Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Vista Eco
Vista Eco
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: More and more attention has been paid to hydrogen due to its cleanity and high energy density. However,
Electrified Steam methane reforming hydrogen production from conventional steam methane reforming has high CO2 emission and heat loss in the
Renewable power accommodation flue gas. Hydrogen from water electrolysis has the defects of high cost and low efficiency. Electrified steam
Power to gas
methane reforming (E-SMR) process is proposed by integrating power to gas technology with steam methane
Hydrogen production
Techno-economic analysis
reforming based on the principle of efficient electrothermal conversion and energy cascade utilization. Electrical
equipment is used in the process to eliminate the above drawbacks and accommodate renewable electricity. The
novel process is simulated by chemical equilibrium and mass-energy conservation methods and analyzed from
energy, environment, and economy. The optimal performance of E-SMR processes is investigated by adjusting
the steam carbon ratio and reforming temperature under appropriate pressure. The optimal thermal efficiency
(97.27 %) is improved by 18 percentage points at least compared to current industrial steam methane reforming
processes. The optimal electrical efficiency (88.68 %) is at least 11.48 percentage points higher than that of
running commercial water electrolysis systems. The novel process achieves low carbon emission (even zero-
emission with CCS) since the required reforming energy is electricity instead of combustion. The cost of the
proposed process can be minimized to 2.47 $/kg H2 through economic analysis. This work may provide an
efficient, low-carbon, and economical option for hydrogen production.
* Corresponding author at: State Key Laboratory of Multiphase Flow in Power Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China.
E-mail address: yinheliu@mail.xjtu.edu.cn (Y. Liu).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115513
Received 13 January 2022; Received in revised form 6 March 2022; Accepted 16 March 2022
Available online 23 March 2022
0196-8904/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Ontario [10]. H2 mixing ratio in natural gas can be in a fluctuation of 0 process with CCS technology, the CO2 emission is still more than 1 kg/kg
~ 20 % in the hydrogen injection in natural gas project of Ameland in H2 [22–24]. The additional CO2 emission and inefficiencies associated
The Netherlands [11]. On the other hand, the cost of hydrogen produced with combustion in conventional SMR processes have not been funda
by water electrolysis is much higher than those of steam methane mentally addressed.
reforming (SMR) due to its high energy consumption [12,13]. Moreover, Suppose the electricity produced by renewable energy is introduced
the scale of the commercial water electrolysis project is still small. into the SMR process instead of combustion. Firstly, the flue gas heat loss
Hydrogen production from water electrolysis takes up only about 4 % of the conventional SMR process can be eliminated, avoiding the CO2
[14]. The primary process of hydrogen production is SMR, which ac released by the combustion of methane as fuel. At present, a large
counts for 48 % of the global hydrogen demand [15,16]. SMR process amount of industrial hydrogen comes from SMR. SMR with renewable
produces hydrogen by the reaction of steam and methane under high- electricity can significantly reduce the energy consumption and CO2
temperature catalysis, which is a conventional and cost-effective emission of hydrogen production. Centi et al. [25] proposed that the
method. The reforming reaction in SMR process is strongly endo integration of renewable energy in chemical production can effectively
thermic, as shown in Eqs. (1) and (2), requiring extra methane to be replace part of fossil energy. Secondly, the scale and efficiency of electric
burned in the combustion chamber for heating [17]. The burning of hydrogen production can be improved, and the SMR process can also be
methane not only brings significant heat loss but also induces additional optimized. Spagnol et al. [26] proposed using electricity to provide heat
CO2 emission. energy for the reformer in the SMR process. Their experimental studies
showed the size of the reforming reactor could be reduced by the electric
CH4 + H2 O ↔ CO + 3H2 ΔH298 = 206.2 kJ/mol (1)
heating method, and the methane conversion rate reached 80 %. Palma
et al. [27–29] conducted SMR experiments using Joule heating or mi
CH4 + 2H2 O ↔ CO2 + 4H2 ΔH298 = 164.9 kJ/mol (2)
crowave heated reactors and found that electric heating could enhance
To improve the thermal efficiency of the reformer, some scholars catalyst activity and suppress the polymeric carbon formation. Tang
have done a variety of optimizations on the SMR process. Simpson et al. et al. developed a reactor with hybrid concentrated solar and electric
[18] performed energy and exergy analyses of SMR process and found heat supply for steam methane reforming and found the methane con
that 42.8 % of exergy loss is caused by combustion in the reformer, and version rate approached the thermodynamic equilibrium of SMR [30].
19 % of exergy loss results from exhaust flue gas. The thermal efficiency Morten et al. [31] introduced induction heating method into the
can reach 71.1 % by optimizing the reactor temperature, pressure, and reformer and found that the catalyst can be heated evenly in this
steam carbon ratio (S/C). Peng [19] optimized the heat exchange pro configuration. The methane conversion rate and thermal efficiency can
cess of SMR process through pinch point analysis and obtained a thermal both be improved significantly. Ambrosetti et al. [32] reviewed the
efficiency of 88.82 % for the new process. Lee et al. [20] used artificial study of different electrified SMR technologies and concluded the im
neural network to optimize the thermal efficiency of SMR system under provements brought by electrification on structural and efficiency of
different working conditions and found that the optimal thermal effi reformer. Thirdly, hydrogen produced by natural gas can be mixed into
ciency is 91.26 %, which is higher than that of the original system by the natural gas pipeline network for transportation. Large-scale ac
8.40 percentage points. In general, the thermal efficiency of SMR pro commodation of renewable electricity and long-term energy storage can
cess has reached a bottleneck due to the low efficiency of combustion in be realized at the same time. Wismann et al. [33] conducted experi
the reformer and the energy carried away by flue gas discharge [18]. mental verification on an electric reformer. The results showed that the
Besides, CO2 emission from SMR process without carbon capture and volume of reformer could be reduced by two orders of magnitude,
storage (CCS) device reaches 9.4–11.4 kg/kg H2 [21]. For the SMR making it easier to achieve wider capacity scale. Another advantage of
2
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Fig. 1. Process of Conventional SMR (a); Case 1: Process of the E-SMR with electric evaporator(b); Case 2: Process of the E-SMR with HTHP system(c).
electrified SMR is proposed in their study that electrical heating sub The electricity-coupled reformer is technically feasible, but the sys
stantially improved temporal response, pushing start-up times to within tem design of the electricity-coupled SMR process is still blank at pre
minutes, allowing the process to handle the intermittency of renewable sent. Specifically, the following questions should be answered via the
energy. studies on the SMR process electrification. (1) What are the problems
3
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Table 1 Table 2
Main parameters and assumptions for process simulation. Main parameters and assumptions for heat pump simulation [45].
Parameters Value Unit Parameters Value Unit Position
4
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Fig. 3. Model results and literature values [27] for CH4 conversion (a) and H2 yield(b) (S/C = 3, P = 1 bar).
5
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Fig. 4. Effect of S/C and T on the thermal efficiency in Case 1 (a) and Case 2 (b).
Fig. 5. Effect of S/C and Tref on electric efficiency in Case 1 (a) and Case 2 (b).
Fig. 6. Effect of S/C on energy inlet/outlet in Case 1 (a) and Case 2 (b) (Tref = 850 ◦ C) (1 kg H2 production).
satisfy the pressure requirements of the reforming reaction. In this 2.2. Process modelling
paper, 4.5 bar is selected as the evaporation pressure. The water in Case
2 is evaporated by an HTHP and then compressed to reaction pressure by H2 production by E-SMR with different electric devices is proposed
a steam compressor. and modelled by the process simulation software. Reactor modeling in
R1233ZD (E) is selected as the working fluid of the heat pump in this the present study is based on theory of chemical equilibrium. The
system due to its remarkable environmental friendliness (GWP = 1), calculation method is based on the minimization of the Gibbs free en
Safety (Safety Group: A1), and high temperature adaptability. The ergy, which makes the phase and chemical equilibrium achieved in the
properties of R1233ZD (E) and other widely used HTHP working fluids process without specification of the possible reactions. For the given
are shown in Table 9 (in Appendix A). temperature and pressure, the differential form of the Gibbs free energy
is described in Eq. (4). A more detailed description of the methodology
6
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Fig. 7. Effect of S/C on electric consumption in Case 1 (a) and Case 2 (b) (Tref = 850 ◦ C).
Table 4
Comparison of E-SMR performance with current SMR research and plants.
Vendor Year Thermal efficiency (HHV, %)
Table 5
Comparison of E-SMR performance with water electrolysis technology [57,58].
Vendor Cummins Cummins Case Case
(HySTAT) (HyLYZER) 1 2
7
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
With the aim of finding the optimal condition of the E-SMR pro
cesses, the following performance indices are considered.
(1) Thermal efficiency
Thermal efficiency refers to the ratio of output energy to input en
ergy in the hydrogen production process, reflecting the overall energy
conversion efficiency of the system. The thermal efficiency is calculated
according to Eq. (5) [43], which represents the ratio of the energy
contained in hydrogen to the total energy inlet, in which the total energy
inlet includes methane energy and electricity.
(qHHV)H2, (qHHV)H2,
Fig. 10. Distribution of different costs of LCOH for E-SMR processes. ηthermal = out
× 100\% = out
× 100\% (5)
ΔHtot (qHHV)CH4,in + Etot
Table 7 where q is the mass flow, kg/s, HHV is the higher heating value, MJ/kg,
Comparison of investment cost and lifetime of E-SMR and electrolytic water Etot is the total electrical energy, MW.
hydrogen production [59]. (2) Electric efficiency
Investment cost, $/kg H2/ Lifetime, year To investigate the storage efficiency of renewable electricity, the
h electrical efficiency is defined as ηE and shown in Eq. (6). Electric effi
AEL 45000–84000 7–11
ciency is expressed as the ratio of gas chemical energy increment to inlet
PEM 79000–120000 3–7 electric energy. The electrical efficiency is less than 100% because of the
E-SMR equipment (Case 2 with 8772 greater energy loss in electric equipment and the heat loss of the product.
CCS) than30
(qHHV)H2, − (qHHV)CH4,
ηE = out in
× 100\% (6)
Etot
(1) The equipment is adiabatic, and the heat loss at the system
boundary is negligible. Pressure loss in pipelines and hydrogen (3) CO2 emission
production units is negligible [40]. The CO2 emission of the E-SMR processes all comes from hydrogen
(2) The simulations are in a steady state [41]. production reactions. The equation for CO2 emission per unit hydrogen
(3) The reference-environment temperature is 25 ◦ C and the pressure production is as follows:
is 1.013 bar [35]. mco2, out
RCO2 = (7)
(4) The isentropic efficiency of the heat pump compressor and steam mH2, out
compressor is 0.83, and the mechanical efficiency is 0.98 [41].
(5) Carbon deposition in the reactor is not considered [35]. where m is the mass flow rate, kg/s.
(6) Natural gas consists entirely of methane [35]. (3) CH4 return ratio
(7) Due to the low heat of reaction, the desulfurization reaction is not The CH4 return ratio means the proportion of unreacted CH4 back to
considered in modelling [35]. the process, and the equation is shown in Eq. (8).
nCH4,return
Two variable parameters of reforming temperature and steam carbon RCH4 = × 100% (8)
nCH4,in
ratio (S/C) are investigated to find the optimal operation condition of
the E-SMR processes. S/C means the molar ratio of steam to methane.
where nx is the mole flow rate, mol/s.
The ranges of variation for the two parameters are shown in Table 1. (4) Steam carbon ratio (S/C)
As shown in Fig. 1 (b) and Fig. 1 (c), the unreacted CH4 and CO re
The steam carbon ratio means the molar of H2O to CH4. CH4 contains
turn to the system and react again. This process involves cyclic iterative the inlet part and return part is shown as follows:
calculation. The returned CH4 affects the given S/C condition, and the
feedwater flow rate needs to be changed to match the additional CH4. n H2 O
S/C = (9)
The logic diagram of iterative calculation is shown in Fig. 2. nCH4,in + nCH4,return
Hydrogen production capacity in the simulation is chosen to be 189
kg/h. The main parameters and assumptions used to simulate Case 1 and 3. Economic modelling
Case 2 are summarized in Table 1. The corresponding pressure and
specific parameters are given in Table 2. 3.1. Economic analysis
8
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Fig. 11. Sensitivity analyses a) Electricity Price vs LCOH, b) Nature gas Price vs LCOH, c) Carbon tax vs LCOH.
is referred to the cost of the reforming furnace of conventional SMR E-SMR for hydrogen production. Hence, a sensitivity analysis is con
process. In fact, the size of the electric reformer is much smaller, and the ducted to evaluate the impact of changes in electricity price, natural gas
structure is much simpler. Therefore, the cost of reformer adopted here price and CO2 tax on LCOH.
should be conservative. To evaluate the system profitability, NPV has been calculated ac
The levelized cost of hydrogen is defined as the ratio of the annual cording to Eq. (13), and different H2 selling prices are used to reflect the
cost to the annual hydrogen output [54], as shown in Eq. (10). profitability performance of the proposed cases.
Ct ∑
n=t
LCOH = (10) NPV =
NCFn
(13)
(CF × 8760) × Pa (1 + r)n
n=1
9
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Fig. 12. Cumulative discounted cash flow of E-SMR plants under different hydrogen selling prices.
efficiency of two cases increases with the decrease of S/C. The thermal (1) S/C analysis
efficiency increases firstly and then decreases with the rise of tempera Tref = 850 ◦ C is taken as an example to analyze the variation of en
ture, and the optimal thermal efficiency is 92.56 % (S/C = 3, Tref = 950 ergy inlet and outlet under different S/C in Fig. 6. Electric energy ac
◦
C). The change of thermal efficiency of Case 2 with temperature is counts for less than 30 % of the energy input, which greatly reduces the
shown in Fig. 4 (b) and the trend is similar to Case 1. The optimal electric energy input in hydrogen production compared with electrol
thermal efficiency of Case 2 is 97.27 % (S/C = 3, Tref = 850 ◦ C). ysis. The inlet CH4 and the outlet H2 are stable because of the principle of
The storage efficiency of electricity to chemical energy is illustrated matter conservation, thus the only factor that affects thermal efficiency
by analyzing the electric efficiency as shown in Fig. 5. The trend of is electricity. Fig. 7 illustrates the electricity consumption of various
electric efficiency is the same as that of thermal efficiency. The electric electrical appliances under different S/C. Electricity consumption in
efficiency of Case 2 reaches the maximum when S/C = 3 and the Case 1 is shown in Fig. 7 (a). The power consumption of the electric
reforming temperature is 850 ◦ C (ηE = 88.68 %). Further analysis of the evaporator increases with the increase of S/C, resulting in a sharp
effect of S/C and Tref on efficiency is shown below. decrease in thermal efficiency. As shown in Fig. 7 (b), the steam
10
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Table 10
Model results and literature values [45] for COP of HTPT with R1233zd as the working fluid.
t0 tk p0 pk ε qk Ecomp COP COPref Error
11
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
Table 11 Table 12
Main results of economic analysis of E-SMR hydrogen plants. The capacity of E-SMR (Case 2 with CCS) to accommodate renewable energy in
Parameters Unit Case 1 Case 2
Japan, the United States, and Europe.
Unit Value
with without with without
CCS CCS CCS CCS Annual natural gas consumption in Japan [62] Billion Nm3 107.8
Annual hydrogen production with E-SMR in Japan Million ton/ 38.6
Investment costs
(Convert all methane to hydrogen) year
Specific cost of reformer M$ 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48
Annual power accommodation with E-SMR in Japan Billion kWh/ 389
Specific cost of Sulphur M$ 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
(Convert all methane to hydrogen) year
removal unit
Annual hydrogen production with E-SMR in Japan Million ton/ 7.4
Cost of PSA unit M$ 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81
(Convert methane to hydrogen-rich gas mixed with 20% year
Cost of WGS reactor M$ 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07
hydrogen)
Cost of steam compressor M$ / / 0.01 0.01
Annual power accommodation with E-SMR in Japan Billion kWh/ 74.2
Electric boiler M$ 0.03 0.03 / /
(Convert methane to hydrogen-rich gas mixed with 20% year
Cost of heat pump M$ / / 0.05 0.05
hydrogen)
Cost of CO2 compressor M$ 0.15 / 0.15 /
Photovoltaic power installations in Japan [63] GW 67
Design and engineering M$ 0.37 0.34 0.35 0.35
Wind power installations in Japan [63] GW 4.2
Contractor’s fee M$ 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09
Annual supply of wind and photovoltaic energy in Japan Billion kWh 105
Contingency allowance M$ 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09
Annual natural gas consumption in USA [63] Billion Nm3 754
Total capital costs M$ 2.34 2.21 2.41 2.28
Annual hydrogen production with E-SMR in the USA Million ton/ 269.9
Fuel costs
(Convert all methane to hydrogen) year
Natural gas price M$/a 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76
Annual power accommodation with E-SMR in the USA Billion kWh/ 2722
Electricity price M$/a 1.17 1.14 0.95 0.92
(Convert all methane to hydrogen) year
Operating and maintenance costs
Annual hydrogen production with E-SMR in the USA Million ton/ 51.4
Process water (Including M$/a 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
(Convert methane to hydrogen-rich gas mixed with 20% year
waste water treatment)
hydrogen)
Cost of CO2 storage M$/a 0.19 / 0.19 /
Annual power accommodation with E-SMR in the USA Billion kWh/ 518.5
Operating labor cost M$/a 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.26
(Convert methane to hydrogen-rich gas mixed with 20% year
Direct supervisory and M$/a 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
hydrogen)
clerical labor costs
Photovoltaic power installations in USA [63] GW 73.8
Utilities M$/a 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.26
Wind power installations in USA [63] GW 117.7
Maintenance and repair M$/a 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.11
Annual supply of wind and photovoltaic energy in USA Billion kWh 228.4
costs
[63]
Operating supplies M$/a 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Annual natural gas consumption in Europe [63] Billion Nm3 490
Laboratory charges M$/a 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Annual hydrogen production with E-SMR in Europe Million ton/ 175.5
Plant-overhead M$/a 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.20
(Convert all methane to hydrogen) year
Administrative costs M$/a 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
Annual power accommodation with E-SMR in Europe Billion kWh/ 1770
Distribution and selling M$/a 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05
(Convert all methane to hydrogen) year
costs
Annual hydrogen production with E-SMR in Europe Million ton/ 33.4
Research and M$/a 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05
(Convert methane to hydrogen-rich gas mixed with 20% year
development costs
hydrogen)
Total operating costs M$/a 1.20 1.18 1.16 1.13
Annual power accommodation with E-SMR in Europe Billion kWh/ 371.5
LCOH $ /kg 2.82 2.65 2.65 2.47
(Convert methane to hydrogen-rich gas mixed with 20% year
H2
hydrogen)
Photovoltaic power installations in Europe [63] GW 167.8
Wind power installations in Europe [63] GW 216.6
As illustrated in Fig. 11 (a), the lowest LCOH of E-SMR is 2.7 $/kg H2 Annual supply of wind and photovoltaic energy in Europe Billion kWh 468.3
under the current electricity price in China (0.084 $/kWh). While the [63]
application of this system is to accommodate surplus renewable electric
energy, in which the price of electricity can be regarded as zero.
Accordingly, the LCOH of Case 2 (without CCS) is as low as 1.89 $/kg H2. reach 12.28 M$ in 30 years.
Fig. 11 (b) shows the sensitivity analysis of LCOH to natural gas
price. It is evident that current natural gas price in China is relatively 5. Application prospects
high (0.373 $/Nm3), therefore, this process is more economical in areas
with a lower natural gas price. The influence of carbon tax on the LCOH, 5.1. Application in gas supply chain
shown in Fig. 11 (c), manifests that systems with CCS are immune to by
carbon taxes by reason of the characteristic of their zero CO2 emission. The excellent performances in energy, environmental, and economic
When carbon tax exceeds 32.4 $/ton CO2, Case2 (with CCS) costs is less aspects of the E-SMR process are verified in the above discussion.
than that of Case 2 (without CCS) and becomes the most economical Therefore, this process may play an important role in gas production and
hydrogen production process. supply.
Discounted cash flow analysis is an important technique to convert Fig. 13 shows the possible application scenarios of E-SMR equipment
the net future cash flows of the project into NPV, which indicates the in both gas supply end and gas consumption areas. Generally, areas with
resources required and the time to give a profit. Fig. 12 displays the rich natural gas resources are far from gas-consuming areas in most
cumulative discounted cash flow of proposed E-SMR processes with the cases. Therefore, E-SMR equipment can be used in gas supply areas to
hydrogen selling price of 2.8, 3.0, and 3.2 $/kg H2. Case 1 (with CCS) is reform part of natural gas into hydrogen, and hydrogen can be mixed
difficult to achieve profit with 2.8 $/kg H2, while Case 2 (with CCS) has into natural gas pipelines to produce the H2-rich gas. Several advantages
a payback period of 7.5 years. Case 2 (without CCS) has the shortest of this method of hydrogen transport could be summarized as follows.
payback period due to low fuel costs, as shown in Fig. 12. Fig. 12 (b) First, the reuse of natural gas infrastructure can reduce the initial capital
shows that all E-SMR processes are profitable with a payback period of investment and facilitate the transformation of large and medium-sized
within 10 years at the hydrogen price of 3.0 $/kg H2. Fig. 12 (c) shows oil and gas companies. Second, the natural gas pipeline network is
that all the cases proposed have considerable economic benefits when installed in a wide range, which facilitates long-distance hydrogen
the hydrogen price is 3.2 $/kg H2, especially Case 2 (without CCS), transportation and significantly reduces transportation costs. At the
which can realize investment recovery in 2.6 years and whose NPV can same time, the natural gas pipeline allows fluctuations in the proportion
12
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
of hydrogen mixing, which perfectly fits the characteristics of the 3) Sensitivity analysis shows that electricity and methane as fuel greatly
volatility of renewable energy power generation. Many countries have influence the cost of the E-SMR process. The price of electricity can
tried mixing hydrogen in natural gas pipelines and implemented several be regarded as zero when the application of E-SMR is to accommo
pilot demonstration projects mentioned before. This process can date the surplus renewable electric energy. The LCOH of Case 2
accommodate renewable energy from the area and inject captured CO2 (without CCS) is as low as 1.89 $/kg H2. Configurations with CCS are
into the oil well to enhance oil recovery. The hydrogen-rich gas reaches more economical when the carbon tax is higher than 32.4 $/ton CO2.
the urban gas station through the natural gas pipelines. The E-SMR When the hydrogen price is 3.2 $/kg, Case 2 (without CCS) invest
equipment can be arranged in the gas station to convert part of the H2- ment can be recovered within 2.6 years. In the lifespan of 30 years,
rich gas to hydrogen. Then the produced hydrogen can be sent to the the net present value of this design is 12.28 M$.
hydrogenation station, or ammonia plant, or mixed into the urban gas 4) This paper proposed the application scenarios of the E-SMR process
pipelines to supply high hydrogen-rich gas. The CO2 produced during in the natural gas supply chain. First, E-SMR uses natural gas and
the process can be stored in CO2 tanks and geological reservoirs or used surplus renewable electricity to generate hydrogen and passes it into
for industrial CO2 utilization. E-SMR equipment helps decarbonize the natural gas pipeline in the gas supply area, which can realize
natural gas while achieving large-scale accommodation of renewable large-scale renewable energy storage and hydrogen transportation.
energy and large-scale transmission of hydrogen, providing a solution E-SMR at the gas consumption area can provide hydrogen for gas
for global green energy transition and carbon neutrality. users, reduce the carbon emission of gas and accommodate renew
able electricity.
In this paper, a novel hydrogen production system called E-SMR was Acknowledgements
proposed by combining PTG technology with SMR. Renewable electric
energy was introduced into SMR process through the electric reformer, This work was supported by the Key Research and Development Plan
electric evaporator, and high temperature heat pump. Two E-SMR of Shaanxi Province (No. 2021GXLH-Z-088).
configurations (Case1 and Case2) were put forward and analyzed. Case 1
is integrated with an electric evaporator, and Case 2 is combined with a Appendix A
high temperature heat pump and a steam compressor. Energy analysis
was performed in this paper to evaluate and optimize the performance of
the proposed processes. The techno-economic and sensitivity analyses
were carried out to assess the economic performance of the E-SMR Appendix B
processes. Simulation results highlighted that the high temperature heat
pump in Case 2 could recover more waste heat of production and
evaporate water efficiently, making the energy consumption of Case 2
lower and the efficiency higher than Case 1. Meanwhile, economic Appendix C
analysis shows that Case 2 has a shorter payback period and higher NPV.
The following conclusions have been drawn:
13
H. Song et al. Energy Conversion and Management 258 (2022) 115513
[8] Schlund D, Schönfisch M. Analysing the impact of a renewable hydrogen quota on [35] Antzara A, Heracleous E, Bukur DB, Lemonidou AA. Thermodynamic Analysis of
the European electricity and natural gas markets. Appl Energy 2021;304:117666. Hydrogen Production via Chemical Looping Steam Methane Reforming Coupled
[9] Isaac T. HyDeploy: The UK’s first hydrogen blending deployment project. Clean with in Situ CO2 Capture. Energy Procedia 2014;63:6576–89.
Energy 2019;3:114–25. [36] Shagdar E, Lougou BG, Shuai Y, Ganbold E, Chinonso OP, Tan H. Process analysis
[10] Abdalla AM, Hossain S, Nisfindy OB, Azad AT, Dawood M, Azad AK. Hydrogen of solar steam reforming of methane for producing low-carbon hydrogen. RSC Adv
production, storage, transportation and key challenges with applications: A review. 2020;10:12582–97.
Energy Convers Manage 2018;165:602–27. [37] Arpagaus C, Bless F, Uhlmann M, Schiffmann J, Bertsch SS. High temperature heat
[11] J.C.D.L. M.J. Kippers, Hermkens RJM. Pilot project on hydrogen injection in pumps: Market overview, state of the art, research status, refrigerants, and
natural gas on island of ameland in the netherlands. International Gas Union application potentials. Energy 2018;152:985–1010.
Research Conference (2010). [38] Smith W, Missen R. Chemical reaction equilibrium analysis Theory and lagorithms:
[12] I.E. Agency. The Future of Hydrogen. 2019. NY Wiley. (1982).
[13] Ji G, Yao JG, Clough PT, da Costa JCD, Anthony EJ, Fennell PS, et al. Enhanced [39] Yang Z, Liu Y, Cao Z. Study of chemical quench of high temperature syngas. Int J
hydrogen production from thermochemical processes. Energy Environ Sci 2018;11: Chem Reactor Eng 2011;9.
2647–72. [40] Faheem HH, Tanveer HU, Abbas SZ, Maqbool F. Comparative study of
[14] Anwar S, Khan F, Zhang Y, Djire A. Recent development in electrocatalysts for conventional steam-methane-reforming (SMR) and auto-thermal-reforming (ATR)
hydrogen production through water electrolysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021;46: with their hybrid sorption enhanced (SE-SMR & SE-ATR) and environmentally
32284–317. benign process models for the hydrogen production. Fuel 2021;297:120769.
[15] Lee B, Heo J, Kim S, Sung C, Moon C, Moon S, et al. Economic feasibility studies of [41] Zhu L, Li L, Fan J. A modified process for overcoming the drawbacks of
high pressure PEM water electrolysis for distributed H2 refueling stations. Energy conventional steam methane reforming for hydrogen production: Thermodynamic
Convers Manage 2018;162:139–44. investigation. Chem Eng Res Des 2015;104:792–806.
[16] Abdin Z, Zafaranloo A, Rafiee A, Mérida W, Lipiński W, Khalilpour KR. Hydrogen [42] Lutz AE, Bradshaw RW, Keller JO, Witmer DE. Thermodynamic analysis of
as an energy vector. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2020;120:109620. hydrogen production by steam reforming. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2003;28:159–67.
[17] Shi X, Wang F, Cheng Z, Liang H, Dong Y, Chen X. Numerical analysis of the [43] Carapellucci R, Giordano L. Steam, dry and autothermal methane reforming for
biomimetic leaf-type hierarchical porous structure to improve the energy storage hydrogen production: A thermodynamic equilibrium analysis. J Power Sources
efficiency of solar driven steam methane reforming. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021; 2020;469:228391.
46:17653–65. [44] Dincer I, Acar C. Review and evaluation of hydrogen production methods for better
[18] Simpson A, Lutz A. Exergy analysis of hydrogen production via steam methane sustainability. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40:11094–111.
reforming. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:4811–20. [45] Mikielewicz D, Wajs J. Performance of the very high-temperature heat pump with
[19] Peng XD. Analysis of the thermal efficiency limit of the steam methane reforming low GWP working fluids. Energy 2019;182:460–70.
process. Ind Eng Chem Res 2012;51:16385–92. [46] Khojasteh Salkuyeh Y, Saville BA, MacLean HL. Techno-economic analysis and life
[20] Lee J, Hong S, Cho H, Lyu B, Kim M, Kim J, et al. Machine learning-based energy cycle assessment of hydrogen production from natural gas using current and
optimization for on-site SMR hydrogen production. Energy Convers Manage 2021; emerging technologies. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017;42:18894–909.
244:114438. [47] Cormos C-C. Economic evaluations of coal-based combustion and gasification
[21] Navas-Anguita Z, Garcia-Gusano D, Dufour J, Iribarren D. Revisiting the role of power plants with post-combustion CO 2 capture using calcium looping cycle.
steam methane reforming with CO2 capture and storage for long-term hydrogen Energy 2014;78:665–73.
production. Sci Total Environ 2021;771:145432. [48] Akhtari MR, Shayegh I, Karimi N. Techno-economic assessment and optimization
[22] Shi W, Yang H, Shen Y, Fu Q, Zhang D, Fu B. Two-stage PSA/VSA to produce H2 of a hybrid renewable earth - air heat exchanger coupled with electric boiler,
with CO2 capture via steam methane reforming (SMR). Int J Hydrogen Energy hydrogen, wind and PV configurations. Renewable Energy 2020;148:839–51.
2018;43:19057–74. [49] Kosmadakis G, Arpagaus C, Neofytou P, Bertsch S. Techno-economic analysis of
[23] Leung DYC, Caramanna G, Maroto-Valer MM. An overview of current status of high-temperature heat pumps with low-global warming potential refrigerants for
carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014; upgrading waste heat up to 150 ◦ C. Energy Convers Manage 2020;226:113488.
39:426–43. [50] Yan Y, Manovic V, Anthony EJ, Clough PT. Techno-economic analysis of low-
[24] Institute GC. Global Status of CCS: 2021. Melbourne: Global CCS Institute; 2021. carbon hydrogen production by sorption enhanced steam methane reforming (SE-
[25] Centi G, Iaquaniello G, Perathoner S. Chemical engineering role in the use of SMR) processes. Energy Convers Manage 2020;226:113530.
renewable energy and alternative carbon sources in chemical production. BMC [51] China electricity prices, September 2021 | GlobalPetrolPrices.com n.d. . htt
Chemical Engineering 2019;1(1). ps://www.globalpetrolprices.com/China/electricity_prices/, 2021.
[26] Spagnolo D, Cornett L, Chuang K. DIRECT ELECTRO-STEAM REFORMING: A [52] Standard rates | Anglian Water Services n.d. (accessed June 12, 2020). http
NOVEL CATALYTIC APPROACH. International Association for Hydrogen. Energy s://www.anglianwater.co.uk/account-and-bill/tariffs-and-charges/standard-rates/
1992;17(11):839–46. 2021.
[27] Renda S, Cortese M, Iervolino G, Martino M, Meloni E, Palma V. Electrically driven [53] Wei X, Manovic V, Hanak DP. Techno-economic assessment of coal- or biomass-
SiC-based structured catalysts for intensified reforming processes. Catal Today fired oxy-combustion power plants with supercritical carbon dioxide cycle. Energy
2022;383:31–43. Convers Manage 2020;221:113143.
[28] Meloni E, Martino M, Ricca A, Palma V. Ultracompact methane steam reforming [54] Finke CE, Leandri HF, Karumb ET, Zheng D, Hoffmann MR, Fromer NA.
reactor based on microwaves susceptible structured catalysts for distributed Economically advantageous pathways for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from
hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021;46:13729–47. industrial hydrogen under common, current economic conditions. Energy Environ
[29] Martino M, Ruocco C, Meloni E, Pullumbi P, Palma V. Main Hydrogen Production Sci 2021;14(3):1517–29.
Processes: An Overview. Catalysts 2021;11:547. [55] Shimizu KIT, Murata K, Kawashima S, Hiranaka Y, Mori S, et al. Development of
[30] Ma J, Jiang B, Li L, Yu K, Zhang Q, Lv Z, et al. A high temperature tubular reactor compact hydrogen generator for on-site hydrogen station. Int Gas Res Conf Proc
with hybrid concentrated solar and electric heat supply for steam methane 2014;3:2613–20.
reforming. Chem Eng J 2022;428:132073. [56] A. Liquide. Hydrogen generators: HYOS-R. in: A.L. (n.d.), (Ed.). Air Liq. (n.d.).
[31] Vinum MG, Almind MR, Engbaek JS, Vendelbo SB, Hansen MF, Frandsen C, et al. [57] Cummins. Discover Cummins Electrolyzer Technologies. 2021.
Dual-Function Cobalt-Nickel Nanoparticles Tailored for High-Temperature [58] Sunfire. SUNFIRE-HYLINK SOEC. 2022.
Induction-Heated Steam Methane Reforming. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2018;57: [59] Lee B, Cho H-S, Kim H, Lim D, Cho W, Kim C-H, et al. Integrative techno-economic
10569–73. and environmental assessment for green H2 production by alkaline water
[32] Ambrosetti M, Beretta A, Groppi G, Tronconi E. A numerical investigation of electrolysis based on experimental data. J Environ Chem Eng 2021;9:106349.
electrically-heated methane steam reforming over structured catalysts. Front Chem [60] P. National Bureau of Statistics. China Statistical Yearbook 2021. China Statistics
Eng 2021;3:747636. Press (2021).
[33] Sebastian JSE, Wismann T, Vendelbo SB, Bendixen FB, Eriksen WL, Aasberg- [61] Frate GF, Ferrari L, Desideri U. Analysis of suitability ranges of high temperature
Petersen K, et al. Electrified methane reforming: A compact approach to greener heat pump working fluids. Appl Therm Eng 2019;150:628–40.
industrial hydrogen production. Science 2019;364 (24:756–9. [62] S.B.o. Japan. JAPAN STATISTICAL YEARBOOK 2022, Ministry of lnternal Affairs
[34] Parandin MS, Rashidi H. Deep desulfurization of natural gas by a commercial ZnO and Communications, 2021.
adsorbent: A mathematical study for fixed-bed reactors. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 2018;59: [63] BP. Bp Statistical Review of World Energy. 2021.
116–23.
14