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
  • [41] Energy Production from Natural Gas: Evaluation of Potential Environmental Impacts using Life Cycle Assessment Approach
    Hafizan, C.
    Noor, Z. Z.
    Michael, F. L.
    ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, PTS 1-4, 2014, 864-867 : 1132 - 1138
  • [42] Renewable methanol production based on in situ synergistic utilization of excavated waste and landfill gas: life cycle techno-environmental-economic analysis
    Tang, Jiehong
    Tang, Yuting
    Liu, Hongyu
    Peng, Songbing
    Sun, Ziwei
    Liu, Yuchen
    Deng, Jingmin
    Chen, Weilong
    Ma, Xiaoqian
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2024, 314
  • [43] Energy-efficient liquid hydrogen production using cold energy in liquefied natural gas: Process intensification and techno-economic analysis
    Kwon, Hweeung
    Do, Thai Ngan
    Kim, Jiyong
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2022, 380
  • [44] TECHNO-ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF HYDROGEN PRODUCTION BASED ON NATURAL GAS STEAM REFORMING PROCESS
    Galusnyak, Stefan
    Petrescu, Letitia
    Cormos, Calin-Cristian
    STUDIA UNIVERSITATIS BABES-BOLYAI CHEMIA, 2020, 65 (04): : 7 - 19
  • [45] Energy, exergy, economic and environmental comprehensive analysis and multi-objective optimization of a sustainable zero liquid discharge integrated process for fixed-bed coal gasification wastewater
    Zhang, Yanli
    Hou, Zhengkun
    Yao, Dong
    Qiu, Xiaomin
    Zhang, Hongru
    Cui, Peizhe
    Wang, Yinglong
    Gao, Jun
    Zhu, Zhaoyou
    Zhong, Limei
    CHINESE JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, 2023, 58 : 341 - 354
  • [46] Renewable energy storage system via coal hydrogasification with co-production of electricity and synthetic natural gas
    Minutillo, M.
    Perna, A.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2014, 39 (11) : 5793 - 5803
  • [47] Stochastic techno-economic analysis of power-to-gas technology for synthetic natural gas production based on renewable H2 cost and CO2 tax credit
    Lee, Boreum
    Lee, Hyunjun
    Kang, Sanggyu
    Lim, Hankwon
    JOURNAL OF ENERGY STORAGE, 2019, 24
  • [48] Comparison of Life Cycle GHG Emissions and Energy Consumption of combined Electricity and H2 production pathways with CCS : Selection of technologies with Natural Gas, Coal and Lignite as fuel for the European HYPOGEN Programme
    Bouvart, Frederique
    Prieur, Anne
    GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES 9, 2009, 1 (01): : 3779 - 3786
  • [49] Techno-economic analysis and life cycle assessment of hydrogen production from natural gas using current and emerging technologies
    Salkuyeh, Yaser Khojasteh
    Saville, Bradley A.
    MacLean, Heather L.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2017, 42 (30) : 18894 - 18909
  • [50] Comparative analysis of liquefied natural gas cold energy scenarios for hydrogen liquefaction: 3E (Energy, economic, and environmental) analysis
    Kim, Hyun Seung
    Cho, Churl-Hee
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2023, 48 (80) : 31267 - 31279