A comprehensive comparison of three renewable natural gas production technologies: Energy, exergy, economic, and environmental assessments

被引:0
|
作者
Zhang, Yu [1 ]
Fan, Mingjing [1 ]
Wang, Haoze [1 ]
Wang, Hao [1 ]
Lu, Youjun [1 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, State Key Lab Multiphase Flow Power Engn, Xian 710049, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Catalytic hydrothermal gasification; Renewable natural gas; Energy analysis; Energy utilization diagram; Economic evaluation; Life cycle assessment; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; SUPERCRITICAL WATER GASIFICATION; CONTINUOUS SALT PRECIPITATION; CATALYTIC GASIFICATION; HYDROGEN-PRODUCTION; THERMOCHEMICAL CONVERSION; LIGNOCELLULOSIC BIOMASS; BIOGAS PRODUCTION; WET BIOMASS; PILOT-PLANT;
D O I
10.1016/j.enconman.2025.119615
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
This study aims to conduct a comprehensive comparison of three technologies for producing renewable natural gas (RNG) from biomass, evaluating their technical, economic, and environmental perspectives: (i) Catalytic hydrothermal gasification (CHG) technology; (ii) Gasification and methanation (G&M) technology; (iii) Anaerobic digestion (AD) technology. Energy analysis reveals that the CHG system achieves the highest energy efficiency (81.30 %), attributed to its superior energy recovery and utilization capabilities. The AD system exhibits 50.17 % lower energy efficiency compared to the CHG system, primarily due to incomplete biomass conversion into biogas. Exergy analysis indicates that the CHG system demonstrates the highest exergy efficiency (63.38 %). The reaction unit constitutes the primary source of exergy losses across the three RNG production systems. Energy utilization diagram (EUD) analysis of the RNG production reaction in the CHG and G&M systems reveals that the CHG system experiences lower exergy losses, owing to its single-step conversion and milder reaction conditions. Economic evaluation highlights that the CHG system offers the most favorable economic performance, driven by its moderate investment cost (24.50 M<euro>), high RNG and steam production, and a competitive RNG break-even cost of 0.41 <euro>/Nm3. Raw material costs and by-product steam prices are critical factors influencing the economic viability of the process. Life cycle assessment reveals that the CHG and G&M systems exhibit superior environmental performance, whereas the AD system performs poorly due to the significant volume of digestate requiring treatment.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Techno-Economic, Energy, Exergy, and Environmental Comparison of Hydrogen Production from Natural gas, Biogas, and their Combination as Feedstock
    Mohammad Shamsi
    Siamak Moghaddas
    Esfandiyar Naeiji
    Saman Farokhi
    Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 2023, 48 : 8971 - 8987
  • [2] Techno-Economic, Energy, Exergy, and Environmental Comparison of Hydrogen Production from Natural gas, Biogas, and their Combination as Feedstock
    Shamsi, Mohammad
    Moghaddas, Siamak
    Naeiji, Esfandiyar
    Farokhi, Saman
    ARABIAN JOURNAL FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 2023, 48 (07) : 8971 - 8987
  • [3] Economic and environmental dimensions of energy production with the use of renewable technologies
    Koval, Viktor
    Ostapenko, Olga
    Halushchak, Olha
    Olczak, Piotr
    Dobrovolska, Kateryna
    Kaptalan, Sergey
    POLITYKA ENERGETYCZNA-ENERGY POLICY JOURNAL, 2023, 26 (01): : 5 - 22
  • [4] Thermodynamic, economic and environmental assessment of renewable natural gas production systems
    Skorek-Osikowska, Anna
    Martin-Gamboa, Mario
    Dufour, Javier
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT-X, 2020, 7
  • [5] Economic, Exergy, and Environmental Analyses of the Energy Assessments for US Industries
    Hasan, Alaa
    Selim, Osama M.
    Abousabae, Mohamed
    Amano, Ryoichi S.
    Otieno, Wilkistar
    JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 2021, 143 (11):
  • [6] Comparative life cycle environmental and cost assessments of renewable natural gas production pathways
    Kotagodahetti, Ravihari
    Hewage, Kasun
    Razi, Faran
    Sadiq, Rehan
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2023, 278
  • [7] Comparison of synthetic natural gas production pathways for the storage of renewable energy
    Fendt, Sebastian
    Buttler, Alexander
    Gaderer, Matthias
    Spliethoff, Hartmut
    WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, 2016, 5 (03) : 327 - 350
  • [8] Energy, exergy, economic, and environmental analysis of natural gas sweetening process using lean vapor compression: a comparison study
    Sun, Xiujun
    Yuan, Lizhi
    CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND PROCESS MODELING, 2024, 19 (03): : 329 - 348
  • [9] Exergy, economic and environmental analyses of the renewable energy assisted hydrogen, cooling and electricity production: A case study
    Karabuga, Arif
    Utlu, Zafer
    Yakut, Melik Ziya
    Ayarturk, Hasan
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2024, 75 : 253 - 261
  • [10] Optimal process selection for natural gas liquids recovery: Energy, exergy, economic, and environmental perspectives
    Islam, Muhammad
    Al-Sobhi, Saad A.
    Naquash, Ahmad
    Qyyum, Muhammad Abdul
    Lee, Moonyong
    ENERGY, 2024, 289