Carbon capture and storage: A possible bridge to a future hydrogen infrastructure for Germany?

Baufumé, Sylvestre; Hake, Jürgen‐Friedrich; Linßen, Jochen; Markewitz, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.04.174

Cited by 12 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Won et al [77] • • Woo et al [78] • abundant domestic fossil resources into low-carbon transport fuels. Additionally, Baufumé et al [97] indicated that the possible spatial separation of electricity generation and centralized fossil hydrogen production with the CCS allow an additional degree of freedom in the energy system in enabling the transport of hydrogen instead of electricity transmission.…”

Section: Hydrogen Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydrogen supply chain network design: An optimization-oriented review

Manier

2019

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reviews the papers that pertain to the hydrogen supply chain network design (HSCND) models published in scientific journals. A few drawbacks (e.g., the treatment of uncertainty and feedstock problems) and missing aspects (e.g., the intertemporal integration planning) in the literature are identified, thus motivating the development of a comprehensive HSCND methodology. Key components of the hydrogen supply chain are presented; thereafter, the models are analyzed and classified based on their decisions, performance measures, uncertainties, solution methodologies, and other model features. Moreover, an effort was made to complete the critical pre-optimization preparation works, which are essential but have been overlooked in previous reviews. Finally, a list of potential problems for future research directions is recommended.

show abstract

Section: Hydrogen Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydrogen supply chain network design: An optimization-oriented review

Manier

2019

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Friedmann and coworkers who analyzed the published data of the commercial UCG pilots, a low carbon content fuel can be produced by combining UCG and carbon capture and storage (CCS), with a considerably lower cost compared to the ex-situ surface gasification. The existence of mature CO 2 capture technologies for decarbonizing the UCG product stream and the proximity of the potential CCS sites to the coal resources [2] are among the reasons that may potentially lead to an economic UCG-CCS process [3,4]. However, Friedmann et that the coupling of UCG-CCS is not addressed in the existing pilot projects nor in the modeling and simulation studies [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy and exergy analysis of alternating injection of oxygen and steam in the low emission underground gasification of deep thin coal

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

• We model UCG process with alternating injection of steam/oxygen.• We used exergy analysis to investigate the practicality of the process.• We show that the alternating injection UCG is practical at low pressure.• Zero emission conversion of coal is not currently practical.• Co-injection of steam/oxygen results in a higher recovery of coal. A R T I C L E I N F O Keywords:Underground coal gasification Alternating injection Exergy analysis Carbon capture and storage A B S T R A C TRecent studies have shown that by coupling the underground coal gasification (UCG) with the carbon capture and storage (CCS), the coal energy can be economically extracted with a low carbon footprint. To investigate the effect of UCG and CCS process parameters on the feasibility of the UCG-CCS process, we utilize a validated mathematical model, previously published by the same authors, that can predict the composition of the UCG product, temperature profile, and coal conversion rate for alternating injection of air and steam for unmineable deep thin coal layers. We use the results of the model to conduct an energy and exergy analysis of the UCG process. We study the effect of various process parameters on the efficiency of the UCG process, the zeroemission recovery factor of coal, and the total CO 2 emission of the process. Moreover, we compare the alternating injection of air/steam with the injection of an air and steam mixture.Exergy analysis shows that the alternating injection of air/steam describes a practical process for UCG at low pressure. However, injecting a mixture of steam and oxygen results in a practical recovery factor of coal higher than the alternating injection process. Additionally, we show that the zero-emission conversion of unmineable deep thin coal resources in a coupled UCG-CCS process, that is not practical with the current state of technology, can be realized by increasing the energy efficiency of the carbon dioxide capture process.

show abstract