Loading…

Techno-economic assessment of process integration models for boosting hydrogen production potential from coal and natural gas feedstocks

[Display omitted] •Heat integration has been employed between gasification and steam methane reforming.•Improved design boosted the H2 production by 25% and reduced the CO2 emissions by 15%.•Improved design enhanced the cold gas efficiency by 10%.•Economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in hydrogen...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Fuel (Guildford) 2020-04, Vol.266, p.117111, Article 117111
Main Authors: Hamid, Usman, Rauf, Ali, Ahmed, Usama, Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md, Ahmad, Nabeel
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-ebd5e601cc1acffa582ce01c9a53aacc248716c3f7415b7f0eb176cb9bb288723
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-ebd5e601cc1acffa582ce01c9a53aacc248716c3f7415b7f0eb176cb9bb288723
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 117111
container_title Fuel (Guildford)
container_volume 266
creator Hamid, Usman
Rauf, Ali
Ahmed, Usama
Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md
Ahmad, Nabeel
description [Display omitted] •Heat integration has been employed between gasification and steam methane reforming.•Improved design boosted the H2 production by 25% and reduced the CO2 emissions by 15%.•Improved design enhanced the cold gas efficiency by 10%.•Economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in hydrogen production cost of the improved design. The elevated energy demands from past decades has created the energy gaps which can mainly be fulfilled through the consumption of natural fossil fuels but at the expense of increased greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, the need of clean and sustainable options to meet energy gaps have increased significantly. Gasification and steam methane reforming are the efficient technologies which resourcefully produce the syngas and hydrogen from coal and natural gas, respectively. The syngas and hydrogen can be further utilized to generate power or other Fischer Tropsch chemicals. In this study, two process models are developed and technically compared to analyze the production capacity of syngas and hydrogen. First model is developed based on conventional entrained flow gasification process which is validated with data provided by DOE followed by its integration with the reforming process that leads to the second model. The integrated gasification and reforming process model is developed to maximize the hydrogen production while reducing the overall carbon dioxide emissions. Furthermore, the integrated model eradicates the possibility of reformer’s catalyst deactivation due to significant amount of H2S present in the coal derived syngas. It has been seen from results that updated model offers 37% increase in H2/CO ratio, 10% increase in cold gas efficiency (CGE), 25% increase in overall H2 production, and 13% reduction in CO2 emission per unit amount of hydrogen production compared to base case model. Furthermore, economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in cost for case 2 while presenting 7% enhanced hydrogen contents.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117111
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2371773832</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S001623612030106X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2371773832</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-ebd5e601cc1acffa582ce01c9a53aacc248716c3f7415b7f0eb176cb9bb288723</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOHDEQRS1EpAyQH8jKUtY98WO63UhsIkQIEhIbWFvu6vLgYdo1sd1I_EE-G3eGNat66N5bpcPYdynWUsju527tZ9yvlVB1IY2U8oStZG90Y2SrT9lKVFWjdCe_srOcd0II07ebFfv3iPAcqUGgSFMA7nLGnCeMhZPnh0RQRx5iwW1yJVDkE424z9xT4gNRLiFu-fPbmGiLcTGMM_zXHajUlOD23CeaOFDtXBx5dGVOtd-6GoI45kLwki_YF-_2Gb991HP29Pvm8fpPc_9we3f9674BrfrS4DC22AkJIB1479peAdbx0rXaOQC16Y3sQHuzke1gvMBBmg6Gy2FQfW-UPmc_jrn1078z5mJ3NKdYT1qljTRG93pRqaMKEuWc0NtDCpNLb1YKuxC3O7sQtwtxeyReTVdHU8WDrwGTzRAwAo4hIRQ7UvjM_g43DI36</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2371773832</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Techno-economic assessment of process integration models for boosting hydrogen production potential from coal and natural gas feedstocks</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection 2022-2024</source><creator>Hamid, Usman ; Rauf, Ali ; Ahmed, Usama ; Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md ; Ahmad, Nabeel</creator><creatorcontrib>Hamid, Usman ; Rauf, Ali ; Ahmed, Usama ; Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md ; Ahmad, Nabeel</creatorcontrib><description>[Display omitted] •Heat integration has been employed between gasification and steam methane reforming.•Improved design boosted the H2 production by 25% and reduced the CO2 emissions by 15%.•Improved design enhanced the cold gas efficiency by 10%.•Economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in hydrogen production cost of the improved design. The elevated energy demands from past decades has created the energy gaps which can mainly be fulfilled through the consumption of natural fossil fuels but at the expense of increased greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, the need of clean and sustainable options to meet energy gaps have increased significantly. Gasification and steam methane reforming are the efficient technologies which resourcefully produce the syngas and hydrogen from coal and natural gas, respectively. The syngas and hydrogen can be further utilized to generate power or other Fischer Tropsch chemicals. In this study, two process models are developed and technically compared to analyze the production capacity of syngas and hydrogen. First model is developed based on conventional entrained flow gasification process which is validated with data provided by DOE followed by its integration with the reforming process that leads to the second model. The integrated gasification and reforming process model is developed to maximize the hydrogen production while reducing the overall carbon dioxide emissions. Furthermore, the integrated model eradicates the possibility of reformer’s catalyst deactivation due to significant amount of H2S present in the coal derived syngas. It has been seen from results that updated model offers 37% increase in H2/CO ratio, 10% increase in cold gas efficiency (CGE), 25% increase in overall H2 production, and 13% reduction in CO2 emission per unit amount of hydrogen production compared to base case model. Furthermore, economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in cost for case 2 while presenting 7% enhanced hydrogen contents.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-2361</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-7153</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117111</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Carbon dioxide ; Carbon dioxide emissions ; Catalysts ; Clean energy ; CO2 emissions ; Coal ; Cold gas ; Cost analysis ; Deactivation ; Economic analysis ; Economic models ; Emissions ; Emissions control ; Energy ; Energy gap ; Fossil fuels ; Gasification ; Greenhouse effect ; Greenhouse gases ; H2 production ; Heat integration ; Hydrogen ; Hydrogen production ; Hydrogen sulfide ; Integration ; Natural gas ; Reforming ; Steam ; Steam methane reforming ; Synthesis gas</subject><ispartof>Fuel (Guildford), 2020-04, Vol.266, p.117111, Article 117111</ispartof><rights>2020 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV Apr 15, 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-ebd5e601cc1acffa582ce01c9a53aacc248716c3f7415b7f0eb176cb9bb288723</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-ebd5e601cc1acffa582ce01c9a53aacc248716c3f7415b7f0eb176cb9bb288723</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7199-600X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hamid, Usman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rauf, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmed, Usama</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmad, Nabeel</creatorcontrib><title>Techno-economic assessment of process integration models for boosting hydrogen production potential from coal and natural gas feedstocks</title><title>Fuel (Guildford)</title><description>[Display omitted] •Heat integration has been employed between gasification and steam methane reforming.•Improved design boosted the H2 production by 25% and reduced the CO2 emissions by 15%.•Improved design enhanced the cold gas efficiency by 10%.•Economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in hydrogen production cost of the improved design. The elevated energy demands from past decades has created the energy gaps which can mainly be fulfilled through the consumption of natural fossil fuels but at the expense of increased greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, the need of clean and sustainable options to meet energy gaps have increased significantly. Gasification and steam methane reforming are the efficient technologies which resourcefully produce the syngas and hydrogen from coal and natural gas, respectively. The syngas and hydrogen can be further utilized to generate power or other Fischer Tropsch chemicals. In this study, two process models are developed and technically compared to analyze the production capacity of syngas and hydrogen. First model is developed based on conventional entrained flow gasification process which is validated with data provided by DOE followed by its integration with the reforming process that leads to the second model. The integrated gasification and reforming process model is developed to maximize the hydrogen production while reducing the overall carbon dioxide emissions. Furthermore, the integrated model eradicates the possibility of reformer’s catalyst deactivation due to significant amount of H2S present in the coal derived syngas. It has been seen from results that updated model offers 37% increase in H2/CO ratio, 10% increase in cold gas efficiency (CGE), 25% increase in overall H2 production, and 13% reduction in CO2 emission per unit amount of hydrogen production compared to base case model. Furthermore, economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in cost for case 2 while presenting 7% enhanced hydrogen contents.</description><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide emissions</subject><subject>Catalysts</subject><subject>Clean energy</subject><subject>CO2 emissions</subject><subject>Coal</subject><subject>Cold gas</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Deactivation</subject><subject>Economic analysis</subject><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Emissions control</subject><subject>Energy</subject><subject>Energy gap</subject><subject>Fossil fuels</subject><subject>Gasification</subject><subject>Greenhouse effect</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>H2 production</subject><subject>Heat integration</subject><subject>Hydrogen</subject><subject>Hydrogen production</subject><subject>Hydrogen sulfide</subject><subject>Integration</subject><subject>Natural gas</subject><subject>Reforming</subject><subject>Steam</subject><subject>Steam methane reforming</subject><subject>Synthesis gas</subject><issn>0016-2361</issn><issn>1873-7153</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMtOHDEQRS1EpAyQH8jKUtY98WO63UhsIkQIEhIbWFvu6vLgYdo1sd1I_EE-G3eGNat66N5bpcPYdynWUsju527tZ9yvlVB1IY2U8oStZG90Y2SrT9lKVFWjdCe_srOcd0II07ebFfv3iPAcqUGgSFMA7nLGnCeMhZPnh0RQRx5iwW1yJVDkE424z9xT4gNRLiFu-fPbmGiLcTGMM_zXHajUlOD23CeaOFDtXBx5dGVOtd-6GoI45kLwki_YF-_2Gb991HP29Pvm8fpPc_9we3f9674BrfrS4DC22AkJIB1479peAdbx0rXaOQC16Y3sQHuzke1gvMBBmg6Gy2FQfW-UPmc_jrn1078z5mJ3NKdYT1qljTRG93pRqaMKEuWc0NtDCpNLb1YKuxC3O7sQtwtxeyReTVdHU8WDrwGTzRAwAo4hIRQ7UvjM_g43DI36</recordid><startdate>20200415</startdate><enddate>20200415</enddate><creator>Hamid, Usman</creator><creator>Rauf, Ali</creator><creator>Ahmed, Usama</creator><creator>Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md</creator><creator>Ahmad, Nabeel</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>P64</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7199-600X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200415</creationdate><title>Techno-economic assessment of process integration models for boosting hydrogen production potential from coal and natural gas feedstocks</title><author>Hamid, Usman ; Rauf, Ali ; Ahmed, Usama ; Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md ; Ahmad, Nabeel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-ebd5e601cc1acffa582ce01c9a53aacc248716c3f7415b7f0eb176cb9bb288723</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide emissions</topic><topic>Catalysts</topic><topic>Clean energy</topic><topic>CO2 emissions</topic><topic>Coal</topic><topic>Cold gas</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Deactivation</topic><topic>Economic analysis</topic><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Emissions control</topic><topic>Energy</topic><topic>Energy gap</topic><topic>Fossil fuels</topic><topic>Gasification</topic><topic>Greenhouse effect</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>H2 production</topic><topic>Heat integration</topic><topic>Hydrogen</topic><topic>Hydrogen production</topic><topic>Hydrogen sulfide</topic><topic>Integration</topic><topic>Natural gas</topic><topic>Reforming</topic><topic>Steam</topic><topic>Steam methane reforming</topic><topic>Synthesis gas</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hamid, Usman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rauf, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmed, Usama</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmad, Nabeel</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Fuel (Guildford)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hamid, Usman</au><au>Rauf, Ali</au><au>Ahmed, Usama</au><au>Selim Arif Sher Shah, Md</au><au>Ahmad, Nabeel</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Techno-economic assessment of process integration models for boosting hydrogen production potential from coal and natural gas feedstocks</atitle><jtitle>Fuel (Guildford)</jtitle><date>2020-04-15</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>266</volume><spage>117111</spage><pages>117111-</pages><artnum>117111</artnum><issn>0016-2361</issn><eissn>1873-7153</eissn><abstract>[Display omitted] •Heat integration has been employed between gasification and steam methane reforming.•Improved design boosted the H2 production by 25% and reduced the CO2 emissions by 15%.•Improved design enhanced the cold gas efficiency by 10%.•Economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in hydrogen production cost of the improved design. The elevated energy demands from past decades has created the energy gaps which can mainly be fulfilled through the consumption of natural fossil fuels but at the expense of increased greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, the need of clean and sustainable options to meet energy gaps have increased significantly. Gasification and steam methane reforming are the efficient technologies which resourcefully produce the syngas and hydrogen from coal and natural gas, respectively. The syngas and hydrogen can be further utilized to generate power or other Fischer Tropsch chemicals. In this study, two process models are developed and technically compared to analyze the production capacity of syngas and hydrogen. First model is developed based on conventional entrained flow gasification process which is validated with data provided by DOE followed by its integration with the reforming process that leads to the second model. The integrated gasification and reforming process model is developed to maximize the hydrogen production while reducing the overall carbon dioxide emissions. Furthermore, the integrated model eradicates the possibility of reformer’s catalyst deactivation due to significant amount of H2S present in the coal derived syngas. It has been seen from results that updated model offers 37% increase in H2/CO ratio, 10% increase in cold gas efficiency (CGE), 25% increase in overall H2 production, and 13% reduction in CO2 emission per unit amount of hydrogen production compared to base case model. Furthermore, economic analysis indicated 8% reduction in cost for case 2 while presenting 7% enhanced hydrogen contents.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117111</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7199-600X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0016-2361
ispartof Fuel (Guildford), 2020-04, Vol.266, p.117111, Article 117111
issn 0016-2361
1873-7153
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2371773832
source ScienceDirect Freedom Collection 2022-2024
subjects Carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide emissions
Catalysts
Clean energy
CO2 emissions
Coal
Cold gas
Cost analysis
Deactivation
Economic analysis
Economic models
Emissions
Emissions control
Energy
Energy gap
Fossil fuels
Gasification
Greenhouse effect
Greenhouse gases
H2 production
Heat integration
Hydrogen
Hydrogen production
Hydrogen sulfide
Integration
Natural gas
Reforming
Steam
Steam methane reforming
Synthesis gas
title Techno-economic assessment of process integration models for boosting hydrogen production potential from coal and natural gas feedstocks
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T11%3A38%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Techno-economic%20assessment%20of%20process%20integration%20models%20for%20boosting%20hydrogen%20production%20potential%20from%20coal%20and%20natural%20gas%20feedstocks&rft.jtitle=Fuel%20(Guildford)&rft.au=Hamid,%20Usman&rft.date=2020-04-15&rft.volume=266&rft.spage=117111&rft.pages=117111-&rft.artnum=117111&rft.issn=0016-2361&rft.eissn=1873-7153&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117111&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2371773832%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-ebd5e601cc1acffa582ce01c9a53aacc248716c3f7415b7f0eb176cb9bb288723%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2371773832&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true