification with other renewable energy technologies
affect the technology’s economic viability and practicality [12]. A clear could offer synergistic benefits. The development hints at the future
route for the installation of plasma gasification facilities must be pro possibility of cheap electricity prices. Thus, making this power-hungry
vided by standardised, simplified laws that also protect the environment technology a much more economically viable process.
and the health of society. Another important element in the imple
mentation of plasma gasification is social acceptance. Local commu 7. Commercialisation of plasma gasification technology
nities and stakeholders could have worries and beliefs regarding the
security, effects on the environment, and social consequences of plasma Plasma gasification is a newer technology among modern waste
gasification plants. Addressing these concerns and building public trust management methods. A lot of work has been carried out for conven
through engagement, education, and transparency will be important for tional gasification. The Gasification and Syngas Technologies Council
the widespread acceptance and adoption of plasma gasification tech reports that there are currently 272 gasification facilities with 686
nology [147]. gasifiers in operation throughout the world and another 74 plants with
238 gasifiers in construction. The majority of them use coal as a feed
stock. Only five commercial plasma gasification units are utilised
6.2. Feedstock availability and composition worldwide for waste disposal, according to the Gasification and Syngas
Technologies Council. These facilities can process a variety of feed
The factor might possess challenges during plasma gasification due stocks, such as tyres, hazardous waste, sewage sludge, and municipal
to variations in uniformity and quality of feedstock. Although the PG solid trash, with a total capacity of 200 tonnes of garbage per day. A list
process allows the processing of a variety of feedstocks including of prominent plasma facilities installed across the globe is mentioned in
biomass, industrial waste, and MSW, but the quality of resulting syngas Table 8.
is significantly impacted by variations in feedstock composition. For Although the WtE method is in trend in Europe, Japan, and China
efficient operation of the plant, supply of high-quality feedstock is [157], it has been predominantly unsuccessful in countries like India
crucial. Consistency in the feedstock composition helps in the proper due to poor budgetary and technical support and a lack of adequate
burning of the feedstock resulting in better syngas properties. infrastructure for sustainable waste disposal [98]. In 2008 the very first
415
Table 7
Economics of PG vs traditional methods.
WtE method Criteria
Technological Economic
Net electrical efficiency Power production (kWh/ton) Capital cost (USD per ton/day) Operation cost (USD per ton/year)
Incineration 13.5–30.6% 360–1491 70,035–633,213 40–70

Pyrolysis 4–24% 104–1294 38,013–276,000 50–80
Gasification 13–34.8% 220–1730 46,457–673,617 45–85
Plasma gasification 18.6–25% 934–1386 566,400–704,761 42–63
• The advancement in simulation tools provides a close/exact predic

Table 8
tion of the validity of the process. Induction of simulation tools like
Plasma facilities across the globe.
MATLAB, TERRA, Aspen plus, EBSILON, etc. offers time saving and
Facility Capacity Location Reference effective resource utilisation. The simulation model enables pro
Alter NRG Corp. 100 t/day Wuhan, China [153] ductive analysis of the process via energy and exergy analysis.
Maharashtra enviro power ltd. 72 t/day Pune, India [98]
Hitachi Metals Ltd. 150 t/day Mihama-Mikata, [154] However, challenges remain in the areas of regulatory framework,
Japan
Alter NRG, Westinghouse plasma 200 t/day Tees Valley, UK [155]
social acceptance, feedstock availability and composition, technical
gasification unit limitations, scalability, integration with existing waste management
InEnTec. 25-150 t/ Oregon, USA [156] systems, and cost competitiveness. Further research and development
day efforts are needed to address these challenges and ensure the widespread
adoption of plasma gasification technology. In conclusion, plasma
gasification has shown great promise as a sustainable and efficient waste
plasma-based hazardous waste treatment facility was commissioned in
management and energy recovery solution. Continued research, inno
Pune. It was built to process 72 tonnes of waste per day and will produce
vation, and collaboration among stakeholders, including researchers,
1.6 MW of electricity. However, the syngas utilisation never worked,
industry, policymakers, and local communities, will be crucial in
and the technical difficulties resulted in no actual power production at
advancing plasma gasification technology and overcoming the chal
the plant [158]. Several other nations are also looking forward to
lenges for its successful deployment on a larger scale. With further ad
incorporating plasma gasification facilities. Environmental Energy Re
vancements, plasma gasification has the potential to play a significant
sources, Ltd., Israel is planning to convert a demonstration facility into a
role in addressing the global waste management and energy challenges
commercial waste treatment facility. Russia too showed interest in
of the 21st century.
plasma gasification facilities. GeoPlasma, USA is working with St. Lucie
County in Florida to build and operate a 1000 t/day capacity plasma
gasification plant that delivers a net output of 33 MWh [159]. A plasma CRediT authorship contribution statement
gasification facility, scheduled to be completed by 2024 is being con
structed in Pune, Maharashtra with the combined effort of Pune Vedraj Nagar: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing. Rajneesh Kaushal: Supervision,
Municipal Corporation (PMC) and The Green Billions Limited (TGBL).
Writing – review & editing.
The facility will utilise Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) from the waste to
generate hydrogen using plasma gasification technology closely devel
oped by BARC and IISC Bangalore [160]. Declaration of competing interest
8. Conclusion The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
Recent advancements in plasma gasification have focused on the work reported in this paper.
improving process efficiency, environmental performance, and eco
nomic feasibility through the development of advanced gas cleaning References
systems, catalysts, monitoring and control systems, modular plant de
[1] Stafford WHL. WtE best practices and perspectives in Africa. Munic. Solid Waste
signs, improved materials, and alternative energy sources. Plasma Energy Convers. Dev. Ctries. Technol. Best Pract. Challenges Policy Jan. 2020:
gasification has emerged as a promising technology for waste manage 185–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813419-1.00006-1.
[2] Van F, Silpa Kaza, Lisa Yao, Perinaz Bhada-Tata, Woerden. What a waste 2.0: a
ment and energy recovery and the points below conclude important
global snapshot of solid waste management to 2050. 2018. https://doi.org/
deductions. 10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0. Washington, DC.
[3] Pavithra KM. Review: ‘Municipal Solid Waste’ generated in India set to increase 7
• PG offers high conversion efficiency and facilitates syngas produc times in the next 30 years. FACTLY 2021. https://factly.in/review-municipal-soli
d-waste-generated-in-india-set-to-increase-7-times-in-the-next-30-years/.
tion, material recovery, and potential for WtE production. [4] CENTRAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. Annual report 2020-21 on
• The hybridisation of the PG process results in the value addition of implementation of solid waste management rules. 2016. Delhi.
the PG process in terms of higher efficiency, lesser power require [5] Sakai S, et al. World terends in municipal solid waste management. Waste Manag
Jan. 1996;16(5–6):341–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-053X(96)00106-7.
ment, and better syngas yield. [6] Cudjoe D, Wang H. Plasma gasification versus incineration of plastic waste:
• Selective use of gasification agents results in the desired alteration of energy, economic and environmental analysis. Fuel Process Technol Dec. 2022;
the composition of syngas. The use of steam favours the formation of 237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2022.107470.
[7] Gamaleldin Y, Abu H, Alkhedher M. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy A
hydrogen and the O2 medium shows a higher yield of CO. review of hydrogen production from food waste through gasification process. Int
• High-temperature operation results in better syngas composition and J Hydrogen Energy March, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
negligible tar on both on gasifier walls and the final; composition of ijhydene.2024.03.070.
[8] Plasma Science and Fusion Center, “What is Plasma,” Massachusetts Institute of
syngas. However, high temperature hampers the lifespan of the
Technology. https://www.psfc.mit.edu/vision/what_is_plasma (accessed June. 5,
reactor. 2023)..
[9] Plasma WI. What is plasma?. 1928. p. 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-
78548-306-6.50001-9.
416
[10] Tang L, Huang H, Hao H, Zhao K. Development of plasma pyrolysis/gasification [36] Favas J, Monteiro E, Rouboa A. Hydrogen production using plasma gasification
systems for energy efficient and environmentally sound waste disposal. with steam injection. Int J Hydrogen Energy Apr. 2017;42(16):10997–1005.
J Electrost Oct. 2013;71(5):839–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.03.109.
elstat.2013.06.007. [37] Hlina M, Hrabovsky M, Kavka T, Konrad M. Production of high quality syngas
[11] Ruj B, Ghosh S. Technological aspects for thermal plasma treatment of municipal from argon/water plasma gasification of biomass and waste. Waste Manag Jan.
solid waste - a review. Fuel Process Technol 2014;126:298–308. https://doi.org/ 2014;34(1):63–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.09.018.
10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.05.011. Elsevier B.V. [38] Kuo PC, Illathukandy B, Wu W, Chang JS. Plasma gasification performances of
[12] Sanjaya E, Abbas A. Plasma gasification as an alternative energy-from-waste various raw and torrefied biomass materials using different gasifying agents.
(EFW) technology for the circular economy: an environmental review. Resour Bioresour Technol 2020;314(May). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Conserv Recycl 2023;189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106730. biortech.2020.123740.
Elsevier B.V., Feb. 01. [39] Materazzi M, Lettieri P, Mazzei L, Taylor R, Chapman C. Tar evolution in a two
[13] Mollah MYA, Schennach R, Patscheider J, Promreuk S, Cocke DL. Plasma stage fluid bed-plasma gasification process for waste valorization. Fuel Process
chemistry as a tool for green chemistry, environmental analysis and waste Technol 2014;128:146–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.06.028.
management. J Hazard Mater Dec. 2000;79(3):301–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/ [40] Diaz G, Sharma N, Leal-Quiros E, Munoz-Hernandez A. Enhanced hydrogen
S0304-3894(00)00279-X. production using steam plasma processing of biomass: experimental apparatus
[14] Bekeschus S. Medical gas plasma technology: roadmap on cancer treatment and and procedure. Int J Hydrogen Energy Feb. 2015;40(5):2091–8. https://doi.org/
immunotherapy. Redox Biol 2023;65(June):102798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.12.049.
redox.2023.102798. [41] Mallick R, Vairakannu P. Experimental investigation of acrylonitrile butadiene
[15] Mazzoni L, Janajreh I. Plasma gasification of municipal solid waste with variable styrene plastics plasma gasification. J Environ Manag Nov. 2023;345:118655.
content of plastic solid waste for enhanced energy recovery. Int J Hydrogen https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118655.
Energy Jul. 2017;42(30):19446–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [42] Pitrez P, Monteiro E, Rouboa A. Numerical analysis of plasma gasification of
ijhydene.2017.06.069. hazardous waste using Aspen Plus. Energy Rep Sep. 2023;9:418–26. https://doi.
[16] Gimžauskaitė D, Aikas M, Tamošiūnas A. Recent progress in thermal plasma org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.05.262.
gasification of liquid and solid wastes. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0- [43] Messerle VE, Ustimenko AB, Lavrichshev OA. Comparative study of coal plasma
12-823532-4.00007-0. gasification: simulation and experiment. Fuel Jan. 2016;164:172–9. https://doi.
[17] Oliveira M, Ramos A, Ismail TM, Monteiro E, Rouboa A. A review on plasma org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.09.095.
gasification of solid residues: recent advances and developments. Energies Feb. [44] Mazzoni L, Almazrouei M, Ghenai C, Janajreh I. A comparison of energy recovery
01, 2022;15(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/en15041475. MDPI. from MSW through plasma gasification and entrained flow gasification. In:
[18] Messerle VE, Mosse AL, Ustimenko AB. Processing of biomedical waste in plasma Energy procedia. Elsevier Ltd; 2017. p. 3480–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gasifier. Waste Manag Sep. 2018;79:791–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. egypro.2017.12.233.
wasman.2018.08.048. [45] Sajid M, Raheem A, Ullah N, Asim M, Ur Rehman MS, Ali N. Gasification of
[19] Minutillo M, Perna A, Di Bona D. Modelling and performance analysis of an municipal solid waste: progress, challenges, and prospects. Renew Sustain Energy
integrated plasma gasification combined cycle (IPGCC) power plant. Energy Rev Oct. 01, 2022;168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112815. Elsevier
Convers Manag Nov. 2009;50(11):2837–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Ltd.
enconman.2009.07.002. [46] Tavares R, Ramos A, Rouboa A. A theoretical study on municipal solid waste
[20] Nanda S, Berruti F. A technical review of bioenergy and resource recovery from plasma gasification. Waste Manag May 2019;90:37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/
municipal solid waste. J Hazard Mater 2021;403(Feb). https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.wasman.2019.03.051.
j.jhazmat.2020.123970. [47] Erdogan AA, Yilmazoglu MZ. Plasma gasification of the medical waste. Int J
[21] Ajay SV, Prathish KP. Dioxins emissions from bio-medical waste incineration: a Hydrogen Energy Aug. 2021;46(57):29108–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
systematic review on emission factors, inventories, trends and health risk studies. ijhydene.2020.12.069.
J Hazard Mater Mar. 2024;465:133384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [48] Wang Y, et al. A novel methanol-electricity cogeneration system based on the
jhazmat.2023.133384. integration of water electrolysis and plasma waste gasification. Energy 2023;267
[22] Jin M, Sun M, Liu J, Dong C, Xue J. Influence of operating parameters on the yield (Mar). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.126490.
of micro-plastics from plastics incineration. Sci Total Environ 2024;912 [49] Zhao X, et al. Thermo-economic analysis of a novel hydrogen production system
(December 2023):169347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169347. using medical waste and biogas with zero carbon emission. Energy 2023;265
[23] Li S, et al. Fate of sulfur and chlorine during co-incineration of municipal solid (December 2022):126333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.126333.
waste and industrial organic solid waste. Sci Total Environ 2024;920(December [50] Messerle VE, Ustimenko AB. Plasma processing of uranium-containing solid fuels.
2023):171040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171040. Fuel Apr. 2019;242:447–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.01.050.
[24] Y. Yun, GASIFICATION for practical applications edited by yongseung yun.. [51] Danthurebandara M, Van Passel S, Vanderreydt I, Van Acker K. Environmental
[25] Peng D, Xiang X, Deng Z, Zhou X, Wang B, He C. Study on emission factor and and economic performance of plasma gasification in Enhanced Landfill Mining.
reduction potential of organic solid waste gasification process. Case Stud Therm Waste Manag Apr. 2015;45:458–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Eng 2024;53(December 2023):103978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. wasman.2015.06.022.
csite.2024.103978. [52] Wang M, et al. Highly efficient treatment of textile dyeing sludge by CO2 thermal
[26] Chen Z, Liao Y, Chen Y, Ma X. Insight into the gas pollutants emission of rural plasma gasification. Waste Manag 2019;90:29–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
solid waste during the gasification-combustion process: influencing factors and wasman.2019.04.025.
mechanisms. Fuel 2024;355(381):129510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [53] Huang H, Tang L. Pyrolysis treatment of waste tire powder in a capacitively
fuel.2023.129510. coupled RF plasma reactor. Energy Convers Manag 2009;50(3):611–7. https://
[27] Sarabhorn P, et al. Investigation of wood pellet gasification in a novel pilot-scale doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2008.10.023.
fixed-bed decoupling gasifier. Fuel 2023;352(May):129025. https://doi.org/ [54] Striūgas N, Valinčius V, Pedišius N, Poškas R, Zakarauskas K. Investigation of
10.1016/j.fuel.2023.129025. sewage sludge treatment using air plasma assisted gasification. Waste Manag Jun.
[28] Mariyam S, Shahbaz M, Al-Ansari T, Mackey HR, McKay G. A critical review on 2017;64:149–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.03.024.
co-gasification and co-pyrolysis for gas production. Renew Sustain Energy Rev [55] Paulino RFS, Essiptchouk AM, Costa LPC, Silveira JL. Thermodynamic analysis of
Jun. 01, 2022;161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112349. Elsevier Ltd. biomedical waste plasma gasification. Energy 2022;244(Apr). https://doi.org/
[29] Hu Y, Pang K, Cai L, Liu Z. A multi-stage co-gasification system of biomass and 10.1016/j.energy.2021.122600.
municipal solid waste (MSW) for high quality syngas production. Energy 2021; [56] Pala LPR, Wang Q, Kolb G, Hessel V. Steam gasification of biomass with
221(Apr). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119639. subsequent syngas adjustment using shift reaction for syngas production: an
[30] Paulino RFS, Essiptchouk AM, Silveira JL. The use of syngas from biomedical Aspen Plus model. Renew Energy 2017;101:484–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
waste plasma gasification systems for electricity production in internal renene.2016.08.069.
combustion: thermodynamic and economic issues. Energy 2020;199. https://doi. [57] Greeff I, Ncwane S, van der Walt J. Study on nitrogen plasma gasification for
org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117419. small scale waste processing. Chem Eng Res Des Dec. 2022;188:354–63. https://
[31] Ozdinc Carpinlioglu M, Sanlisoy A. Performance assessment of plasma doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2022.09.057.
gasification for waste to energy conversion: a methodology for thermodynamic [58] Qi H, et al. Conceptual design and comprehensive analysis for novel municipal
analysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy Jun. 2018;43(25):11493–504. https://doi.org/ sludge gasification-based hydrogen production via plasma gasifier. Energy
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.08.147. Convers Manag 2021;245(Oct). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[32] Jun K, Roh H, Kim K, Ryu J, Lee K. Catalytic investigation for Fischer – tropsch enconman.2021.114635.
synthesis from bio-mass derived syngas 2004;259:221–6. https://doi.org/ [59] Fabry F, Rehmet C, Rohani V, Fulcheri L. Waste gasification by thermal plasma: a
10.1016/j.apcata.2003.09.034. review. Waste and Biomass Valorization 2013;4(3):421–39. https://doi.org/
[33] Byun Y, et al. Hydrogen recovery from the thermal plasma gasification of solid 10.1007/s12649-013-9201-7.
waste, 190; 2011. p. 317–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03.052. [60] Chen WH, Chen CY. Water gas shift reaction for hydrogen production and carbon
[34] An Y, et al. Advances in direct production of value-added chemicals via syngas dioxide capture: a review. Appl Energy 2020;258(October 2019):114078.
conversion 2017;60(7):887–903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11426-016-0464-1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114078.
[35] Sanlisoy A, Carpinlioglu MO. A review on plasma gasification for solid waste [61] Basu P. Biomass gasification and pyrolysis. first ed. © 2010 Elsevier Inc.; 2010.
disposal. Int J Hydrogen Energy Jan. 2017;42(2):1361–5. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-20099-7.
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.06.008. [62] Tamošiūnas A, Gimžauskaitė D, Uscila R, Aikas M. Thermal arc plasma
gasification of waste glycerol to syngas. Appl Energy 2019;251(November 2018).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113306.
417
[63] Tamošiūnas A, Valatkevičius P, Gimžauskaitė D, Valinčius V, Jeguirim M. [89] Surov AV, et al. Multi-gas AC plasma torches for gasification of organic
Glycerol steam reforming for hydrogen and synthesis gas production. Int J substances. Fuel 2017;203:1007–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Hydrogen Energy 2017;42(17):12896–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. fuel.2017.02.104.
ijhydene.2016.12.071. [90] Gabbar HA, Abu S, Damideh V, Hassen I, Aboughaly M, Lisi D. Comparative study
[64] Lawrence A, Thollander P, Andrei M, Karlsson M. Specific energy consumption/ of atmospheric pressure DC , RF , and microwave thermal plasma torches for
use (SEC) in energy management for improving energy efficiency in industry: waste to energy applications. Sustain Energy Technol Assessments 2021;47(July):
meaning, usage and differences. Energies Jan. 2019;12(2):247. https://doi.org/ 101447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101447.
10.3390/en12020247. [91] Hong YC, et al. Syngas production from gasification of brown coal in a microwave
[65] Sun CW, Shen J, Ren XM, Chen CL. Research progress of plasma gasification torch plasma. Energy 2012;47(1):36–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
technology for solid waste treatment. Wuli Xuebao/Acta Physica Sinica 2021;70 energy.2012.05.008.
(9). https://doi.org/10.7498/aps.70.20201676. [92] Liu Q, et al. Characteristics and kinetics of coal char steam gasification under
[66] Tang B, Lin J, Qian S, Wang J, Zhang S. Preparation of glass–ceramic foams from microwave heating. Fuel 2019;256(February). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
the municipal solid waste slag produced by plasma gasification process. Mater fuel.2019.115899.
Lett Aug. 2014;128:68–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATLET.2014.04.097. [93] Yoon SJ, Yun YM, Seo MW, Kim YK, Ra HW, Lee JG. Hydrogen and syngas
[67] Zhang Y, Yang H, Zhou J, Wang Z, Liu J, Cen K. Catalytic decomposition of production from glycerol through microwave plasma gasification. Int J Hydrogen
sulfuric acid over CuO/CeO2in the sulfur-iodine cycle for hydrogen production. Energy Nov. 2013;38(34):14559–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40(5):2099–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijhydene.2013.09.001.
ijhydene.2014.12.048. [94] Arpia AA, Nguyen T-B, Chen W-H, Dong C-D, Ok YS. Microwave-assisted
[68] Munir MT, Mardon I, Al-Zuhair S, Shawabkeh A, Saqib NU. Plasma gasification of gasification of biomass for sustainable and energy-efficient biohydrogen and
municipal solid waste for waste-to-value processing. Renew Sustain Energy Rev biosyngas production: a state-of-the-art review. Chemosphere 2022;287:132014.
Dec. 01, 2019;116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109461. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132014.
[69] Mazzoni L, Ahmed R, Janajreh I. Plasma gasification of two waste streams: [95] Zherlitsyn AG, Shiyan VP, Demchenko PV. Microwave plasma torch for
municipal solid waste and hazardous waste from the oil and gas industry. Energy processing hydrocarbon gases. Resour. Technol. 2016;2(1):11–4. https://doi.org/
Proc 2017;105:4159–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.882. 10.1016/j.reffit.2016.04.001.
[70] Du C, et al. Gasification of corn cob using non-thermal arc plasma. Int J Hydrogen [96] Shin DH, et al. A pure steam microwave plasma torch: gasification of powdered
Energy Oct. 2015;40(37):12634–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. coal in the plasma. Surf Coating Technol 2013;228(SUPPL.1):S520–3. https://
ijhydene.2015.07.111. doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2012.04.071.
[71] Khan SUD, Khan R, Hussain S. Suitability of thermal plasma for solid waste [97] Ellison C, Abdelsayed V, Smith MW. Analysis of char structure and composition
treatment and non-thermal plasma for nano-scale high-tech plasmonic materials: from microwave and conventional pyrolysis/gasification of low and middle rank
a concise review. Appl Nanosci 2022;12(11):3111–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/ coals. Fuel 2023;354(July):129301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
s13204-022-02342-8. fuel.2023.129301.
[72] Zhang H, et al. Development of high temperature air combustion technology in [98] Kaushal R, Rohit, Dhaka AK. A comprehensive review of the application of
pulverized fossil fuel fired boilers. Proc Combust Inst 2007;31 II:2779–85. plasma gasification technology in circumventing the medical waste in a post-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2006.07.135. COVID-19 scenario. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery 2022. https://doi.org/
[73] Kwon S, kyun Im S. Feasibility of non-thermal plasma gasification for a waste-to- 10.1007/s13399-022-02434-z. Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland
energy power plant. Energy Convers Manag 2022;251(October 2021):114978. GmbH.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114978. [99] Kulacki FA, et al. Handbook of thermal science and engineering. 2018. https://
[74] Catalysts N, et al. Recent developments in dielectric barrier discharge plasma- doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26695-4.
assisted catalytic dry reforming of methane over. 2021. [100] Mohsenian S, Esmaili MS, Shokri B, Ghorbanalilu M. Physical characteristics of
[75] Bhatt KP, Patel S, Upadhyay DS, Patel RN. In-depth analysis of the effect of twin DC thermal plasma torch applied to polymer waste treatment. J Electrost
catalysts on plasma technologies for treatment of various wastes. J Environ 2015;76:231–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elstat.2015.06.004.
Manag Oct. 2023;344:118335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118335. [101] Guo Z, Yin S, Liao H, Gu S. Three-dimensional simulation of an argon-hydrogen
[76] Gabbar HA, Aboughaly M, Damideh V, Hassen I. RF-ICP thermal plasma for DC non-transferred arc plasma torch. Int J Heat Mass Tran 2015;80:644–52.
thermoplastic waste pyrolysis process with high conversion yield and tar https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2014.09.059.
elimination. Processes 2020;8(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8030281. [102] Ibrahimoglu B, Cucen A, Yilmazoglu MZ. Numerical modeling of a downdraft
[77] Shao S, et al. A review on the application of non-thermal plasma (NTP) in the plasma gasification reactor. Int J Hydrogen Energy Jan. 2017;42(4):2583–91.
conversion of biomass: catalyst preparation, thermal utilization and catalyst https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.06.224.
regeneration. Fuel 2022;330(July):125420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [103] Paik S, Huang ~ P C, Heberlein J, Pfender E. Plasma Chem Plasma Process 1993.
fuel.2022.125420. I’ol.
[78] Tezer O, Karabag N, Ozturk MU, Ongen A, Ayol A. Comparison of green waste [104] Jin Y, Su X, Wang B, Li D, Ding F, Qiao Z. The design and analysis of a novel low
gasification performance in updraft and downdraft fixed bed gasifiers. Int J power atmospheric plasma jet torch for optical fabrication. J Manuf Process Sep.
Hydrogen Energy Aug. 2022;47(74):31864–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 2021;69:422–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.07.054.
ijhydene.2022.04.077. [105] Amarnath P, Nandy N, Indumathy B, Yugeswaran S. Study on CO2based thermal
[79] Cho IJ, Park HW, Park DW, Choi S. Enhancement of synthesis gas production plasma torch and its effective utilization for material processing in atmospheric
using gasification-plasma hybrid system. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40(4): pressure. J CO2 Util 2022;66(October):102290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
1709–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.12.007. jcou.2022.102290.
[80] Ramos A, Teixeira CA, Rouboa A. Environmental assessment of municipal solid [106] Delikonstantis E, et al. Biomass gasification in microwave plasma: an
waste by two-stage plasma gasification. Energies Jan. 2019;12(1). https://doi. experimental feasibility study with a side stream from a fermentation reactor.
org/10.3390/en12010137. Chem. Eng. Process. - Process Intensif. 2019;141:107538. https://doi.org/
[81] Materazzi M, Lettieri P, Mazzei L, Taylor R, Chapman C. Reforming of tars and 10.1016/j.cep.2019.107538.
organic sulphur compounds in a plasma-assisted process for waste gasification. [107] Zhang T, Zhang J, Yu Y, Zhang Z, Wang GGX. Up-rotating plasma gasifier for
Fuel Process Technol Oct. 2015;137:259–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. waste treatment to produce syngas and intensified by carbon dioxide. Energy May
fuproc.2015.03.007. 2023;270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.126910.
[82] Evangelisti S, Tagliaferri C, Clift R, Lettieri P, Taylor R, Chapman C. Integrated [108] Ibrahimoglu B, Yilmazoglu MZ. Numerical modeling of a downdraft plasma coal
gasification and plasma cleaning for waste treatment: a life cycle perspective. gasifier with plasma reactions. Int J Hydrogen Energy Jan. 2020;45(5):3532–48.
Waste Manag Sep. 2015;43:485–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.12.198.
wasman.2015.05.037. [109] Ellison C, Abdelsayed V, Smith M, Shekhawat D. Comparative evaluation of
[83] Giltrap DL, McKibbin R, Barnes GRG. A steady state model of gas-char reactions microwave and conventional gasification of different coal types: experimental
in a downdraft biomass gasifier. Sol Energy 2003;74(1):85–91. https://doi.org/ reaction studies. Fuel 2022;321(January). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
10.1016/S0038-092X(03)00091-4. fuel.2022.124055.
[84] Morrin S, Lettieri P, Chapman C, Taylor R. Fluid bed gasification - plasma [110] Zhang Q, Dor L, Zhang L, Yang W, Blasiak W. Performance analysis of municipal
converter process generating energy from solid waste: experimental assessment of solid waste gasification with steam in a Plasma Gasification Melting reactor. Appl
sulphur species. Waste Manag 2014;34(1):28–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Energy 2012;98:219–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.03.028.
wasman.2013.10.005. [111] Shie JL, Chen LX, Lin KL, Chang CY. Plasmatron gasification of biomass
[85] Materazzi M, Lettieri P, Mazzei L, Taylor R, Chapman C. Thermodynamic lignocellulosic waste materials derived from municipal solid waste. Energy Mar.
modelling and evaluation of a two-stage thermal process for waste gasification. 2014;66:82–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.12.042.
Fuel 2013;108:356–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.02.037. [112] Nemmour A, Inayat A, Janajreh I, Ghenai C. Syngas production from municipal
[86] Helsen L, Bosmans A. Waste-to-Energy through thermochemical processes : solid waste plasma gasification: a simulation and optimization study. Fuel 2023;
matching waste with process Thermochemical conversion technologies : 349(Oct). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.128698.
overview. 2010. Symp. A Q. J. Mod. Foreign Lit.. [113] Rutberg PG, et al. Novel three-phase steam-air plasma torch for gasification of
[87] Demir F, Yurtkuran E, Unal R, Ozsunar AK. 3D cfd modelling of non-transferred high-caloric waste. Appl Energy 2013;108:505–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
argon plasma torch [Online]. Available: www.sciencedirect.comwww.materialst apenergy.2013.03.052.
oday.com/proceedings2214-7853; 2020. [114] Tamošiūnas A, Gimžauskaitė D, Aikas M, Uscila R, Zakarauskas K. Waste glycerol
[88] Abdo Y, Rohani V, Cauneau F, Fulcheri L. New perspectives on the dynamics of gasification to syngas in pure DC water vapor arc plasma. Int J Hydrogen Energy
AC and DC plasma arcs exposed to cross-fields. J Phys D Appl Phys 2017;50(6). 2022;47(24):12219–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.06.203.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6463/aa540e.
418
[115] Mazzoni L, Janajreh I, Elagroudy S, Ghenai C. Modeling of plasma and entrained Convers Manag 2022;271(Nov). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
flow co-gasification of MSW and petroleum sludge. Energy 2020;196:1–14. enconman.2022.116320.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117001. [137] Lv J, et al. Thermodynamic and economic analysis of a conceptual system
[116] Erdogan AA, Yilmazoglu MZ. Experimental and numerical investigation of combining medical waste plasma gasification, SOFC, sludge gasification,
medical waste disposal via plasma gasification. Appl Energy 2024;353(PA): supercritical CO2 cycle, and desalination. Energy 2023;282(August):128866.
122014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128866.
[117] Vecten S, Wilkinson M, Bimbo N, Dawson R, Herbert BMJ. Hydrogen-rich syngas [138] Mehrpooya M, Hosseini SS. A novel integration of plasma gasification melting
production from biomass in a steam microwave-induced plasma gasification process with direct carbon fuel cell. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2023;(xxxx):1–14.
reactor. Bioresour Technol 2021;337(March):125324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.08.183.
biortech.2021.125324. [139] Zhang Q, et al. A novel system integrating water electrolysis and supercritical
[118] Mallick R, Vairakannu P. Experimental studies on CO2-thermal plasma CO2 cycle for biomass to methanol. Appl Therm Eng 2023;225(February).
gasification of refused derived fuel feedstock for clean syngas production. Energy https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.120234.
2024;288(October 2023):129766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [140] Jiang P, et al. Novel two-stage fluidized bed-plasma gasification integrated with
energy.2023.129766. SOFC and chemical looping combustion for the high efficiency power generation
[119] Hu M, Deng W, Su Y, Wang L, Chen G. Production of hydrogen-rich syngas from MSW: a thermodynamic investigation. Energy Convers Manag 2021;236
through microwave-assisted gasification of sewage sludge in steam-CO2 (March):114066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114066.
atmosphere. Fuel 2024;357(PB):129855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [141] Chu Z, Li Y, Zhang C, Fang Y. Process analysis of H2 production from pyrolysis-
fuel.2023.129855. CO2 gasification-water gas shift for oil sludge based on calcium looping. Fuel
[120] Yousef S, Tamošiūnas A, Aikas M, Uscila R, Gimžauskaitė D, Zakarauskas K. 2023;342(February):127916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.127916.
Plasma steam gasification of surgical mask waste for hydrogen-rich syngas [142] Pan P, Peng W, Li J, Chen H, Xu G, Liu T. Design and evaluation of a conceptual
production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2024;49:1375–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. waste-to-energy approach integrating plasma waste gasification with coal-fired
ijhydene.2023.09.288. power generation. Energy 2022;238(Jan). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[121] Okati A, Reza Khani M, Shokri B, Rouboa A, Monteiro E. Optimizing the operating energy.2021.121947.
conditions for hydrogen-rich syngas production in a plasma co-gasification [143] Qi H, et al. Thermodynamic and techno-economic analyses of hydrogen
process of municipal solid waste and coal using Aspen Plus. Int J Hydrogen production from different algae biomass by plasma gasification. Int J Hydrogen
Energy Jul. 2022;47(63):26891–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Energy 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.06.038.
ijhydene.2022.06.058. [144] Kuo PC, Illathukandy B, Wu W, Chang JS. Energy, exergy, and environmental
[122] Sakhraji M, Ramos A, Monteiro E, Bouziane K, Rouboa A. Plasma gasification analyses of renewable hydrogen production through plasma gasification of
process using computational fluid dynamics modeling. Energy Rep Nov. 2022;8: microalgal biomass. Energy May 2021;223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
1541–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.08.069. energy.2021.120025.
[123] Montiel-Bohórquez ND, Agudelo AF, Pérez JF. Modelling of an integrated plasma [145] Ghodke PK, Sharma AK, Jayaseelan A, Gopinath KP. Hydrogen-rich syngas
gasification combined cycle power plant using aspen plus. J. King Saud Univ. - production from the lignocellulosic biomass by catalytic gasification: a state of art
Eng. Sci. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksues.2022.06.004. review on advance technologies, economic challenges, and future prospectus.
[124] Uytdenhouwen Y, Meynen V, Cool P, Bogaerts A. The potential use of core-shell Fuel 2023;342(July 2022):127800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.127800.
structured spheres in a packed-bed DBD plasma reactor for. 2020. [146] Kakran S, Kaushal R, Bajpai VK. Experimental study and optimization of
[125] Liu L, Zhang Z, Das S, Kawi S. Reforming of tar from biomass gasification in a performance characteristics of compression ignition hydrogen engine with diesel
hybrid catalysis-plasma system: a review. Appl Catal B Environ 2019;250:250–72. pilot injection. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2023;(xxxx). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2019.03.039. ijhydene.2023.05.103.
[126] Sriningsih W, Saerodji MG, Trisunaryanti W, Triyono, Armunanto R, Falah II. Fuel [147] Ramos A, Berzosa J, Espí J, Clarens F, Rouboa A. Life cycle costing for plasma
production from LDPE plastic waste over natural zeolite supported Ni, Ni-Mo, Co gasification of municipal solid waste: a socio-economic approach. Energy Convers
and Co-Mo metals. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2014;20:215–24. https://doi.org/ Manag Apr. 2020;209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112508.
10.1016/j.proenv.2014.03.028. [148] Cai X, Cai H, Shang C, Du C. Two-stage pyrolysis/gasification and plasma
[127] Magureanu M, Bradu C. Catalysts: special issue on plasma-catalysis for conversion technology for the utilization of solid waste. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci
environmentaand energy-related applications. Catalysts 2021;11(12):10–2. Jan. 2021;49:191–213. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPS.2020.3044534.
https://doi.org/10.3390/catal11121439. [149] Janajreh I, Adeyemi I, Raza SS, Ghenai C. A review of recent developments and
[128] Youn JS, Bae J, Park S, Park Y-K. Plasma-assisted oxidation of toluene over Fe/ future prospects in gasification systems and their modeling. Renew Sustain
zeolite catalyst in DBD reactor using adsorption/desorption system. Catal Energy Rev October 2020;138:110505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Commun Jul. 2018;113:36–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catcom.2018.05.013. rser.2020.110505. 2021.
[129] de Castro TP, Silveira EB, Rabelo-Neto RC, Borges LEP, Noronha FB. Study of the [150] Kumar M, Kumar S, Singh SK. Plasma technology as waste to energy: a review. Int
performance of Pt/Al2O3 and Pt/CeO2/Al2O3 catalysts for steam reforming of J Adv Res 2020;8(12):464–73. https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/12171.
toluene, methane and mixtures. Catal Today Jan. 2018;299:251–62. https://doi. [151] Pourali M. Application of plasma gasification technology in waste to energy-
org/10.1016/j.cattod.2017.05.067. challenges and opportunities. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2010;1(3):125–30.
[130] Meng J, et al. Comparative study on phenol and naphthalene steam reforming https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2010.2061242.
over Ni-Fe alloy catalysts supported on olivine synthesized by different methods. [152] Satiada MA, Calderon A. Comparative analysis of existing waste-to-energy
Energy Convers Manag 2018;168(April):60–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. reference plants for municipal solid waste. Clean. Environ. Syst. 2021;3(April):
enconman.2018.04.112. 100063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100063.
[131] Kaewpanha M, et al. Steam reforming of tar derived from the steam pyrolysis of [153] Generation TN, Solutions W. Alter NRG plasma gasification : the next generation
biomass over metal catalyst supported on zeolite. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng Nov. of waste-to-energy solutions. June, 2016.
2013;44(6):1022–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2013.05.023. [154] Nicolae B. Plasma gasification – the WASTE-to-ENERGY solution for the future.
[132] Mohammad Gholipour A, Rahemi N, Allahyari S, Ghareshabani E. Hybrid plasma- Probl. Reg. Energ. 2014;2014–3(3):107–15. 26.
catalytic oxidation of VOCs with NiMn/montmorillonite: plasma and catalyst [155] Tighe C. Teesside investor drops £300m renewables project. Financial Times;
considerations. Top Catal 2017;60(12–14):934–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 2016. https://www.ft.com/content/226c0e34-fb47-11e5-8f41-df5bda8beb40.
s11244-017-0758-4. [156] O’Neill KM. InEnTec: turning trash into valuable chemical products and clean
[133] De S, Zhang J, Luque R, Yan N. Ni-based bimetallic heterogeneous catalysts for fuels. MIT News; 2021. https://news.mit.edu/2021/inentec-turning-trash
energy and environmental applications. Energy Environ Sci 2016;9(11):3314–47. -into-valuable-chemical-products-clean-fuels-0106.
https://doi.org/10.1039/c6ee02002j. [157] Karak T, Bhagat RM, Bhattacharyya P. Municipal solid waste generation,
[134] Xu R, Kong X, Zhang H, Ruya PM, Li X. Destruction of gasification tar over Ni composition, and management: the world scenario. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol
catalysts in a modified rotating gliding arc plasma reactor: effect of catalyst Aug. 2012;42(15):1509–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2011.569871.
position and nickel loading. Fuel 2021;289(Apr). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [158] Patil CB, Khan A. Sustainable solid waste management ; case study of nagpur ,
fuel.2020.119742. India. Int J Eng Res Technol 2020;9(11):645–51.
[135] Zhang Z, Liu L, Shen B, Wu C. Preparation, modification and development of Ni- [159] J. Strickland, “How Plasma Converters Work,” how stuff works. https://science.
based catalysts for catalytic reforming of tar produced from biomass gasification. howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/plasma-converter4.htm..
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;94(July):1086–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [160] TGBL to extract Green Hydrogen from biomass and waste in Pune plant.
rser.2018.07.010. Economics Jan. 10, 2023 [Online]. Available: https://energy.economictimes.indi
[136] Mallick R, Prabu V. 4-E analyses of plasma gasification integrated chemical atimes.com/news/renewable/tgbl-to-extract-green-hydrogen-from-biomass-and-
looping reforming system for power and hydrogen co-generation using bakelite waste-in-pune-plant/96867994.
and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene based plastic waste feedstocks. Energy
419

1 s2.0 S036031992402384X Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S036031992402384X Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S036031992402384X Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 77 (2024) 405–419

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

A review of recent advancement in plasma gasification: A promising

MSW Municipal solid PG Plasma gasification

Fig. 1. Global MSW composition estimate.

graph below in Fig. 2 represents the number of year-wise literature impurities.

Gasification of waste involves multiple complex reactions. The pro­

2.3. Calculation of results

The performance of the gasification process is evaluated by consid­

Fig. 3. Author and co-author network.

Fig. 4. Network of keywords identified.

Fig. 5. Network of narrowed-down keywords.

Fig. 6. Crucial steps in plasma gasification.

Fig. 7. Plasma gasification process.

MSW Household waste, commercial waste, industrial [29,

where SER is a specific energy requirement (kJ/mol, or kWh/kg), Pplasma

Table 4 5.2. Selective use of plasma gas

5.3. Improvements in gasifier design

Type Power (in H2 CO

Steam MW 4 Brown Coal 48 23 43 [91]

5.5. Use of hybrid models

Integrating the plasma gasification process with other methods i.e.

6. Challenges and future directions 6.5. Cost competitiveness

Incineration 13.5–30.6% 360–1491 70,035–633,213 40–70

• The advancement in simulation tools provides a close/exact predic­

You might also like

Gasification of waste involves multiple complex reactions. The pro

The performance of the gasification process is evaluated by consid

• The advancement in simulation tools provides a close/exact predic