IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v212y2018icp1191-1202.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Techno-economic analysis of biogas upgrading via amine scrubber, carbon capture and ex-situ methanation

Author

Listed:
  • Vo, Truc T.Q.
  • Wall, David M.
  • Ring, Denis
  • Rajendran, Karthik
  • Murphy, Jerry D.

Abstract

Biogas upgraded to biomethane can provide a renewable gaseous transport fuel and is one of the proposed solutions in meeting the renewable energy supply in transport targets set under the EU Renewable Energy Directive. The upgrading process for biogas involves the removal of CO2. Amine scrubbing is one traditional method of upgrading that is applied due to its low methane slippage and its capability to provide a high purity renewable methane product. However, new technologies such as power to gas (P2G) can also upgrade biogas through biological methanation by combining the CO2 in biogas with H2 to produce renewable methane. The H2 for P2G can be produced through electrolysis of renewable electricity. Through simulation software – SuperPro Designer, the economics of different pathways for upgrading biogas from a grass silage and slurry fed digester are analysed and compared in this paper. Three scenarios were investigated: biogas upgrading through amine scrubbing (scenario 1); biogas upgrading through amine scrubbing with CO2 directed to ex-situ biological methanation (scenario 2) and biogas upgrading through ex-situ biological methanation only (scenario 3). The results show that at a net present value of zero, the minimum selling price (MSP) per m3 of renewable methane for scenario 1, 2 and 3 is €0.76; €1.50 and €1.43, respectively (with an electricity price to produce H2 of €0.10/kWh and a grass silage production cost of €27/t). The electricity price has a significant effect on the cost of renewable methane in both scenarios 2 and 3. The MSP reduces to €1.09 and €1.00 per m3 of renewable methane, respectively for scenarios 2 and 3, if the electricity price is reduced to €0.05/kWh. Since the renewable methane MSP from scenario 2 is higher than scenario 3, it is suggested that direct biogas injection to the methanation reactor is financially more attractive than capturing CO2 from biogas and feeding it to the methanation step. The MSP of renewable methane from both scenarios 2 and 3 are significantly higher than that of scenario 1. However, when considering climate change mitigation, balancing of the electricity network and storage of surplus electricity, utilising P2G can offset some of these costs. The cost of H2 is a significant factor in determining the cost of renewable methane.

Suggested Citation

  • Vo, Truc T.Q. & Wall, David M. & Ring, Denis & Rajendran, Karthik & Murphy, Jerry D., 2018. "Techno-economic analysis of biogas upgrading via amine scrubber, carbon capture and ex-situ methanation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1191-1202.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:212:y:2018:i:c:p:1191-1202
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261917318226
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.099?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. Parra, David & Zhang, Xiaojin & Bauer, Christian & Patel, Martin K., 2017. "An integrated techno-economic and life cycle environmental assessment of power-to-gas systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 440-454.
    2. Ahern, Eoin P. & Deane, Paul & Persson, Tobias & Ó Gallachóir, Brian & Murphy, Jerry D., 2015. "A perspective on the potential role of renewable gas in a smart energy island system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 648-656.
    3. Bensmann, A. & Hanke-Rauschenbach, R. & Heyer, R. & Kohrs, F. & Benndorf, D. & Reichl, U. & Sundmacher, K., 2014. "Biological methanation of hydrogen within biogas plants: A model-based feasibility study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 413-425.
    4. Budzianowski, Wojciech M. & Budzianowska, Dominika A., 2015. "Economic analysis of biomethane and bioelectricity generation from biogas using different support schemes and plant configurations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 658-666.
    5. Browne, James & Nizami, Abdul-Sattar & Thamsiriroj, T & Murphy, Jerry D., 2011. "Assessing the cost of biofuel production with increasing penetration of the transport fuel market: A case study of gaseous biomethane in Ireland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4537-4547.
    6. Subramanian, K.A. & Mathad, Vinaya C. & Vijay, V.K. & Subbarao, P.M.V., 2013. "Comparative evaluation of emission and fuel economy of an automotive spark ignition vehicle fuelled with methane enriched biogas and CNG using chassis dynamometer," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 17-29.
    7. Gutierrez, Enrique Chan & Xia, Ao & Murphy, Jerry D., 2016. "Can slurry biogas systems be cost effective without subsidy in Mexico?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 22-30.
    8. Smyth, Beatrice M. & Murphy, Jerry D. & O'Brien, Catherine M., 2009. "What is the energy balance of grass biomethane in Ireland and other temperate northern European climates?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2349-2360, December.
    9. Götz, Manuel & Lefebvre, Jonathan & Mörs, Friedemann & McDaniel Koch, Amy & Graf, Frank & Bajohr, Siegfried & Reimert, Rainer & Kolb, Thomas, 2016. "Renewable Power-to-Gas: A technological and economic review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1371-1390.
    10. Teghammar, Anna & Forgács, Gergely & Sárvári Horváth, Ilona & Taherzadeh, Mohammad J., 2014. "Techno-economic study of NMMO pretreatment and biogas production from forest residues," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 125-133.
    11. Sun, Qie & Li, Hailong & Yan, Jinying & Liu, Longcheng & Yu, Zhixin & Yu, Xinhai, 2015. "Selection of appropriate biogas upgrading technology-a review of biogas cleaning, upgrading and utilisation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 521-532.
    12. Collet, Pierre & Flottes, Eglantine & Favre, Alain & Raynal, Ludovic & Pierre, Hélène & Capela, Sandra & Peregrina, Carlos, 2017. "Techno-economic and Life Cycle Assessment of methane production via biogas upgrading and power to gas technology," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 282-295.
    13. Vo, Truc T.Q. & Xia, Ao & Wall, David M. & Murphy, Jerry D., 2017. "Use of surplus wind electricity in Ireland to produce compressed renewable gaseous transport fuel through biological power to gas systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 495-504.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Van Dael, Miet & Kreps, Sabine & Virag, Ana & Kessels, Kris & Remans, Koen & Thomas, Denis & De Wilde, Fabian, 2018. "Techno-economic assessment of a microbial power-to-gas plant – Case study in Belgium," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(C), pages 416-425.
    2. Vo, Truc T.Q. & Xia, Ao & Wall, David M. & Murphy, Jerry D., 2017. "Use of surplus wind electricity in Ireland to produce compressed renewable gaseous transport fuel through biological power to gas systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 495-504.
    3. McDonagh, Shane & Deane, Paul & Rajendran, Karthik & Murphy, Jerry D., 2019. "Are electrofuels a sustainable transport fuel? Analysis of the effect of controls on carbon, curtailment, and cost of hydrogen," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 247(C), pages 716-730.
    4. Koj, Jan Christian & Wulf, Christina & Zapp, Petra, 2019. "Environmental impacts of power-to-X systems - A review of technological and methodological choices in Life Cycle Assessments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 865-879.
    5. Kirchbacher, F. & Miltner, M. & Wukovits, W. & Harasek, M., 2019. "Economic assessment of membrane-based power-to-gas processes for the European biogas market," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 338-352.
    6. Blanco, Herib & Faaij, André, 2018. "A review at the role of storage in energy systems with a focus on Power to Gas and long-term storage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 1049-1086.
    7. Inkeri, Eero & Tynjälä, Tero & Laari, Arto & Hyppänen, Timo, 2018. "Dynamic one-dimensional model for biological methanation in a stirred tank reactor," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 95-107.
    8. Lewandowska-Bernat, Anna & Desideri, Umberto, 2018. "Opportunities of power-to-gas technology in different energy systems architectures," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 57-67.
    9. Kolb, Sebastian & Plankenbühler, Thomas & Hofmann, Katharina & Bergerson, Joule & Karl, Jürgen, 2021. "Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of renewable gas technologies: A comparative review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    10. Janke, Leandro & McDonagh, Shane & Weinrich, Sören & Murphy, Jerry & Nilsson, Daniel & Hansson, Per-Anders & Nordberg, Åke, 2020. "Optimizing power-to-H2 participation in the Nord Pool electricity market: Effects of different bidding strategies on plant operation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 820-836.
    11. Li, Li & Wang, Jing & Zhong, Xiaoyi & Lin, Jian & Wu, Nianyuan & Zhang, Zhihui & Meng, Chao & Wang, Xiaonan & Shah, Nilay & Brandon, Nigel & Xie, Shan & Zhao, Yingru, 2022. "Combined multi-objective optimization and agent-based modeling for a 100% renewable island energy system considering power-to-gas technology and extreme weather conditions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    12. Valerie Eveloy & Tesfaldet Gebreegziabher, 2018. "A Review of Projected Power-to-Gas Deployment Scenarios," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-52, July.
    13. Fózer, Dániel & Volanti, Mirco & Passarini, Fabrizio & Varbanov, Petar Sabev & Klemeš, Jiří Jaromír & Mizsey, Péter, 2020. "Bioenergy with carbon emissions capture and utilisation towards GHG neutrality: Power-to-Gas storage via hydrothermal gasification," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    14. Rajendran, Karthik & Browne, James D. & Murphy, Jerry D., 2019. "What is the level of incentivisation required for biomethane upgrading technologies with carbon capture and reuse?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 951-963.
    15. McDonagh, Shane & Wall, David M. & Deane, Paul & Murphy, Jerry D., 2019. "The effect of electricity markets, and renewable electricity penetration, on the levelised cost of energy of an advanced electro-fuel system incorporating carbon capture and utilisation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 364-371.
    16. Inkeri, Eero & Tynjälä, Tero & Karjunen, Hannu, 2021. "Significance of methanation reactor dynamics on the annual efficiency of power-to-gas -system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1113-1126.
    17. Vo, Truc T.Q. & Rajendran, Karthik & Murphy, Jerry D., 2018. "Can power to methane systems be sustainable and can they improve the carbon intensity of renewable methane when used to upgrade biogas produced from grass and slurry?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1046-1056.
    18. Strübing, Dietmar & Moeller, Andreas B. & Mößnang, Bettina & Lebuhn, Michael & Drewes, Jörg E. & Koch, Konrad, 2018. "Anaerobic thermophilic trickle bed reactor as a promising technology for flexible and demand-oriented H2/CO2 biomethanation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 543-554.
    19. Eveloy, Valerie & Gebreegziabher, Tesfaldet, 2019. "Excess electricity and power-to-gas storage potential in the future renewable-based power generation sector in the United Arab Emirates," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 426-450.
    20. Long, Aoife & Murphy, Jerry D., 2019. "Can green gas certificates allow for the accurate quantification of the energy supply and sustainability of biomethane from a range of sources for renewable heat and or transport?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).

    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:212:y:2018:i:c:p:1191-1202. 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.