International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004) 1471 – 1477

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhydene

Conversion of hydrogen sul%de to hydrogen by superadiabatic

partial oxidation: thermodynamic consideration
R.B. Slimanea , F.S. Laua , M. Khinkisa , J.P. Bingueb , A.V. Savelievb , L.A. Kennedyb;∗
a Gas Technology Institute, Energy Utilization Center, Des Plaines, IL 60018, USA
b Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago IL 60607, USA

Accepted 4 February 2004

Abstract
A thermodynamic model for the partial oxidation of hydrogen sul%de (H2 S) was used to study product compositions
attainable in the superadiabatic partial oxidation regime. Superadiabatic partial oxidation techniques permit attainment of
operating temperatures signi%cantly in excess of the adiabatic temperature of the incoming reactants. The superadiabatic partial
oxidation of H2 S is studied numerically by varying acid gas and oxidizer feed compositions with overall goal of optimizing
the hydrogen yield. These reactant parameters were varied as follows: (20% H2 S=80% N2 )=air, (20% H2 S=80% N2 )=O2 ,
100% H2 S=air, 100% H2 S=O2 , (75% H2 S=25% N2 )=air, and (75% H2 S=25% N2 )=O2 . The performed analysis predicts favorable
H2 and low SO2 yields in the region of ultra-rich superadiabatic partial oxidation at equivalence ratios above 6 for all studied
acid gas and oxidizer compositions. Pure oxygen as an oxidizer shifts the thermodynamic range to equivalence ratios ¿12.
Oxygen operation appears thermodynamically promising. With oxygen, high H2 and low SO2 yields are attainable in the
superadiabatic systems with lower degrees of heat recuperation.
? 2004 International Association for Hydrogen Energy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Hydrogen production; Filtration combustion; Porous media

1. Introduction elemental sulfur, but wasting the hydrogen component as

Hydrogen sul%de (H2 S) is present in the industrial world
mainly as an undesirable byproduct of fuel processing oper-
ations, including sweetening of sour natural gas, petroleum
re%ning, and coal gasi%cation. In sour natural gas, H2 S is the
primary sulfur component, along with lower levels of hydro-
carbon sul%des, and must be removed to ¡4 ppmv before
the gas can be transported in the interstate pipeline network.
In petroleum, H2 S appears at various stages in the re%ning
process, and it must be removed to facilitate the production
of low-sulfur liquid fuels. H2 S also appears in coal gasi%ca-
tion and is generally removed prior to fuel gas utilization.
For over a century, the Claus process has been the main-
stay of the sulfur recovery industry, converting H2 S into
∗ Corresponding author. Tel: +1-312-996-2400; fax: +1-312-
996-8664.
E-mail address: lkennedy@uic.edu (L.A. Kennedy).
water. Although modern Claus plants can recover sulfur
very eEciently, the process is uneconomical for small plants
and for gas streams containing low concentrations of H2 S.
Alternate processes, such as liquid Redox and scavenging
systems, are used to recover sulfur from small-scale sour
gas treating applications. However eFective, the operating
costs of these processes are substantial. Hence the opportu-
nity for an alternative sulfur recovery technology is forever
present, particularly if such a technology can reliably pro-
cess small-scale, low-concentration H2 S streams.
Hydrogen is currently needed in large quantities, and
is projected to be the fuel of choice for a number of ad-
vanced technologies that are being pursued. The greatest
need for hydrogen continues to be as feedstock in the syn-
thesis of ammonia and methanol, in the desulfurization
and hydrocracking in oil re%neries, and in the upgrading
of various hydrocarbon resources such as heavy oil and
coal [1]. There also will be a growing need for hydrogen

0360-3199/$ 30.00 ? 2004 International Association for Hydrogen Energy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2004.02.004
1472 R.B. Slimane et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004) 1471 – 1477
as fuel cell technology is introduced into the utility and
transportation sectors. Globally, the predominant method
of hydrogen production is through the steam reforming
of natural gas. Other established methods include partial
oxidation of residual oil, coal gasi%cation, and water elec-
trolysis. Because of the increasingly important status of
hydrogen as a fuel, many other exotic approaches have
been investigated, such as high-temperature electrolysis
of steam, thermal cracking of natural gas, thermochemi-
cal water splitting, solar photovoltaic water electrolysis,
and plasma decomposition of water. These technologies
can be classi%ed as thermal, thermochemical, electro-
chemical, photochemical, and plasmachemical methods.
A recent comprehensive review has been made to bring
to focus the possibilities and limitations in each of these
areas [2].
Due to the signi%cant amounts of H2 S available world-
wide, eForts have been made in recent years for the produc-
tion of hydrogen, in addition to sulfur, from H2 S through a
number of approaches [3,4]. A large number of schemes us-
ing diverse techniques have been studied for converting H2 S
to hydrogen and elemental sulfur. A compilation of these
processes was provided by Luinstra [5] and Funk [6]. Some
of these processes have been evaluated at the pilot-scale.
However, many of these processes require electrical energy
to decompose H2 S, and as a result, will not be suitable for
large-scale hydrogen production because of the high cost of
electricity [5]. It is widely recognized that the most direct
process of converting hydrogen sul%de into hydrogen and
sulfur is through thermal catalytic or noncatalytic decompo-
sition. However, due to energy considerations, this approach
has been considered impractical at temperatures exceeding
1200 K. In addition to being endothermic, the equilibrium
of the thermal decomposition of H2 S at these temperatures
is relatively low, and the reaction does not proceed to an
industrially important extent [2].
Superadiabatic partial oxidation of hydrogen sul%de in an
inert porous media presents itself as a technology capable
of simultaneously producing hydrogen and sulfur. Super-
adiabatic partial oxidation techniques permit attainment of
operating temperatures signi%cantly in excess of the adia-
batic temperature of the incoming reactants. This occurs be-
cause of the inherent self recuperation as the reaction wave
travels through the packed bed. Research interest in supera-
diabatic partial oxidation by %ltration combustion has been
driven by numerous applications such as utilization of low
calori%c fuels [7], low emission burners [8,9], and pollution
control devices. Recent novel applications by the UIC group
include fuel reforming and processing in the ultra-rich su-
peradiabatic partial oxidation waves [10–14].
Ultra-lean superadiabatic combustion [15–18] results in
complete burnout of the hydrocarbon fuel with the formation
of carbon dioxide and water. Thus, both the composition of
the %nal products and the heat release are well de%ned. In
contrast with the ultra-lean case, the partial oxidation prod-
ucts of rich superadiabatic waves are not clearly de%ned.
In this case, fuel is only partially oxidized in the superadi-
abatic wave and the total heat release could be kinetically
controlled by the degree of partial oxidation. As a result,
chemical kinetics, heat release, and heat transfer are strongly
coupled in the ultra-rich wave, making it a more complicated
and challenging phenomenon than the ultra-lean wave.
The application of ultra-rich superadiabatic partial ox-
idation in an inert porous medium for hydrogen gener-
ation is a novel area of research and technology. Ex-
perimental and numerical studies on the generation of
hydrogen-rich gases from hydrocarbons by superadiabatic
partial oxidation have shown the high potential of
this approach. Premixed methane–air superadiabatic
Mames have demonstrated conversions of methane to
hydrogen exceeding 60% [8,10]. In addition, stable
self-sustained Mames were generated using hydrogen sul-
%de (H2 S) as a feedstock in the range of equivalence
ratios from 2 to 5 with a hydrogen yield close to 20% [12].
For numerical analysis, detailed heat transfer and a com-
prehensive chemical mechanism of H2 S combustion is re-
quired for understanding and optimization of the process
[18–20]; Moreover thermodynamic simulation can be a use-
ful tool to establish process parameters. The main objectives
of the performed thermodynamic modeling include predic-
tion of adiabatic partial oxidation temperatures, prediction
of product gas compositions at given reactor temperatures,
estimation of hydrogen yields, estimation of the superadia-
batic partial oxidation limits, selection of appropriate matrix
for kinetic modeling and experimental eForts [20].
2. Thermodynamic model
The numerical model used in this study of H2 S super-
adiabatic partial oxidation is based on Gibbs free energy
minimization using the Stanjan computation subroutine de-
veloped by Reynolds [22]. The main advantage of the free
energy minimization approach is the ease of obtaining the
equilibrium composition using a list of chemical species, ex-
pected to be present at equilibrium, as an input. To perform
the calculations, a computer code using the Stanjan subrou-
tine was developed to perform extensive calculations over
the selected matrix of input parameters. The Gibbs free en-
ergies and heats of formation for all species (O2 , O, H2 , H,
OH, H2 O, S, S2 , N2 , H2 S, SO2 ) considered in the computa-
tional routine were obtained from JANAF Thermochemical
Tables [23].
Thermodynamic reactor modeling was performed by
varying input concentrations of the acid gas, H2 S, from
20% to 100% and oxidant from 21% O2 (air) to 100%. The
range of equivalence ratios from 2 to 16 was investigated
depending on the input mixture composition. These calcula-
tions were performed to determine the equilibrium mixture
composition at constant pressure (1 atm) and at a constant
enthalpy equal to that of the initial mixture. The predictions
of the adiabatic temperatures were used to estimate the typi-
cal operational range of the superadiabatic partial oxidation
 R.B. Slimane et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004) 1471 – 1477 1473

reactor. The equilibrium states of the reacted input mix- 2000 12

tures were determined at three selected temperatures (1300, 1800 (A)
1450, 1600 K). The selected temperatures are characteristic 10
1600 K

Concentration, %
high temperatures of the superadiabatic partial oxidation of 1600

Temperature, K
1450 K
H2 S. These temperatures also were achieved in experimen- 1400 8
1300 K
tal studies of Bingue et al. [11] and Slimane et al. [21] on
1200
superadiabatic partial oxidation of diluted H2 S mixtures. 6
1000 T
ad
4
800
3. Results and discussion S
2
H
2
600 2
After verifying the model, two sets of results were gener- 400
0
ated including adiabatic temperature predictions and prod- 2000 12
uct compositions at a given reactor (superadiabatic wave) 1800
(B)
temperature. The adiabatic temperatures and output com- 1600 K 10
positions were modeled for diFerent acid gas and oxidant

Concentration, %
1600

feed compositions. The following acid gas compositions
were considered 20% H2 S=80% N2 , 75% H2 S=25% N2 , and
100% H2 S. Air and oxygen were modeled as oxidants in the
feed mixtures. Selected thermodynamic modeling results are
presented for reactant compositions (20% H2 S=80% N2 )=air,
(20% H2 S=80% N2 )=O2 , 100% H2 S=air, 100% H2 S=O2 ,
(75% H2 S=25% N2 )=air, and (75% H2 S=25% N2 )=O2 ,
respectively.
Fig. 1 shows the results of thermodynamic modeling for
the (20% H2 S=80% N2 )=air mixture with equivalence ratios
ranging from 2 to 10. The predicted adiabatic temperature
is shown along with the speci%ed maximum superadiabatic
partial oxidation temperatures. The equilibrium concentra-
tions of H2 and S2 , and desired H2 S decomposition products,
for the speci%ed partial oxidation temperatures are given in
Fig. 1A. The equilibrium concentrations of the main unde-
sirable products, H2 S and SO2 , are shown in Fig. 1B. It
should be noted that S2 was the only sulfur species consid-
ered. This is because virtually all elemental sulfur is in the
form of S2 at the temperatures of interest.
The relation between the adiabatic temperature for the
feed and the speci%ed partial oxidation temperature is the
major factor determining the applicability of the superadi-
abatic partial oxidation concept. By de%nition, this ratio is
above one for superadiabatic partial oxidation. It is usually
considered to be limited to 3 for a linear superadiabatic re-
actor. However, temperature ratios up to 10 are achievable
for reciprocal Mow burners [24]. Fig. 1 shows that in the
considered range of equivalence ratios, the adiabatic tem-
perature is always lower than all selected partial oxidation
temperatures, implying that experimental realization of the
partial oxidation temperatures is feasible only in the supera-
diabatic regime.
As shown in Fig. 1, hydrogen concentration in the prod-
uct gas increases with increasing equivalence ratios, and as
expected, it is also higher for higher equilibrium tempera-
ture. The sulfur concentration increases signi%cantly in the
range of equivalence ratios from 1 to 4, reaching a maximum
near an equivalence ratio of about 5. Further increase of the
equivalence ratio causes slight reduction of the equilibrium
Temperature, K
1450 K
1400 8
1300 K
1200 T
ad 6
1000
SO
800
2 4
600 HS
2
2
400
0
2 4 6 8 10
Equivalence Ratio
Fig. 1. Thermodynamic predictions of adiabatic temperature and
equilibrium compositions for mixtures of 20% H2 S=80% N2 acid
gas feed and air. The equilibrium compositions are calculated as-
suming that superadiabatic partial oxidation temperatures are equal
to 1300, 1450, and 1600 K. (A) Hydrogen and sulfur concentra-
tions; (B) H2 S and SO2 concentrations.
sulfur concentration (Fig. 1A). Similar to hydrogen, the sul-
fur concentration is seen to rise with increasing equilibrium
temperature. This is explained mainly by higher extent of
H2 S decomposition in the initial feed. The concentration of
“unreacted” H2 S in the product gas increases with increas-
ing equivalence ratio, but is considerably lower for higher
equilibrium temperatures as shown in Fig. 1B. The concen-
tration of SO2 drops exponentially with increasing equiva-
lence ratio, approaching zero at equivalence ratios ¿6. The
concentration of SO2 also shows low sensitivity to the se-
lected equilibrium temperature; SO2 concentration slightly
increases with temperature that is likely due to the higher
stability of SO2 at elevated temperatures.
The use of pure oxygen as an oxidant with 20% H2 S=80%
N2 acid feed leads to an increase of the adiabatic temper-
ature (Fig. 2). This eFect is especially strong at the range
of low equivalence ratios. It is less pronounced in the limit
of high equivalence ratios where the presence of nitrogen
in the oxidant stream leaves the mixture composition prac-
tically unchanged due to the abundance of nitrogen in the
acid gas feed. The region above an equivalence ratio of
1474 R.B. Slimane et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004) 1471 – 1477

2000 15 2000 35
T (A)
(A) 1800 ad
1800 30
1600 K 1600 K
1600

Concentration, %
Concentration, %

Temperature, K
1600 25
1450 K
Temperature, K

1450 K
10 1400
1400 1300 K 1300 K
20
1200
1200 T
ad
1000 15
1000 S
S 5 2
2 800
800 10
H
2
600 H
600 2 5
400
400 2000 0
2000 0
15 35
T (B)
(B) 1800 ad 30
1800
1600 K
1600

Concentration, %
1600 K

Temperature, K
1600 25
Concentration, %
1450 K
Temperature, K

1450 K 1400
1400 10 1300 K
1300 K 20
1200
1200 T HS
ad
1000
2 15
1000 SO
2
5 800 SO 10
2
800
600
600 HS 5
2
400
400 0
0 2 4 6 8 10
2 4 6 8 10 Equivalence Ratio
Equivalence Ratio
Fig. 3. Thermodynamic predictions of adiabatic temperature and
Fig. 2. Thermodynamic predictions of adiabatic temperature and equilibrium compositions for mixtures of 100% H2 S acid gas feed
equilibrium compositions for mixtures of 20% H2 S=80% N2 acid and air. The equilibrium compositions are calculated assuming that
gas feed and 100% oxygen. The equilibrium compositions are cal- superadiabatic partial oxidation temperatures are equal to 1300,
culated assuming that superadiabatic partial oxidation temperatures 1450, and 1600 K. (A) Hydrogen and sulfur concentrations; (B)
are equal to 1300, 1450, and 1600 K. (A) Hydrogen and sulfur H2 S and SO2 concentrations.
concentrations; (B) H2 S and SO2 concentrations.

2.5 requires partial oxidation in superadiabatic regime. The
overall trends for the product concentrations are similar to
the trends observed in the case of air operation in Fig. 1.
The concentration of the products is slightly higher due to
the absence of nitrogen dilution. Also some variations, e.g.
clearly de%ned maximum in sulfur output, are observed at
low equivalence ratios where dilution eFects are especially
strong.
Fig. 3 shows the results of thermodynamic modeling for
the 100% H2 S=air mixture. The increased H2 S content of the
feed gas increases the adiabatic temperatures of the gas mix-
tures, shifting the area of superadiabatic partial oxidation to
higher equivalence ratios. The intersection of the adiabatic
temperature curve with the selected equilibrium tempera-
ture separates the areas of superadiabatic and underadiabatic
partial oxidation regimes. For example, the superadiabatic
partial oxidation with a maximum temperature of 1600 K
occurs in the region of equivalence ratios ¿3, while supera-
diabatic partial oxidation with the maximum temperature of
1300 K exists at equivalence ratios ¿5. The trends observed
for the concentrations of major chemical species are similar
to the previous case of (20% H2 S=80% N2 )=air mixture. The
hydrogen and H2 S concentrations increase almost linearly
with equivalence ratio. The hydrogen yield increases with
temperature and so does the sulfur concentration. The con-
centration of SO2 again shows a signi%cant drop with equiv-
alence ratio, approaching zero at equivalence ratios ¿6.
Fig. 4 presents results for the 100% H2 S=O2 mixture. In
here, the area of superadiabatic partial oxidation is shifted
signi%cantly to the ultra-rich region. The superadiabatic par-
tial oxidation region exists at equivalence ratios ¿6 for the
selected equilibrium temperature of 1600 K, and at equiva-
lence ratios ¿8 for the selected equilibrium temperature of
1300 K. Equilibrium concentrations of hydrogen and H2 S
increase with equivalence ratio; the initial linear trend shows
some saturation at high equivalence ratios as it approaches
the thermodynamic limit for pure H2 S (Fig. 4). The sulfur
concentration demonstrates a well-de%ned maximum near
an equivalence ratio of 4. The last represented case consid-
ers the acid feed of 75% H2 S/25% N2 , typical for industrial
applications. The observed trends for air (Fig. 5) and oxy-
gen (Fig. 6) are overall similar to the case of 100% H2 S
 R.B. Slimane et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004) 1471 – 1477 1475

2000 60 2000 35
T (A) T (A)
1800 ad
1800 ad 30
50
1600 K 1600 K

Concentration, %
1600 1600

Concentration, %
Temperature, K

Temperature, K
1450 K 1450 K 25
1400 40 1400
1300 K 1300 K
20
1200 30 1200
S 15
2 1000
1000
S
20 2
800 800 10

600 H 10 600
2 H 5
2
400 400
2000 0 0
60 2000 35
T (B) (B)
ad T
1800 1800 ad
50 30
1600 K 1600 K
1600

Concentration, %

Concentration, %
1600
Temperature, K

Temperature, K
1450 K 1450 K 25
1400 40
1300 K 1400 1300 K
20
1200 HS 30 1200
2
1000 1000 HS 15
2
20 SO
800 800 2 10
600 10 600
SO 5
2
400 400
0 0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 2 4 6 8 10
Equivalence Ratio Equivalence Ratio

Fig. 4. Thermodynamic predictions of adiabatic temperature and
equilibrium compositions for mixtures of 100% H2 S acid gas feed
and oxygen. The equilibrium compositions are calculated assuming
that superadiabatic partial oxidation temperatures are equal to 1300,
1450, and 1600 K. (A) Hydrogen and sulfur concentrations; (B)
H2 S and SO2 concentrations.
Fig. 5. Thermodynamic predictions of adiabatic temperature and
equilibrium compositions for mixtures of 75% H2 S=25% N2 acid
gas feed and air. The equilibrium compositions are calculated as-
suming that superadiabatic partial oxidation temperatures are equal
to 1300, 1450, and 1600 K. (A) Hydrogen and sulfur concentra-
tions; (B) H2 S and SO2 concentrations.

feed. The noticeable reduction of adiabatic temperature is
observed along with reduced concentrations of H2 , H2 S and
S2 .
The hydrogen yield, de%ned as the molar ratio of hy-
drogen output to the initial H2 S concentration, is shown in
Fig. 7. The equilibrium temperature is assumed to be equal
to 1450 K. The 100% H2 S feed is used in mixtures with oxy-
gen and air (Fig. 7A). The calculated adiabatic temperature
of O2 mixtures signi%cantly exceeds the adiabatic tempera-
tures of the air mixtures in the range of equivalence ratios
¡10. However, the hydrogen output of the air mixtures de-
%ned based on the superadiabatic partial oxidation temper-
ature of 1450 K is about 10% higher than the output of the
oxygen mixtures. This is attributed mainly to a shift of the
equilibrium due to the N2 dilution. It is expected that at the
limit of the extremely high equivalence ratios, the hydrogen
yields from both the O2 and air mixtures approach the same
thermodynamic limit as shown in Fig. 7A. Similar trends
in adiabatic temperature and hydrogen yield are observed
for the acid gas feed with composition of 75% H2 S/25% N2
(Fig. 7B). For this acid feed gas, typical for the industrial
Claus process, the oxygen enrichment again leads to an
increase of the adiabatic temperature and slightly reduced
hydrogen yield at a given equivalence ratio. However, the
overall eFect is slightly less pronounced if compared with
100% H2 S feed (Fig. 7A).
This suggests similar eFectiveness of air and
oxygen-based processes in hydrogen generation from H2 S
via the superadiabatic partial oxidation process. The clear
advantage of an oxygen-based process is the absence of N2
in the separation stage. Another important advantage of O2
operation is the wider range of equivalence ratios where
the superadiabatic partial oxidation can be maintained
with lower heat recuperation eEciencies. An additional
advantage of O2 over air, as an oxidant in the feed to the
superadiabatic partial oxidation reactor is that more acid
gas throughput can be processed.
The results of the thermodynamic modeling suggest
that the range of optimal operation of a superadiabatic
partial oxidation unit is above an equivalence ratio of 6,
where the H2 output is maximized and SO2 generation is
minimized. The stabilization of the superadiabatic partial
1476 R.B. Slimane et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004) 1471 – 1477

2000 2000 80
T (A) (A)
1800 ad 40 1800 T Oxygen 70
ad
1600 K

Hydrogen Yield, %
1600

Concentration, %
1600 60
Temperature, K

1450 K 1450 K

Temperature, K
1400 30
1300 K 1400 Thermodynamic 50
limit
1200 S 1200 40
2
20
1000 1000 Air 30
800 800 20
10 H
600 H 600 2 Oxygen
2 10
400 400
0 0
2000 60 2000 80
T (B) T (B)
ad
1800 1800 ad
70
50 Oxygen
1600 K

Hydrogen Yield, %
Concentration, %
1600 1600
Temperature, K

1450 K 60

Temperature, K
40 1450 K
1400 1300 K 1400
Thermodynamic 50
1200 1200 limit
30
40
HS
1000 2 1000 Air
20 30
800 800
H 20
2
600 10 600
SO 10
2
400 Oxygen
400
0
2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0
Equivalence Ratio Equivalence Ratio

Fig. 6. Thermodynamic predictions of adiabatic temperature and
equilibrium compositions for mixtures of 75% H2 S=25% N2 acid
gas feed and oxygen. The equilibrium compositions are calcu-
lated assuming that superadiabatic partial oxidation temperatures
are equal to 1300, 1450, and 1600 K. (A) Hydrogen and sulfur
concentrations; (B) H2 S and SO2 concentrations.
Fig. 7. Thermodynamically predicted hydrogen yield as a func-
tion of equivalence ratio for mixtures of 100% H2 S (A) and
75% H2 S=25% N2 (B) with air and oxygen. The partial oxidation
temperature is assumed to be 1450 K; the adiabatic partial oxi-
dation temperatures for air and oxygen mixtures are provided for
reference.

oxidation wave in the highest possible equivalence ratio can
be bene%cial due to the increased hydrogen yield and re-
duced SO2 output. The overall process diagram can include
the subsequent recycling of the unprocessed H2 S stream to
obtain zero H2 S output. Based on these considerations, the
area of high equivalence ratios is to be selected for kinetic
modeling of hydrogen output.
4. Conclusions
Thermodynamic equilibrium modeling can be a fruit-
ful approach for estimation of Mame temperatures and
product compositions. It is well recognized however,
that the comparison of measured and thermodynamic
equilibrium conversions demonstrates a good agreement
only in the case of relatively fast chemical kinetics.
Thermodynamic predictions are usually inapplicable at
low temperatures because of the slow rates of chemical
reactions.

The thermodynamics of superadiabatic partial oxidation

of hydrogen sul%de was studied numerically for a number
of acid gas and oxidizer feeds, varying equivalence ratio,
interstitial gas velocity, and temperature parameters. Equiv-
alence ratios ¿6 are thermodynamically favorable for
hydrogen production for all studied acid gas and oxidizer
compositions. Pure oxygen operation shifts the optimal
thermodynamic range to ultra-rich equivalence ratios ¿12.
Oxygen operation looks thermodynamically promising.
With oxygen, high H2 and low SO2 yields can be attained
at relatively low heat regeneration eEciencies.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the US Department of
Energy for supporting this work under DOE Contract
No: DE-FC36-99GO10450 and the technical support and
guidance of project manager Mr. Doug Hooker. We are
also very grateful to Mr. Walter Kunc, Remon J. Dihu,
Mikhail Atroshenko, and Dave Bowen of GTI for their
valuable help during the experimental portion of this
study.
 R.B. Slimane et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29 (2004) 1471 – 1477
References
[1] Srinivas G, Karpuk ME. Selective oxidation of hydrogen
sul%de to sulfur. In: Proceedings of the 1997 GRI Sulfur
Recovery Conference, 1997.
[2] Zaman J, Chakma A. Production of hydrogen and sulfur from
hydrogen sul%de. Fuel Process Technol 1995;41:159–98.
[3] Kaloidas VE, Papayannakos NG. Hydrogen production from
the decomposition of hydrogen sulphide. Equilibrium studies
on the system H2 S=H2 =Si , (i = 1; : : : ; 8) in the gas phase. Int
J Hydrogen Energy 1987;16(6):403–9.
[4] Faraji F, Safarik I, Strausz OP, Yildirim E, Torres ME. The
direct conversion of hydrogen sul%de to hydrogen and sulfur.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 1998;23(6):451–6.
[5] Luinstra E. Hydrogen from H2 S—a review of the leading
processes. In: Proceedings of the 1995 GRI Sulfur Recovery
Conference, Texas, 1995.
[6] Funk JE. Thermochemical hydrogen production: past and
present. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2001;26(3):185–90.
[7] Hanamura K, Echigo R, Zhdanok SA. Superadiabatic
combustion in a porous medium. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
1993;36:3201–9.
[8] Xiong TY, Khinkis MJ, Fish FF. Experimental study of a
high-eEciency, low emission porous matrix combustor-heater.
Fuel 1995;74(11):1641–7.
[9] Trimis D, Durst F. Combustion in a porous medium
—advances and applications. Combust Sci Technol
1996;121:153–68.
[10] Drayton MK, Saveliev AV, Kennedy LA, Fridman AA,
Li Y-E. Syngas production using superadiabatic combustion
of ultra-rich methane–air mixtures. In: Twenty-Seventh
Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute; 1998. p. 1361–7.
[11] Bingue JP, Saveliev AV, Fridman AA, Kennedy LA, %ltration
combustion of H2 S. Proceedings of the Central States Section,
The Combustion Institute, April 2000. p. 370–84.
[12] Bingue JP, Saveliev AV, Fridman AA, Kennedy LA.
Hydrogen production in ultra-rich %ltration combustion of
methane and hydrogen sul%de. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2002;27:643–9.
[13] Kennedy LA, Bingue JP, Saveliev AV, Fridman AA, Futko SI.
Chemical structure of methane/air %ltration combustion waves
1477
for fuel-lean and fuel-rich conditions. In: Twenty-Eighth
Symposium (International) on Combustion. Pittsburgh: The
Combustion Institute; 2000. p. 1431–8.
[14] Porshnev PI, Fridman AA, Saveliev AA, Kennedy LA.
In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on
Computational Heat and Mass Transfer COPPE/EE/UFRIJ.
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2001,
p. 22–6.
[15] Zhdanok S, Kennedy LA, Koester G. Superadiabatic
combustion of methane air mixtures under %ltration in a
packed bed. Combust Flame 1995;100(1):221–31.
[16] Howell JR, Hall MJ, Ellzy JL. Combustion of hydrocarbon
fuels within porous medium. Prog Energy Combust Sci
1996;22:121–45.
[17] Kennedy LA, Fridman AA, Saveliev AV. Superadiabatic
combustion in porous media: wave propagation, instabilities,
new type of chemical reactor. Int J Fluid Mech Res
1997;22(2):1–26.
[18] Kennedy LA, Saveliev AV, Freidman AA. Transient %ltration
combustion. Proceedings of the Mediterranean Combustion
Symposium, vol. 1, 1999. p. 105–28.
[19] Frenklach M, Lee JH, White JN, Gardiner WC. Oxidation of
hydrogen sul%de. Combust Flame 1981;41:1–16.
[20] Alzueta M, Bilbao R, Glarborg P. Inhibition and sensitization
of fuel oxidation by SO2 . Combust Flame 2001;127(4):
2234–51.
[21] Slimane RB, Lau FS, Dihu R, Atroshenko M, Khinkis
M, Saveliev A, Kennedy L. Production of hydrogen by
superadiabatic decomposition of hydrogen sul%de. Final
Report for GTI Project No. 61120-02, DOE/EERE Contract
DE-FC36-99GO10450, February 2003.
[22] Reynolds WC. The element potential method for chemical
equilibrium analysis: implementation in the interactive
program STANJAN. Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Stanford University, 1986.
[23] Stull DR, Prophet H. JANAF Thermochemical Tables, 2nd
Edition NSRDS-NBS 37, National Bureau of Standards,
1971.
[24] Contarin F, Saveliev AV, Fridman AA, Kennedy LA.
Numerical study on a porous media reciprocal Mow burner
with embedded heat exchangers. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
2003;36:949–61.