Transition to Renewable Energy Systems 2013
DOI: 10.1002/9783527673872.ch39
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Power to Gas

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For this purpose, the computed hydrogen pipeline from Section 3.3, which is designed for a peak hydrogen demand of 2.93 million tons in the year 2052 from Section 2.2.1 and for the 15 sources from Section 3.2, is assumed. Within this scope, the methodology outlined by Stolten et al [20,28,71] is of utility. Thereby, the necessary input values are divided into three categories, namely: "Best case", "middle case" and "worst case."…”
Section: Economic Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this purpose, the computed hydrogen pipeline from Section 3.3, which is designed for a peak hydrogen demand of 2.93 million tons in the year 2052 from Section 2.2.1 and for the 15 sources from Section 3.2, is assumed. Within this scope, the methodology outlined by Stolten et al [20,28,71] is of utility. Thereby, the necessary input values are divided into three categories, namely: "Best case", "middle case" and "worst case."…”
Section: Economic Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent year, power-to-gas conversion is highlighted where water electrolysis driven by renewable electricity is combined with catalytic conversion of CO 2 [5]. CO 2 is converted into CH 4 with the renewable H 2 , then distributed through existing natural gas grid for widespread use.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…compared to the exhaust streams from point sources, such as fossil fuel power plants (5–15% vol.). The minimum theoretical work required, based on Gibbs free energy, for CO 2 capture from atmospheric air at 400 ppm concentration is 19–22 kJ/molCO 2 , which is approximately four times higher than the 4.6–5.6 kJ/molCO 2 required for capture from a stream with 10–15% CO 2 (e.g., postcombustion capture in a coal‐fired power plant) 23,53–55 …”
Section: Co2 Capture From Source Streamsmentioning
confidence: 97%