2016
DOI: 10.1002/cssc.201600394
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Gross‐Margin Model for Defining Technoeconomic Benchmarks in the Electroreduction of CO2

Abstract: We introduce a gross-margin model to evaluate the technoeconomic feasibility of producing different C1 -C2 chemicals such as carbon monoxide, formic acid, methanol, methane, ethanol, and ethylene through the electroreduction of CO2 . Key performance benchmarks including the maximum operating cell potential (Vmax ), minimum operating current density (jmin ), Faradaic efficiency (FE), and catalyst durability (tcatdur ) are derived. The Vmax values obtained for the different chemicals indicate that CO and HCOOH a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
509
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 557 publications
(524 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
4
509
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of important note, the commercial viability of CO 2 RR to different products depends on a series of factors including not only the market demand of the product, but also the material, manufacturing, and separation costs. Although it is intuitively more desirable to control the selectivity toward higher‐valued products such as ethylene, ethanol, acetate, n ‐propanol, or even C 4 products, recent technoeconomic analysis unambiguously points out that the two‐electron electrochemical CO 2 RR to CO or formic acid is the most economically viable, whereas those C 2 –C 4 products other than propanol are not even profitable . This is understandable because the electricity cost is the major contributor to the operation cost of CO 2 electrolyzer.…”
Section: Fundamentals Of Electrochemical Co2 Reductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of important note, the commercial viability of CO 2 RR to different products depends on a series of factors including not only the market demand of the product, but also the material, manufacturing, and separation costs. Although it is intuitively more desirable to control the selectivity toward higher‐valued products such as ethylene, ethanol, acetate, n ‐propanol, or even C 4 products, recent technoeconomic analysis unambiguously points out that the two‐electron electrochemical CO 2 RR to CO or formic acid is the most economically viable, whereas those C 2 –C 4 products other than propanol are not even profitable . This is understandable because the electricity cost is the major contributor to the operation cost of CO 2 electrolyzer.…”
Section: Fundamentals Of Electrochemical Co2 Reductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, regarding an industrial implementation of electrochemical CO 2 electrolyzers towards CO there are still several challenges that must be solved. For electrolyzers to be commercially applicable, long‐term stability and selectivity with current densities above 200 mA/cm 2 are required . Consequently, the academic community has given much attention to improve the electrocatalyst.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1] In particular, several techno-economic analyses proposed the CO 2 reduction reaction (CO 2 RR) to carbon monoxide (CO) or formate/formic acid (HCOO − /HCOOH) to be economically most viable. [3] Due to the low solubility of CO 2 in water (≈34 × 10 −3 m at 1 bar and 25 °C [4] ), the current density for CO 2 RR is limited to ≈20 mA cm −2 using dissolved CO 2 as reactant. [3] Due to the low solubility of CO 2 in water (≈34 × 10 −3 m at 1 bar and 25 °C [4] ), the current density for CO 2 RR is limited to ≈20 mA cm −2 using dissolved CO 2 as reactant.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%