A comparison of two hydrogen storages in a fossil-free direct reduced iron process

被引:19
作者
Andersson, Joakim [1 ]
Gronkvist, Stefan [1 ]
机构
[1] KTH Royal Inst Technol, Div Energy Proc, SE-10044 Stockholm, Sweden
关键词
Direct reduced iron; Methanol; Electrolysis; Hydrogen storage; Fossil-free; Steelmaking; POWER-TO-GAS; CARBON-DIOXIDE; METHANOL PRODUCTION; WATER ELECTROLYSIS; ENERGY-STORAGE; RENEWABLE POWER; CAPTURED CO2; SALT CAVERNS; WIND ENERGY; FUEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.06.092
中图分类号
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号
070304 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Hydrogen direct reduction has been proposed as a means to decarbonize primary steelmaking. Preferably, the hydrogen necessary for this process is produced via water electrolysis. A downside to electrolysis is the large electricity demand. The electricity cost of water electrolysis may be reduced by using a hydrogen storage to exploit variations in electricity price, i.e., producing more hydrogen when the electricity price is low and vice versa. In this paper we compare two kinds of hydrogen storages in the context of a hydrogen direct reduction process via simulations based on historic Swedish electricity prices: the storage of gaseous hydrogen in an underground lined rock cavern and the storage of hydrogen chemically bound in methanol. We find the methanol-based storages to be economically advantageous to lined rock caverns in several scenarios. The main advantages of methanol-based storage are the low investment cost of storage capacity and the possibility to decouple storage capacity from rate capacity. Nevertheless, no storage option is found to be profitable for historic Swedish electricity prices. For the storages to be profitable, electricity prices must be volatile with relatively frequent high peaks, which has happened rarely in Sweden in recent years. However, such scenarios may become more common with the expected increase of intermittent renewable power in the Swedish electricity system. (c) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:28657 / 28674
页数:18
相关论文
共 102 条
[91]  
Taibi E, 2020, GREEN HYDROGEN COST
[92]  
Tengborg P, 2014, P WORLD TUNN C 2014 P WORLD TUNN C 2014
[93]   Power-to-Gas: Electrolysis and methanation status review [J].
Thema, M. ;
Bauer, F. ;
Sterner, M. .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2019, 112 :775-787
[94]  
TRIBE MA, 1986, ENG COST PROD ECON, V10, P271, DOI 10.1016/S0167-188X(86)80025-8
[95]  
van Leeuwen C., 2018, Report on the costs involved with PtG technologies and their potentials across the EU
[96]   Design and simulation of a methanol production plant from CO2 hydrogenation [J].
Van-Dal, Everton Simoes ;
Bouallou, Chakib .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2013, 57 :38-45
[97]   Assessment of hydrogen direct reduction for fossil-free steelmaking [J].
Vogl, Valentin ;
Ahman, Max ;
Nilsson, Lars J. .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 203 :736-745
[98]   Hydrogen production with CO2 capture [J].
Voldsund, Mari ;
Jordal, Kristin ;
Anantharaman, Rahul .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2016, 41 (09) :4969-4992
[99]   Methanol steam reforming in a fuel cell drive system [J].
Wiese, W ;
Emonts, B ;
Peters, R .
JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES, 1999, 84 (02) :187-193
[100]   Electrified methane reforming: A compact approach to greener industrial hydrogen production [J].
Wismann, Sebastian T. ;
Engbaek, Jakob S. ;
Vendelbo, Soren B. ;
Bendixen, Flemming B. ;
Eriksen, Winnie L. ;
Aasberg-Petersen, Kim ;
Frandsen, Cathrine ;
Chorkendorff, Ib ;
Mortensen, Peter M. .
SCIENCE, 2019, 364 (6442) :756-+