...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Cleaner Production >Power-to-fuels through carbon dioxide Re-Utilization and high- temperature electrolysis: A technical and economical comparison between synthetic methanol and methane
【24h】

Power-to-fuels through carbon dioxide Re-Utilization and high- temperature electrolysis: A technical and economical comparison between synthetic methanol and methane

机译：通过二氧化碳再利用和高温电解转化为燃料的燃料：合成甲醇和甲烷之间的技术和经济比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This work conveys the study of the production of synthetic fuels, in this case, methane and methanol, by means of comparing two processes that employ high-temperature water splitting based on solid oxide electrolysis cells (SOEC) technology. In both cases, the process consists of mixing hydrogen produced by electrolysis with carbon dioxide in order to achieve hydrogenation synthesis via a catalytic reactor. An energy analysis was performed with special care on thermal integration (minimization of external heat requirements) via pinch analysis, as well as a final estimation of power-to-fuel overall efficiency. The study demonstrates that power-to-methane and power-to-methanol process can achieve efficiency of up to approximate to 77% and approximate to 59%, respectively. The energy analysis (based on the process modelling developed for both the systems) and the heat exchange network design enabled the development of capital expenditure estimation. An economic analysis comparison for the production cost of both synthetic fuels was performed with the purpose of highlighting any potential risk associated with the systems. The economic analysis considered the impact on synthetic fuel cost of some parameters as electrolysis specific costs, the expenditure for carbon dioxide, electricity price, and yearly operating hours. The results show that for both systems, as expected, the SOEC electrolyzer is the greatest capital expenditure of the design. Methanol synthesis plant showed lower efficiency and higher investment costs; on the other hand, fossil-based methanol has higher costs ($/MWh) than fossil methane; thus, the breakeven point of electricity price (i.e., that making economically comparable synthetic and fossil fuel) is similar for the two considered cases. It was concluded that to produce an economically attractive market for methane and methanol, the production plants should maintain a utilization factor of approximately 50%, the cost of SOECs should be near to 1050 (sic)/kW and the electricity required to run the system needs to be supplied from renewable sources at a very low cost (below 40-50 $/MWh). (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译：通过比较两种基于固体氧化物电解池（SOEC）技术采用高温水分解的工艺，这项工作传达了合成燃料（在这种情况下为甲烷和甲醇）生产的研究。在两种情况下，该方法均包括将电解产生的氢气与二氧化碳混合，以便通过催化反应器进行氢化合成。进行能量分析时要特别注意通过收缩分析进行热集成（最小化外部热量需求），并最终估算动力-燃料的整体效率。该研究表明，以甲烷为原料的工艺和以甲醇为原料的工艺可以分别达到约77％和59％的效率。能源分析（基于针对两个系统开发的过程模型）和热交换网络设计使能够进行资本支出估算。对两种合成燃料的生产成本进行了经济分析比较，目的是强调与该系统相关的任何潜在风险。经济分析考虑了某些参数对合成燃料成本的影响，例如电解比成本，二氧化碳支出，电价和年度运行时间。结果表明，对于这两个系统，正如预期的那样，SOEC电解槽是该设计中最大的资本支出。甲醇合成装置效率较低，投资成本较高。另一方面，化石基甲醇的成本（美元/兆瓦时）比化石甲烷高。因此，在两种情况下，电价的收支平衡点（即在经济上可比的合成燃料和化石燃料的收支平衡点）相似。结论是，要产生甲烷和甲醇的经济上有吸引力的市场，生产厂应保持约50％的利用率，SOEC的成本应接近1050（sic）/ kW，运行该系统所需的电需要以非常低的成本（低于40-50 $ / MWh）由可再生资源提供。 （C）2019 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号