A comprehensive comparison of three renewable natural gas production technologies: Energy, exergy, economic, and environmental assessments

被引:0
作者
Zhang, Yu [1 ]
Fan, Mingjing [1 ]
Wang, Haoze [1 ]
Wang, Hao [1 ]
Lu, Youjun [1 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, State Key Lab Multiphase Flow Power Engn, Xian 710049, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Catalytic hydrothermal gasification; Renewable natural gas; Energy analysis; Energy utilization diagram; Economic evaluation; Life cycle assessment; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; SUPERCRITICAL WATER GASIFICATION; CONTINUOUS SALT PRECIPITATION; CATALYTIC GASIFICATION; HYDROGEN-PRODUCTION; THERMOCHEMICAL CONVERSION; LIGNOCELLULOSIC BIOMASS; BIOGAS PRODUCTION; WET BIOMASS; PILOT-PLANT;
D O I
10.1016/j.enconman.2025.119615
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
This study aims to conduct a comprehensive comparison of three technologies for producing renewable natural gas (RNG) from biomass, evaluating their technical, economic, and environmental perspectives: (i) Catalytic hydrothermal gasification (CHG) technology; (ii) Gasification and methanation (G&M) technology; (iii) Anaerobic digestion (AD) technology. Energy analysis reveals that the CHG system achieves the highest energy efficiency (81.30 %), attributed to its superior energy recovery and utilization capabilities. The AD system exhibits 50.17 % lower energy efficiency compared to the CHG system, primarily due to incomplete biomass conversion into biogas. Exergy analysis indicates that the CHG system demonstrates the highest exergy efficiency (63.38 %). The reaction unit constitutes the primary source of exergy losses across the three RNG production systems. Energy utilization diagram (EUD) analysis of the RNG production reaction in the CHG and G&M systems reveals that the CHG system experiences lower exergy losses, owing to its single-step conversion and milder reaction conditions. Economic evaluation highlights that the CHG system offers the most favorable economic performance, driven by its moderate investment cost (24.50 M<euro>), high RNG and steam production, and a competitive RNG break-even cost of 0.41 <euro>/Nm3. Raw material costs and by-product steam prices are critical factors influencing the economic viability of the process. Life cycle assessment reveals that the CHG and G&M systems exhibit superior environmental performance, whereas the AD system performs poorly due to the significant volume of digestate requiring treatment.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Energy, exergy and economic assessments of a novel integrated biomass based multigeneration energy system with hydrogen production and LNG regasification cycle
    Taheri, M. H.
    Mosaffa, A. H.
    Farshi, L. Garousi
    ENERGY, 2017, 125 : 162 - 177
  • [22] Energy, exergy, environmental and economic analysis of solvent-based post-combustion carbon capture for ethylene production
    Dong, Zhaoxi
    Liu, Yurong
    Ma, Jin
    Ding, Yuxing
    Oko, Eni
    Wang, Meihong
    Du, Wenli
    Qian, Feng
    SEPARATION AND PURIFICATION TECHNOLOGY, 2025, 359
  • [23] Comparison of feedstocks and technologies for biodiesel production: An environmental and techno-economic evaluation
    Rincon, L. E.
    Jaramillo, J. J.
    Cardona, C. A.
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2014, 69 : 479 - 487
  • [24] Integrated techno-economic and environmental assessments of sixty scenarios for co-firing biomass with coal and natural gas
    Agbor, Ezinwa
    Oyedun, Adetoyese Olajire
    Zhang, Xiaolei
    Kumar, Amit
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2016, 169 : 433 - 449
  • [25] A comprehensive analysis of energy and exergy characteristics for a natural gas city gate station considering seasonal variations
    Olfati, Mohammad
    Bahiraei, Mehdi
    Heidari, Setareh
    Veysi, Farzad
    ENERGY, 2018, 155 : 721 - 733
  • [26] Environmental and economic performance assessment of alternative acid gas removal technologies for waste-to-energy plants
    Dal Pozzo, Alessandro
    Guglielmi, Daniele
    Antonioni, Giacomo
    Tugnoli, Alessandro
    SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION, 2018, 16 : 202 - 215
  • [27] Natural gas and grid electricity for seawater desalination: An economic and environmental life-cycle comparison
    Cherchi, Carla
    Badruzzaman, Mohammad
    Becker, Larry
    Jacangelo, Joseph G.
    DESALINATION, 2017, 414 : 89 - 97
  • [28] Greenhouse-gas emissions of Canadian liquefied natural gas for use in China: Comparison and synthesis of three independent life cycle assessments
    Nie, Yuhao
    Zhang, Siduo
    Liu, Ryan Edward
    Roda-Stuart, Daniel Javier
    Ravikumar, Arvind P.
    Bradley, Alex
    Masnadi, Mohammad S.
    Brandt, Adam R.
    Bergerson, Joule
    Bi, Xiaotao Tony
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 258
  • [29] Environmental life cycle assessment of glycerine production: Energy transition from natural gas to biomass
    Ghannadzadeh, Ali
    Tarighaleslami, Amir Hossein
    SUSTAINABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES AND ASSESSMENTS, 2020, 42
  • [30] Economic and environmental analysis of hydrogen production when complementing renewable energy generation with grid electricity
    Hurtubia, Byron
    Sauma, Enzo
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2021, 304