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
  • [31] Techno-economic analysis and life cycle analysis of renewable natural gas production from brewery wastewater via ex-situ methanation processes
    Liu, Xuanbo
    Poddar, Tuhin K.
    Zhang, Jingyi
    Su, Xueqian
    Hawkins, Troy R.
    Huang, Haibo
    BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2025, 422
  • [32] Enhanced ammonia-cracking process via induction heating for green hydrogen: A comprehensive energy, exergy, economic, and environmental (4E) analysis
    Yun, Seunggwan
    Im, Junhyeok
    Kim, Junhwan
    Cho, Hyungtae
    Lee, Jaewon
    CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL, 2024, 491
  • [33] Environmental life cycle assessment for a cheese production plant towards sustainable energy transition: Natural gas to biomass vs. natural gas to geothermal
    Tarighaleslami, Amir H.
    Ghannadzadeh, Ali
    Atkins, Martin J.
    Walmsley, Michael R. W.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 275 (275)
  • [34] Energy, exergy, environmental, and economic analyses and multiobjective optimization of a DSORC system for waste heat utilization in low-concentration gas power generation
    Bu, Shujuan
    Yang, Xinle
    Li, Weikang
    Dai, Wenzhi
    Su, Chang
    Wang, Xin
    Liu, Xunan
    Yu, Ning
    Wang, Guanyu
    ENERGY, 2024, 286
  • [35] Comprehensive assessment of solar cracking of natural gas for the production and transportation of turquoise energy carriers
    Seklani, Yusra
    Bicer, Yusuf
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2024, 51 : 536 - 558
  • [36] Techno-economic and environmental impact assessment of hydrogen production processes using bio-waste as renewable energy resource
    Hosseinzadeh, Ahmad
    Zhou, John L.
    Li, Xiaowei
    Afsari, Morteza
    Altaee, Ali
    RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2022, 156
  • [38] Economic and environmental estimated assessment of power production from municipal solid waste using anaerobic digestion and landfill gas technologies
    Huang, Weiping
    Fooladi, Hadi
    ENERGY REPORTS, 2021, 7 : 4460 - 4469
  • [39] Energy, exergy, economic, and environmental analysis of an integrated system of high-temperature heat pump and gas separation unit
    Li, Xiaoqiong
    Zhang, Yufeng
    Fang, Lei
    Jin, Zhendong
    Zhang, Yan
    Yu, Xiaohui
    Ma, Xuelian
    Deng, Na
    Wu, Zhangxiang
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2019, 198
  • [40] Economic study of a large-scale renewable hydrogen application utilizing surplus renewable energy and natural gas pipeline transportation in China
    Liu, Bo
    Liu, Shixue
    Guo, Shusheng
    Zhang, Shuxing
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2020, 45 (03) : 1385 - 1398