Ethanol production and consumption Production	12 gal/day
Consumption	1 gal/h
Syngas production and consumption Production	65 m3/h
Consumption	65 m3/h
Pellet production and consumption Production	60 lbs/h
Consumption	60 lbs/h
Power efficiency Total power generated	54 kW
Parasitic power demand	14 kW
Total waste remediated per day	1,752 lbs
Solid	1,440 lbs
Liquid	312 lbs
Diesel fuel consumption per day	average 24 gal
Diesel fuel saved per day	average 86 gal

Although the TGER did not perform to its full potential during the 90 day assess­ment and validation, it did demonstrate its ability to convert waste to energy and reduce diesel fuel consumption in a harsh operating environment. Below is the system level parameters recorded during live testing in Iraq. Due to equipment problems, the TGER was not able to demonstrate its ethanol production capabilities and provide enough data to statistically evaluate the bioreactor performance. The harsher conditions in Iraq also required more maintenance time for the pelletizer, thus reducing their pellet production capabilities. These issues and others con­tributed to the reduced fuel efficiency of the TGER while in operation in Iraq.

Ethanol production and consumption Production	Insufficient data
Consumption	Insufficient data
Syngas production and consumption Production	65 Nm3/h
Consumption	65 Nm3/h
Pellet production and consumption Production	54 lbs/h
Consumption	60 lbs/h
Power efficiency Total power generated	54 kW
Parasitic power demand	14 kW
Diesel fuel consumption per day	average 48 gal
Diesel fuel saved per day	average 62.4 gal

Below are specific data taken from various days when the TGER was operating at its best in Iraq. Figure 9 illustrates the ability of the TGER to conserve diesel

23 May 08 — Off Board Power(KW) — Diesel Flow (GPH) Fig. 9 Example test data (fuel/power over time)

fuel when running at high loads. The specifications for the Kohler 60 kW generator used on the TGER rates the engine’s fuel consumption at 4.6 gallons per hour (gph) when less than 100% load. 100% load for the Kohler generator set using a 3-phase, 120/240 V 4P8 alternator at prime rating is 54 kW. The TGER maintained 50 kW of off board power (usable power) for approximately 2 h. During that same time the engine’s diesel fuel consumption was on average 1.5 gph, a diesel fuel savings of 2.76 gph.

Figure 10 illustrates the power efficiency of the TGER. The yellow line rep­resents all the power consumed by the TGER’s subsystems and is referred to as parasitic power. All remaining power generated by the TGER (50 kW) is available for use by the customer, and is represented by the light blue line. To determine the TGER’s power efficiency (pink line), we divided the power available to the customer (light blue line) by the total power generated (dark blue line). The TGER’s average power efficiency was approximately 77.37% during the recorded timeframe.

Figure 11 illustrates the TGER’s ability to continue to conserve diesel fuel in adverse environmental conditions. The generator exceeded the recommended load of 54 kW and generated 55.5 kW of off board power while consuming only 2.5 gph of diesel fuel. The most likely cause of the increase in fuel consumption from 1.5 to 2.5 gph was due to foreign debris (i. e. sand and dust) entering the system and causing the gasifier filters to clog, thereby reducing the amount of syngas supplied to the engine. This forced the engine to compensate by supplying more diesel fuel into the engine in order to maintain 55.5 kW of off board power. Even under these sub-optimal conditions, the TGER was able to conserve 2.23 gph of diesel fuel.

Table 3 shows data taken during field testing on 30 May 08 that was input into the TGER Energy Conversion Model. The model calculates the percent contribution

Fuel Efficiency -28 May 08 Total Power (kW) — Diesel Flow (GPH)

A?’ . 4-

Fig. 11 Fuel efficiency and power (28 May 08)

that diesel fuel versus biofuels has to generating electrical energy. The model cal­culated that, of the total energy produced, the biofuels contributed 77.26% of the required energy and diesel fuel contributed 22.74%.

Figure 12 illustrates the effect of the introduction of ethanol on fuel consump­tion of the generator. Fuel consumption matches closely with the increase in power

Feed materials (daily) -30 May 08
Garbage (gallons)	70 20% paper, 50% cardboard, 30% plastic
Garbage (lbs)	399
Food (gallons)	40
Diesel (gallons)	9

Energy content of feed

Heats of Total (lb) Component combustion (btu/lb) LHV Total energy (BTU) Total energy (kWhr) 2.0 Carbohydrates 7200 14394.24 4.21871 279.3 Paper/cardboard 8000 2234400 654.8654 59.9 Plastic-polyethylene terephthalate 10250 613462.5 179.7956 59.9 Pastic-polystyrene 17800 1065330 312.2304 62.8 Diesel (DF2) 18397 1155700 338.7162 Total 5083286 1489.826

Electrical energy production

Total (kWh) 343

Offboard (kWh) 230

Total thermal-to-electrical energy conversion efficiency (% of energy content of feed) 23.0%

Offboard energy conversion efficiency (% of thermal energy content of feed)

15.4%

Diesel fuel savings (gallons)

33

Energy delivery efficiency (% of electrical energy for offboard use)

67.1%

%Contribution to feed energy Diesel 22.74%

Biofuels 77.26% output until 1:30 pm, after which the fuel consumption drops off abruptly while the power output remains relatively steady. At 1:30 pm ethanol was introduced into the engine at rate of 0.5 gph causing the diesel fuel consumption rate to drop by more than 0.25 gph. Ethanol was supplied to the engine for approximately 30 min until mechanical difficulties with the ethanol pump began to occur and forced the operators to turn the pump off. When the ethanol pump is turned off the diesel fuel consumption gradually goes up while the power output remains relatively steady.

Table 4 shows the use of the TGER Energy Conversion Model to analyze the per­formance of the TGER on 1 August 08. Biofuels contributed 92.92% of the required energy to generate electricity and diesel fuel contributed 7.08%. This shows that the TGER can run almost entirely on biofuels, although the increase in biofuel contribu­tion did have a negative affect on the thermal to electrical conversion efficiency. The increase in the contribution of energy from biofuels lowered the thermal to electrical conversion efficiency from 23% on 30 May 08 to 16.8% on 1 August 08, which is attributable to the fact that the Kohler generator was specifically designed to run on diesel, rather than biofuels.