Evaluation of process performance, energy consumption and microbiota characterization in a ceramic membrane bioreactor for ex-situ biomethanation of H2 and CO2

Alfaro, Natalia; Fdz-Polanco, M.; Fdz‐Polanco, F.; Díaz, Israel

doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2018.02.087

Cited by 52 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In an anaerobic process, multiple gases are produced and consumed, rendering standard estimation methods challenging and/or unreliable. The volumetric gas-liquid mass transfer coefficient (k L a) (also referred to as the absorption coefficient [57]) is frequently mentioned throughout BHM literature, but k L a is rarely obtained from experimental reactors [58]. While this data is scarce in the literature, it is crucial in allowing for the determination of the efficiency of a reactor system, and for cross-system performance comparisons.…”

Section: Biological Hydrogen Methanation Systems: a Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological hydrogen methanation systems – an overview of design and efficiency

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rise in intermittent renewable electricity production presents a global requirement for energy storage. Biological hydrogen methanation (BHM) facilitates wind and solar energy through the storage of otherwise curtailed or constrained electricity in the form of the gaseous energy vector biomethane. Biological methanation in the circular economy involves the reaction of hydrogenproduced during electrolysiswith carbon dioxide in biogas to produce methane (4H 2 + CO 2 = CH 4 + 2H 2), typically increasing the methane output of the biogas system by 70%. In this paper, several BHM systems were researched and a compilation of such systems was synthesized, facilitating comparison of key parameters such as methane evolution rate (MER) and retention time. Increased retention times were suggested to be related to less efficient systems with long travel paths for gases through reactors. A significant lack of information on gas-liquid transfer coefficient was identified.

show abstract

Section: Biological Hydrogen Methanation Systems: a Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological hydrogen methanation systems – an overview of design and efficiency

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, in the bio‐P2M reactor, CO 2 and H 2 molecules are also used for bacterial growth and, because of slip, not all CO 2 and H 2 which is available will be converted to methane . An overall CH 4 /H 2 ratio of 0.22 rather than the theoretical 0.25 has been reported . Here, such slip was not included, but a small loss of CH 4 was taken into account during upgrading (Table ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 An overall CH 4 /H 2 ratio of 0.22 rather than the theoretical 0.25 has been reported. 52 Here, such slip was not included, but a small loss of CH 4 was taken into account during upgrading ( Table 1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The bio-P2M trickle bed reactor needs energy for operation, estimated to range from 0.1 to 1.0 kWh Nm −3 green gas produced. [8][9][10]52,53 The gas that is formed contains water vapour and is at atmospheric pressure, so it needs to be dried and compressed before injection into the gas grid. Compression is considered part of the "Bio-P2M" transformation block (Figure 1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The total electricity consumption of the bio-P2M reactor is estimated to be 0.16 kWh Nm −3 gas flowing into the reactor. The bio-P2M reaction operates in the range of 30 C to 70 C. 8,9,52 Sufficient heat is produced during the exothermic process, so no additional heating is needed. Also, it is assumed that the CH 4 input (in biogas) in scenario B does not react with other components.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Farm‐scale bio‐power‐to‐methane: Comparative analyses of economic and environmental feasibility

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Power‐to‐gas technologies are considered to be part of the future energy system, but their viability and applicability need to be assessed. Therefore, models for the viability of farm‐scale bio‐power‐to‐methane supply chains to produce green gas were analysed in terms of levelised cost of energy, energy efficiency and saving of greenhouse gas emission. In bio‐power‐to‐methane, hydrogen from electrolysis driven by surplus renewable electricity and carbon dioxide from biogas are converted to methane by microbes in an ex situ trickle‐bed reactor. Such bio‐methanation could replace the current upgrading of biogas to green gas with membrane technology. Four scenarios were compared: a reference scenario without bio‐methanation (A), bio‐methanation (B), bio‐methanation combined with membrane upgrading (C) and the latter with use of renewable energy only (all‐green; D). The reference scenario (A) has the lowest costs for green gas production, but the bio‐methanation scenarios (B‐D) have higher energy efficiencies and environmental benefits. The higher costs of the bio‐methanation scenarios are largely due to electrolysis, whereas the environmental benefits are due to the use of renewable electricity. Only the all‐green scenario (D) meets the 2026 EU goal of 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, but it would require a CO2 price of 200 € t−1 to achieve the levelised cost of energy of 65 €ct Nm−3 of the reference scenario. Inclusion of the intermittency of renewable energy in the scenarios substantially increases the costs. Further greening of the bio‐methanation supply chain and how intermittency is best taken into account need further investigation.

show abstract

Membrane processes

Arabi¹,

Pellegrin

Aguinaldo

et al. 2020

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This literature review provides a review for publications in 2018 and 2019 and includes information membrane processes findings for municipal and industrial applications. This review is a subsection of the annual Water Environment Federation literature review for Treatment Systems section. The following topics are covered in this literature review: industrial wastewater and membrane. Bioreactor (MBR) configuration, membrane fouling, design, reuse, nutrient removal, operation, anaerobic membrane systems, microconstituents removal, membrane technology advances, and modeling. Other subsections of the Treatment Systems section that might relate to this literature review include the following: Biological Fixed-Film Systems, Activated Sludge, and Other Aerobic Suspended Culture Processes, Anaerobic Processes, and Water Reclamation and Reuse. This publication might also have related information on membrane processes: Industrial Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, and Fate and Effects of Pollutants.

show abstract

Evaluation of process performance, energy consumption and microbiota characterization in a ceramic membrane bioreactor for ex-situ biomethanation of H2 and CO2

Cited by 52 publications

References 28 publications

Biological hydrogen methanation systems – an overview of design and efficiency

Biological hydrogen methanation systems – an overview of design and efficiency

Farm‐scale bio‐power‐to‐methane: Comparative analyses of economic and environmental feasibility

Membrane processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About