Optimal process design for the polygeneration of SNG, power and heat by hydrothermal gasification of waste biomass: Process optimisation for selected substrates

Gassner, Martin; Vogel, Frédéric; Heyen, Georges; Maréchal, François

doi:10.1039/c0ee00634c

Cited by 35 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here, both of the authors investigated the energy efficiencies of wood gasification processes. The results of Gassner et al [28] showed that the overall energy efficiency for a wood gasification process targeting the production of synthetic natural gas (SNG) in SCWG is 70%. The overall energy efficiency is given in Equation (1) …”

Section: Gasificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 8 shows the comparison of supercritical water gasification (SCWG) with the other biomass conversion routes on heat utilization efficiency basis. Another comparison between conventional gasification and SCWG can be made based on the works of Gassner et al [28] and van der Meijden et al [29]. Here, both of the authors investigated the energy efficiencies of wood gasification processes.…”

Section: Gasificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using AspenPlus TM 2004.1 software for the process simulations, their results showed that 62% of the manure's lower heating value (LHV) is converted to SNG and 71% of wood's LHV is converted to SNG. Similarly, Gassner et al [28,132] offered optimal process design for polygeneration of SNG, power and heat from various biomass sources varying from a typical lignocellulosic material (modeled as CH1.35O0.63) to manure and sewage sludge. The authors made an extensive analysis from both thermo-economic and optimization points of view concerning the processes.…”

Section: Process Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, the authors used the software packages of FactSage 5.4.1 and SimuSage 1.12 for the prediction of the equilibrium partitioning of 12 elements on the basis of compounds and phases for a mixture of pig and cow manure sample. The simulations have been performed for a wide range of temperatures (100-580 °C), pressures (25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30) and dry mass concentrations (5-20 wt%). The same research group [128] has also developed a multi-phase thermodynamic model for the prediction of equilibrium state compounds for supercritical water gasification of biomass systems.…”

Section: Thermodynamic Equilibrium Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Supercritical Water Gasification of Biomass: A Literature and Technology Overview

Yakaboylu

Harinck

Smit³

et al. 2015

Energies

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The supercritical water gasification process is an alternative to both conventional gasification as well as anaerobic digestion as it does not require drying and the process takes place at much shorter residence times; a few minutes at most. The drastic changes in the thermo-physical properties of water from the liquid state to the supercritical state make it a promising technology for the efficient conversion of wet biomass into a product gas that after upgrading can be used as substitute natural gas. The earliest research goes back as far as the 1970s and since then, supercritical water has been the subject of many research works in the field of thermochemical conversion of wet biomass. This article reviews the state of the art of the supercritical water gasification technology starting from the thermophysical properties of water and the chemistry of reactions to the process challenges of such a biomass based supercritical water gasification process plant.

show abstract

Section: Gasificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gasificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Process Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Thermodynamic Equilibrium Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Supercritical Water Gasification of Biomass: A Literature and Technology Overview

Yakaboylu

Harinck

Smit³

et al. 2015

Energies

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Catalytic SCWG allows the production of SNG from biomass without prior drying (water content ¼ 50%e90%) at high chemical energy conversion efficiencies of up to 70%e77% [10,11]. Such high energy conversion efficiencies are possible because at supercritical pressure the specific and latent heat demand of water is strongly decreased, thus being a promising biofuel pathway for feedstocks with high water content like microalgae [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Producing synthetic natural gas from microalgae via supercritical water gasification: A techno-economic sensitivity analysis

Brandenberger

Matzenberger

Vogel

et al. 2013

Biomass and Bioenergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthetic natural gas (SNG)Supercritical water gasification Sensitivity analysis Bioenergy Process economics a b s t r a c t A techno-economic sensitivity analysis of the production of synthetic natural gas (SNG) via catalytic supercritical water gasification (SCWG) of microalgae produced in raceway ponds (RP), tubular-, or flat-panel-airlift photobioreactors (FPA-PBR) has been perfomed. The aim of combining microalgae production with SCWG is to close material flows with respect to water and nutrients, the so called SunCHem process. The sensitivity analysis is based on an annual production of 86,500 t of microalgae biomass yielding 1.14 PJ of methane per year. The sensitivity analysis showed that with an annual algae productivity of 38.5 t per hectare of RP an energy return on energy invested (EROEI) of 1.84 can be achieved for the self-sufficient base case scenario. An SNG production cost of 194 V GJ À1 was obtained forRP. An EROEI of 0.08 was calculated for tubular PBR with a productivity of 75.1 t ha À1 a À1 in the base case scenario and thus was found to be inappropriate for SNG production. EROEI for FPA-PBR with an assumed microalgae productivity of 79 t ha À1 a À1 was found to be 1.01in the base case scenario and an SNG production cost of 266 V GJ À1. With significantly more optimistic assumptions concerning microalgae productivity, energy input and capital requirement with respect to microalgae cultivation, an EROEI of 3.6e5.8 and SNG production costs of 53e90 V GJ À1 were found for RP, whereas for FPA-PBR an EROEI of 2e3.7 and SNG production costs of 30e103 V GJ À1 were obtained.ª 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. IntroductionThe potential of microalgae as a renewable energy source, as a provider of renewable bulk and high value chemicals for the chemical and pharmaceutical industry, as a source of proteins for animal feedstock and fertilizer has made them the subject of considerable research effort in the past [1,2]. However, the economic viability and energy efficiency of biofuels made from microalgae are presently intensively discussed. The main obstacles to large scale introduction of biofuels from microalgae are the high investment costs and energy input required for microalgae cultivation and harvesting [3,4]. b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 3 ) 1 e9Please cite this article in press as: Brandenberger M, et al., Producing synthetic natural gas from microalgae via supercritical water gasification: A techno-economic sensitivity analysis, Biomass and Bioenergy (2013), http://dx

show abstract

Pre‐Combustion Carbon Capture

Pardemann

Meyer

2015

Handbook of Clean Energy Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pre‐combustion carbon capture based on integrated gasification combined cycle ( IGCC ) technology represents one approach to fossil fueled power generation with carbon capture and storage ( CCS ) in the short run. It is based on the generation of a syngas often from coal followed by a complex syngas treatment before combustion in a combined cycle power block. Because of the gas treatment and the higher combined cycle efficiency, IGCC power plants are regarded as highly efficient and low emission power plants. If designed for CCS , CO 2 will be separated from the fuel gas before combustion in the gas turbine. The CO 2 is captured at advantageous conditions with liquid solvents and obtained at a high quality. All major process units forming an IGCC power plant are well demonstrated in the electricity generation sector or the chemical industry. However, IGCC plants feature higher complexity and significantly higher capital investment than conventional power plants. Despite some demonstration plants, the technology has not reached full maturity or availabilities as they are achieved by competing coal power plants. Consequently, it is still yielding high costs of electricity. A new approach to overcome economic drawbacks and with the potential to integrate renewable with fossil power generation is given by polygeneration concepts. It often relies on the combination of IGCC with coal‐to‐liquids routes allowing for the coproduction of electricity and synthesis products. Polygeneration allows for a significant reduction of CO 2 emissions by integrating renewable energy sources. However, conceptual and technological development is required for both, IGCC and polygeneration plants, for wider future application.

show abstract

Optimal process design for the polygeneration of SNG, power and heat by hydrothermal gasification of waste biomass: Process optimisation for selected substrates

Cited by 35 publications

References 29 publications

Supercritical Water Gasification of Biomass: A Literature and Technology Overview

Supercritical Water Gasification of Biomass: A Literature and Technology Overview

Producing synthetic natural gas from microalgae via supercritical water gasification: A techno-economic sensitivity analysis

Pre‐Combustion Carbon Capture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About