IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v258y2022ics0360544222018989.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative techno-economic performance analysis of underground coal gasification and surface coal gasification based coal-to-hydrogen process

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Huan
  • Guo, Wei
  • Liu, Shuqin

Abstract

Underground coal gasification (UCG) hydrogen production (UCG-H2) can convert deep coal resources difficult to mine into hydrogen, its economic performance needs to be investigated so the application prospect can be clarified. This paper take hydrogen production with capacity of 1.2 billion Nm3/a as objective, based on simulation results, comparative techno-economic analysis was conducted between UCG-H2 and Lurgi-based surface coal gasification (SCG) hydrogen production (SCG-H2). Benefiting from lower gasification equipment investment, capital investment of UCG-H2 without CCS is only 77.1% of that of SCG-H2, product cost is only 0.73 RMB/Nm3, lower than 1.69 RMB/Nm3 of SCG-H2, and will not be affected by price fluctuation. With 80% capture rate (CR), capital investment ratio increases to 81.8%, product cost of UCG-H2 increases to 1.05 RMB/Nm3, still possesses great cost advantage. If hydrogen market price less than 1.5 RMB/Nm3, IRR of UCG-H2 with 90% CR cannot reach the standard of 12%, possesses no economic feasibility, while SCG-H2 can only be economically feasible when hydrogen market price less than 2.2 RMB/Nm3 without CCS. By conducting sensitivity analysis, competitive carbon tax between UCG-H2 and SCG-H2 with 80% CR and without CCS are determined, as well as correlation between price and carbon tax when SCG-H2 is cost-competitive.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Huan & Guo, Wei & Liu, Shuqin, 2022. "Comparative techno-economic performance analysis of underground coal gasification and surface coal gasification based coal-to-hydrogen process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:258:y:2022:i:c:s0360544222018989
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544222018989
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125001?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. Li, Guoxuan & Wang, Shuai & Zhao, Jiangang & Qi, Huaqing & Ma, Zhaoyuan & Cui, Peizhe & Zhu, Zhaoyou & Gao, Jun & Wang, Yinglong, 2020. "Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis of biomass-to-hydrogen production with methane tri-reforming," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    2. Krawczyk, Piotr & Howaniec, Natalia & Smoliński, Adam, 2016. "Economic efficiency analysis of substitute natural gas (SNG) production in steam gasification of coal with the utilization of HTR excess heat," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1207-1213.
    3. Tock, Laurence & Maréchal, François, 2012. "Co-production of hydrogen and electricity from lignocellulosic biomass: Process design and thermo-economic optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 339-349.
    4. Lee, See Hoon & Yoon, Sang Jun & Ra, Ho Won & Son, Young Il & Hong, Jai Chang & Lee, Jae Goo, 2010. "Gasification characteristics of coke and mixture with coal in an entrained-flow gasifier," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 3239-3244.
    5. Chen, Jianjun & Yang, Siyu & Qian, Yu, 2019. "A novel path for carbon-rich resource utilization with lower emission and higher efficiency: An integrated process of coal gasification and coking to methanol production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 304-318.
    6. Chen, Qianqian & Gu, Yu & Tang, Zhiyong & Wang, Danfeng & Wu, Qing, 2021. "Optimal design and techno-economic assessment of low-carbon hydrogen supply pathways for a refueling station located in Shanghai," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    7. Olateju, Babatunde & Kumar, Amit, 2013. "Techno-economic assessment of hydrogen production from underground coal gasification (UCG) in Western Canada with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) for upgrading bitumen from oil sands," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 428-440.
    8. Olateju, Babatunde & Kumar, Amit, 2016. "A techno-economic assessment of hydrogen production from hydropower in Western Canada for the upgrading of bitumen from oil sands," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 604-614.
    9. Chisalita, Dora-Andreea & Cormos, Calin-Cristian, 2019. "Techno-economic assessment of hydrogen production processes based on various natural gas chemical looping systems with carbon capture," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 331-344.
    10. Nakaten, Natalie & Schlüter, Ralph & Azzam, Rafig & Kempka, Thomas, 2014. "Development of a techno-economic model for dynamic calculation of cost of electricity, energy demand and CO2 emissions of an integrated UCG–CCS process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 779-790.
    11. Taheri, M.H. & Mosaffa, A.H. & Farshi, L. Garousi, 2017. "Energy, exergy and economic assessments of a novel integrated biomass based multigeneration energy system with hydrogen production and LNG regasification cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 162-177.
    12. Sadeghi, Shayan & Ghandehariun, Samane & Rosen, Marc A., 2020. "Comparative economic and life cycle assessment of solar-based hydrogen production for oil and gas industries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    13. Wang, Gang & Wang, Shukun & Cao, Yong & Chen, Zeshao, 2022. "Design and performance evaluation of a novel hybrid solar-gas power and ORC-based hydrogen-production system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    14. Wang, Yinglong & Li, Guoxuan & Liu, Zhiqiang & Cui, Peizhe & Zhu, Zhaoyou & Yang, Sheng, 2019. "Techno-economic analysis of biomass-to-hydrogen process in comparison with coal-to-hydrogen process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 1063-1075.
    15. Lv, Pengmei & Wu, Chuangzhi & Ma, Longlong & Yuan, Zhenhong, 2008. "A study on the economic efficiency of hydrogen production from biomass residues in China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1874-1879.
    16. Li, Junjie & Zhang, Yueling & Yang, Yanli & Zhang, Xiaomei & Zheng, Yonghong & Qian, Qi & Tian, Yajun & Xie, Kechang, 2022. "Comparative resource-environment-economy assessment of coal- and oil-based aromatics production," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    17. Cormos, Calin-Cristian, 2012. "Integrated assessment of IGCC power generation technology with carbon capture and storage (CCS)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 434-445.
    18. Sadeghi, Shayan & Ghandehariun, Samane, 2022. "A standalone solar thermochemical water splitting hydrogen plant with high-temperature molten salt: Thermodynamic and economic analyses and multi-objective optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    19. Li, Jiaojiao & Zoghi, Mohammad & Zhao, Linfeng, 2022. "Thermo-economic assessment and optimization of a geothermal-driven tri-generation system for power, cooling, and hydrogen production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 244(PB).
    20. Karayel, G. Kubilay & Javani, Nader & Dincer, Ibrahim, 2022. "Effective use of geothermal energy for hydrogen production: A comprehensive application," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    21. Xiang, Dong & Qian, Yu & Man, Yi & Yang, Siyu, 2014. "Techno-economic analysis of the coal-to-olefins process in comparison with the oil-to-olefins process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 639-647.
    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. Dong, Maifan & Feng, Lele & Qin, Botao, 2023. "Characteristics of coal gasification with CO2 after microwave irradiation based on TGA, FTIR and DFT theory," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    2. Wang, Xiaorui & Zhang, Qinghe & Yuan, Liang, 2024. "A coupled thermal-force-chemical-displacement multi-field model for underground coal gasification based on controlled retraction injection point technology and its thermal analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 293(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. Tomonori Miyagawa & Mika Goto, 2022. "Hydrogen Production Cost Forecasts since the 1970s and Implications for Technological Development," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Yang, Qingchun & Yang, Qing & Xu, Simin & Zhang, Dawei & Liu, Chengling & Zhou, Huairong, 2021. "Optimal design, exergy and economic analyses of coal-to-ethylene glycol process coupling different shale gas reforming technologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    3. Chen, Jianjun & Yang, Siyu & Qian, Yu, 2019. "A novel path for carbon-rich resource utilization with lower emission and higher efficiency: An integrated process of coal gasification and coking to methanol production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 304-318.
    4. Xiang, Dong & Xiang, Junjie & Sun, Zhe & Cao, Yan, 2017. "The integrated coke-oven gas and pulverized coke gasification for methanol production with highly efficient hydrogen utilization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 78-91.
    5. Byun, Manhee & Kim, Heehyang & Lee, Hyunjun & Lim, Dongjun & Lim, Hankwon, 2022. "Conceptual design for methanol steam reforming in serial packed-bed reactors and membrane filters: Economic and environmental perspectives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    6. Huo, Hailong & Liu, Xunliang & Wen, Zhi & Lou, Guofeng & Dou, Ruifeng & Su, Fuyong & Zhou, Wenning & Jiang, Zeyi, 2021. "Case study of a novel low rank coal to calcium carbide process based on techno-economic assessment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    7. Verma, Aman & Kumar, Amit, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of hydrogen production from underground coal gasification," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 556-568.
    8. Wijayasekera, Sachindra Chamode & Hewage, Kasun & Hettiaratchi, Patrick & Razi, Faran & Sadiq, Rehan, 2023. "Planning and development of waste-to-hydrogen conversion facilities: A parametric analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(PA).
    9. Fan, Jing-Li & Yu, Pengwei & Li, Kai & Xu, Mao & Zhang, Xian, 2022. "A levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH) comparison of coal-to-hydrogen with CCS and water electrolysis powered by renewable energy in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    10. Man, Yi & Yang, Siyu & Zhang, Jun & Qian, Yu, 2014. "Conceptual design of coke-oven gas assisted coal to olefins process for high energy efficiency and low CO2 emission," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 197-205.
    11. Chen, Xiaoyuan & Pang, Zhou & Jiang, Shan & Zhang, Mingshun & Feng, Juan & Fu, Lin & Shen, Boyang, 2023. "A novel LH2/GH2/battery multi-energy vehicle supply station using 100% local wind energy: Technical, economic and environmental perspectives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    12. Li, Junjie, 2024. "Spatialized carbon-energy-water footprint of emerging coal chemical industry in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    13. Hosseinzadeh, Ahmad & Zhou, John L. & Li, Xiaowei & Afsari, Morteza & Altaee, Ali, 2022. "Techno-economic and environmental impact assessment of hydrogen production processes using bio-waste as renewable energy resource," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    14. Kelem, Ummu Rumeysa & Yilmaz, Fatih, 2024. "An innovative geothermal based multigeneration plant: Thermodynamic and economic assessment for sustainable outputs with compressed hydrogen," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 295(C).
    15. Jhulimar Castro & Jonathan Leaver & Shusheng Pang, 2022. "Simulation and Techno-Economic Assessment of Hydrogen Production from Biomass Gasification-Based Processes: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-37, November.
    16. Prabu, V. & Geeta, K., 2015. "CO2 enhanced in-situ oxy-coal gasification based carbon-neutral conventional power generating systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 672-683.
    17. Feng, Ye & Chen, Jinglong & Luo, Ji, 2024. "Life cycle cost analysis of power generation from underground coal gasification with carbon capture and storage (CCS) to measure the economic feasibility," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    18. Li, Guoxuan & Wang, Shuai & Zhao, Jiangang & Qi, Huaqing & Ma, Zhaoyuan & Cui, Peizhe & Zhu, Zhaoyou & Gao, Jun & Wang, Yinglong, 2020. "Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis of biomass-to-hydrogen production with methane tri-reforming," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    19. Okunlola, Ayodeji & Davis, Matthew & Kumar, Amit, 2023. "Assessing the cost competitiveness of electrolytic hydrogen production from small modular nuclear reactor-based power plants: A price-following perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 346(C).
    20. Safder, Usman & Loy-Benitez, Jorge & Yoo, ChangKyoo, 2024. "Techno-economic assessment of a novel integrated multigeneration system to synthesize e-methanol and green hydrogen in a carbon-neutral context," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 290(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:energy:v:258:y:2022:i:c:s0360544222018989. 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.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    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.