IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v165y2016icp183-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hydrogen production from natural gas using an iron-based chemical looping technology: Thermodynamic simulations and process system analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kathe, Mandar V.
  • Empfield, Abbey
  • Na, Jing
  • Blair, Elena
  • Fan, Liang-Shih

Abstract

Hydrogen (H2) is a secondary fuel derived from natural gas. Currently, H2 serves as an important component in refining operations, fertilizer production, and is experiencing increased utilization in the transportation industry as a clean combustion fuel. In recent years, industry and academia have focused on developing technology that reduces carbon emissions. As a result, there has been an increase in the technological developments for producing H2 from natural gas. These technologies aim to minimize the cost increment associated with clean energy production. The natural gas processing chemical looping technology, developed at The Ohio State University (OSU), employs an iron-based oxygen carrier and a novel gas–solid counter-current moving bed reactor for H2 production. Specifically, this study examines the theoretical thermodynamic limits for full conversion of natural gas through iron-based oxygen carrier reactions with methane (CH4), by utilizing simulations generated with ASPEN modeling software. This study initially investigates the reducer and the oxidizer thermodynamic phase diagrams then derives an optimal auto-thermal operating condition for the complete loop simulation. This complete loop simulation is initially normalized for analysis on the basis of one mole of carbon input from natural gas. The H2 production rate is then scaled to match that of the baseline study, using a full-scale ASPEN simulation for computing cooling loads, water requirements and net parasitic energy consumption. The full scale ASPEN simulation is used to analyze the thermal efficiency of multiple energy recovery schemes, for further validation of the chemical looping process. Resulting from this study, the chemical looping technology is found to produce a cold gas efficiency improvement of more than 5 percentage points and an effective thermal efficiency of more than 6 percentage points over the conventional steam methane reforming process, while producing H2 from natural gas with greater than 90% carbon capture.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathe, Mandar V. & Empfield, Abbey & Na, Jing & Blair, Elena & Fan, Liang-Shih, 2016. "Hydrogen production from natural gas using an iron-based chemical looping technology: Thermodynamic simulations and process system analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 183-201.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:165:y:2016:i:c:p:183-201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.11.047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030626191501497X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.11.047?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paltsev, Sergey & Jacoby, Henry D. & Reilly, John M. & Ejaz, Qudsia J. & Morris, Jennifer & O'Sullivan, Francis & Rausch, Sebastian & Winchester, Niven & Kragha, Oghenerume, 2011. "The future of U.S. natural gas production, use, and trade," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5309-5321, September.
    2. Saxena, R.C. & Seal, Diptendu & Kumar, Satinder & Goyal, H.B., 2008. "Thermo-chemical routes for hydrogen rich gas from biomass: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(7), pages 1909-1927, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiang, Dong & Jin, Tong & Lei, Xinru & Liu, Shuai & Jiang, Yong & Dong, Zhongbing & Tao, Quanbao & Cao, Yan, 2018. "The high efficient synthesis of natural gas from a joint-feedstock of coke-oven gas and pulverized coke via a chemical looping combustion scheme," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 944-954.
    2. Shareq Mohd Nazir & Olav Bolland & Shahriar Amini, 2018. "Analysis of Combined Cycle Power Plants with Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas and Pre-Combustion CO 2 Capture," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, January.
    3. Luo, Ming & Yi, Yang & Wang, Shuzhong & Wang, Zhuliang & Du, Min & Pan, Jianfeng & Wang, Qian, 2018. "Review of hydrogen production using chemical-looping technology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 3186-3214.
    4. Zhang, Yitao & Wang, Dawei & Pottimurthy, Yaswanth & Kong, Fanhe & Hsieh, Tien-Lin & Sakadjian, Bartev & Chung, Cheng & Park, Cody & Xu, Dikai & Bao, Jinhua & Velazquez-Vargas, Luis & Guo, Mengqing & , 2021. "Coal direct chemical looping process: 250 kW pilot-scale testing for power generation and carbon capture," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(PA).
    5. Surywanshi, Gajanan Dattarao & Patnaikuni, Venkata Suresh & Vooradi, Ramsagar & Anne, Sarath Babu, 2021. "4-E and life cycle analyses of a supercritical coal direct chemical looping combustion power plant with hydrogen and power co-generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    6. Qiu, Yu & Zhang, Shuai & Cui, Dongxu & Li, Min & Zeng, Jimin & Zeng, Dewang & Xiao, Rui, 2019. "Enhanced hydrogen production performance at intermediate temperatures through the synergistic effects of binary oxygen carriers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Siriwardane, Ranjani & Riley, Jarrett & Atallah, Chris, 2022. "CO2 utilization potential of a novel calcium ferrite based looping process fueled with coal: Experimental evaluation of various coal feedstocks and thermodynamic integrated process analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 323(C).
    8. Dianju Wang & Zhandong Li & Haixiang Zhang & Shufen Liu & Fahao Yu & Ji Li & Xingbin Liu & Yingjian Xiao & Yunshu Lv, 2023. "Evaluation of the Performance of a Composite Water Control Process for Offshore Bottom Water Fractured Gas Reservoirs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-11, September.
    9. Jiang, Yuan & Bhattacharyya, Debangsu, 2017. "Techno-economic analysis of direct coal-biomass to liquids (CBTL) plants with shale gas utilization and CO2 capture and storage (CCS)," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 433-448.
    10. Shah, Vedant & Cheng, Zhuo & Baser, Deven S. & Fan, Jonathan A. & Fan, Liang-Shih, 2021. "Highly Selective Production of Syngas from Chemical Looping Reforming of Methane with CO2 Utilization on MgO-supported Calcium Ferrite Redox Materials," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(PA).
    11. Esteban-Díez, G. & Gil, María V. & Pevida, C. & Chen, D. & Rubiera, F., 2016. "Effect of operating conditions on the sorption enhanced steam reforming of blends of acetic acid and acetone as bio-oil model compounds," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 579-590.
    12. Sui, Jiyuan & Chen, Zhennan & Wang, Chen & Wang, Yueyang & Liu, Jianhong & Li, Wenjia, 2020. "Efficient hydrogen production from solar energy and fossil fuel via water-electrolysis and methane-steam-reforming hybridization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    13. Arnob Das & Susmita Datta Peu, 2022. "A Comprehensive Review on Recent Advancements in Thermochemical Processes for Clean Hydrogen Production to Decarbonize the Energy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-42, September.
    14. Liu, Xiangyu & Zhang, Hao & Hong, Hui & Jin, Hongguang, 2020. "Experimental study on honeycomb reactor using methane via chemical looping cycle for solar syngas," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    15. Hua, Xiuning & Fan, Yiran & Wang, Yidi & Fu, Tiantian & Fowler, G.D. & Zhao, Dongmei & Wang, Wei, 2017. "The behaviour of multiple reaction fronts during iron (III) oxide reduction in a non-steady state packed bed for chemical looping water splitting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 96-111.
    16. Cho, Won Chul & Lee, Jun Kyu & Nam, Gyeong Duk & Kim, Chang Hee & Cho, Hyun-Seok & Joo, Jong Hoon, 2019. "Degradation analysis of mixed ionic-electronic conductor-supported iron-oxide oxygen carriers for chemical-looping conversion of methane," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 644-657.
    17. Chávez-Rodríguez, Mauro F. & Dias, Luís & Simoes, Sofia & Seixas, Júlia & Hawkes, Adam & Szklo, Alexandre & Lucena, Andre F.P., 2017. "Modelling the natural gas dynamics in the Southern Cone of Latin America," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 219-239.
    18. Jida Zhang & Liguo Yang, 2024. "Aspen Simulation Study of Dual-Fluidized Bed Biomass Gasification," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-21, May.
    19. Abdul Rahim Shaikh & Qinhui Wang & Long Han & Yi Feng & Zohaib Sharif & Zhixin Li & Jianmeng Cen & Sunel Kumar, 2022. "Techno-Economic Analysis of Hydrogen and Electricity Production by Biomass Calcium Looping Gasification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    20. Sun, Zhao & Chen, Shiyi & Hu, Jun & Chen, Aimin & Rony, Asif Hasan & Russell, Christopher K. & Xiang, Wenguo & Fan, Maohong & Darby Dyar, M. & Dklute, Elizabeth C., 2018. "Ca2Fe2O5: A promising oxygen carrier for CO/CH4 conversion and almost-pure H2 production with inherent CO2 capture over a two-step chemical looping hydrogen generation process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 431-442.
    21. Xiang, Dong & Zhou, Yunpeng, 2018. "Concept design and techno-economic performance of hydrogen and ammonia co-generation by coke-oven gas-pressure swing adsorption integrated with chemical looping hydrogen process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 1024-1034.
    22. Nadgouda, Sourabh G. & Guo, Mengqing & Tong, Andrew & Fan, L.-S., 2019. "High purity syngas and hydrogen coproduction using copper-iron oxygen carriers in chemical looping reforming process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 1415-1426.
    23. Xiang, Dong & Huang, Weiqing & Huang, Peng, 2018. "A novel coke-oven gas-to-natural gas and hydrogen process by integrating chemical looping hydrogen with methanation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PB), pages 1024-1033.
    24. Kang, Dohyung & Lim, Hyun Suk & Lee, Minbeom & Lee, Jae W., 2018. "Syngas production on a Ni-enhanced Fe2O3/Al2O3 oxygen carrier via chemical looping partial oxidation with dry reforming of methane," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 174-186.
    25. Liu, Xiangyu & Hong, Hui & Zhang, Hao & Cao, Yali & Qu, Wanjun & Jin, Hongguang, 2020. "Solar methanol by hybridizing natural gas chemical looping reforming with solar heat," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. M. Faizal & L. S. Chuah & C. Lee & A. Hameed & J. Lee & M. Shankar, 2019. "Review Of Hydrogen Fuel For Internal Combustion Engines," Journal of Mechanical Engineering Research & Developments (JMERD), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 42(3), pages 35-46, April.
    2. Enrica De Cian & Ilkka Keppo & Johannes Bollen & Samuel Carrara & Hannah Förster & Michael Hübler & Amit Kanudia & Sergey Paltsev & Ronald D. Sands & Katja Schumacher, 2013. "European-Led Climate Policy Versus Global Mitigation Action: Implications On Trade, Technology, And Energy," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(supp0), pages 1-28.
    3. Burra, K.G. & Hussein, M.S. & Amano, R.S. & Gupta, A.K., 2016. "Syngas evolutionary behavior during chicken manure pyrolysis and air gasification," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 408-415.
    4. Makena Coffman & Paul Bernstein & Sherilyn Wee & Clarice Schafer, 2014. "An Economic and GHG Analysis of LNG in Hawaii," Working Papers 2014-10, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    5. Henry D. Jacoby & Francis M. O'Sullivan & Sergey Paltsev, 2011. "The Influence of Shale Gas on U.S. Energy and Environmental Policy," RSCAS Working Papers 2011/52, European University Institute.
    6. Schipperus, Ouren T. & Mulder, Machiel, 2015. "The effectiveness of policies to transform a gas-exporting country into a gas-transit country: The case of The Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 117-127.
    7. Wang, Yangjie & Chen, Xiaohong & Ren, Shenggang, 2019. "Clean energy adoption and maternal health: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    8. Taran Faehn & Gabriel Bachner & Robert Beach & Jean Chateau & Shinichiro Fujimori & Madanmohan Ghosh & Meriem Hamdi-Cherif & Elisa Lanzi & Sergey Paltsev & Toon Vandyck & Bruno Cunha & Rafael Garaffa , 2020. "Capturing Key Energy and Emission Trends in CGE models: Assessment of Status and Remaining Challenges," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 5(1), pages 196-272, June.
    9. Claire Gavard & Niven Winchester & Henry Jacoby & Sergey Paltsev, 2011. "What To Expect From Sectoral Trading: A Us-China Example," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(01), pages 9-26.
    10. Hannah Förster & Katja Schumacher & Enrica De Cian & Michael Hübler & Ilkka Keppo & Silvana Mima & Ronald D. Sands, 2013. "European Energy Efficiency And Decarbonization Strategies Beyond 2030 — A Sectoral Multi-Model Decomposition," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(supp0), pages 1-29.
    11. AlNouss, Ahmed & Parthasarathy, Prakash & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Al-Ansari, Tareq & Mackey, Hamish & McKay, Gordon, 2020. "Techno-economic and sensitivity analysis of coconut coir pith-biomass gasification using ASPEN PLUS," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    12. Fugang Zhu & Laihong Shen & Pengcheng Xu & Haoran Yuan & Ming Hu & Jingwei Qi & Yong Chen, 2022. "Numerical Simulation of an Improved Updraft Biomass Gasifier Based on Aspen Plus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Panwar, N.L. & Kothari, Richa & Tyagi, V.V., 2012. "Thermo chemical conversion of biomass – Eco friendly energy routes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 1801-1816.
    14. Su, Hongcai & Yan, Mi & Wang, Shurong, 2022. "Recent advances in supercritical water gasification of biowaste catalyzed by transition metal-based catalysts for hydrogen production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    15. Dries Haeseldonckx & William D’haeseleer, 2010. "Hydrogen from Renewables," Chapters, in: François Lévêque & Jean-Michel Glachant & Julián Barquín & Christian von Hirschhausen & Franziska Ho (ed.), Security of Energy Supply in Europe, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Udomsirichakorn, Jakkapong & Salam, P. Abdul, 2014. "Review of hydrogen-enriched gas production from steam gasification of biomass: The prospect of CaO-based chemical looping gasification," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 565-579.
    17. Kyung-Min Nam & John M. Reilly, 2013. "City Size Distribution as a Function of Socioeconomic Conditions: An Eclectic Approach to Downscaling Global Population," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(1), pages 208-225, January.
    18. Chen, Hao & Geng, Hao-Peng & Ling, Hui-Ting & Peng, Song & Li, Nan & Yu, Shiwei & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2020. "Modeling the coal-to-gas switch potentials in the power sector: A case study of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    19. Rupesh S & Muraleedharan C & Arun P, 2022. "Influence of Residence Time on Syngas Composition in CaO Enhanced Air–Steam Gasification of Biomass," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8363-8377, June.
    20. Jenner, Steffen & Lamadrid, Alberto J., 2013. "Shale gas vs. coal: Policy implications from environmental impact comparisons of shale gas, conventional gas, and coal on air, water, and land in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 442-453.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:165:y:2016:i:c:p:183-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.