2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcou.2021.101608
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

CO2 utilization for methanol production; Part I: Process design and life cycle GHG assessment of different pathways

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the ideal scenario, these two hydrogen sources will be combined, giving GWP indicator values in between those estimated here. The environmental impact is significantly lower in this study when using green hydrogen than those usually reported for a methanol plant [20]. These savings are the consequence of producing propane directly from CO 2 in a single step, as the estimated carbon footprint of producing propane with the current technology (crude oil at refinery) is significantly higher than that of conventional methanol production (natural gas).…”
Section: Life Cycle Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the ideal scenario, these two hydrogen sources will be combined, giving GWP indicator values in between those estimated here. The environmental impact is significantly lower in this study when using green hydrogen than those usually reported for a methanol plant [20]. These savings are the consequence of producing propane directly from CO 2 in a single step, as the estimated carbon footprint of producing propane with the current technology (crude oil at refinery) is significantly higher than that of conventional methanol production (natural gas).…”
Section: Life Cycle Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Most of the work has been done within the boundaries of the CO 2 hydrogenation plant, performing optimizations of the process parameters [14], estimations of the maxima CO 2 abated [15], or required costs (methanol and H 2 price or CO 2 tax) to make a green methanol plant affordable [16][17][18][19]. Khojasteh-Salkuyeh et al [20] performed a more specific study on the thermal efficiency of methanol production plants, and concluded that CO 2 hydrogenation can produce methanol more efficiently than dry reforming (48% vs 41% LHV) but still far from the conventional route (autothermal or steam reforming of methane) (68%). Nevertheless, their LCA suggested that CO 2 net zero emissions will be only achieved with very low electricity GHG intensity, making necessary the use of RES, especially for H 2 production.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…65 Recent LCA studies have demonstrated that CO 2 -based chemicals such as methanol and ethylene would have lower carbon footprint than their conventional counterparts only when using low-carbon hydrogen, such as green hydrogen from water electrolysis powered with zero-to low-carbon electricity. [66][67][68][69] Therefore, speedy upscaling of the capacity of zero-to low-carbon electricity is another pre-requisite for the transition to a fully CO 2 -based chemical industry.…”
Section: Towards Net-zero Emissions Of the Chemical Industrymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…12 In 2019, the world's methanol production was 148 million metric tons and is expected to rise to approximately 311 million metric tons by 2030, considering the versatility of its commercial applications. 13 Unfortunately, 90% of the current methanol demand is met using natural gas, thus depleting non-renewable resources and substantially contributing to GHG emissions. However, these issues have diverted the attention of industries and academia towards researching green methanol production routes using renewable energy resources.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%