首页> 外文期刊>Applied Energy >Techno-economic comparison of green ammonia production processes
【24h】

Techno-economic comparison of green ammonia production processes

机译:绿色氨生产工艺的技术经济比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To reduce the fossil-fuel consumption and the impacts of conventional ammonia production on climate change, green ammonia production processes using green hydrogen need to be investigated. For commercial production scale, potential alternatives can be based on biomass gasification and water electrolysis via renewable energy, namely biomass- and power-to-ammonia. The former generally uses entrained flow gasifier due to low CO2 and almost no tar, and air separation units are shared by the gasifier and ammonia synthesis. The latter may use solid-oxide electrolyzer due to high electrical efficiency and the possibility of heat integration with the ammonia synthesis process. In this paper, techno-economic feasibility of these two green ammonia production processes are investigated and compared with the state-of-the-art methane-to-ammonia process, considering system-level heat integration and optimal placement of steam cycles for heat recovery. With a reference ammonia production of 50 kton/year, the results show that there are trade-offs between the overall energy efficiency (LHV) and ammonia production cost for all three cases. The biomass-to-ammonia is the most exothermic but is largely limited by the large heat requirement of acid gas removal. The steam cycles with three pressure levels are able to maximize the heat utilization at the system level. The power-to-ammonia achieves the highest system efficiency of over 74%, much higher than that of biomass-to-ammonia (44%) and methane-to-ammonia (61%). The biomass-to-ammonia reaches above 450 $/ton ammonia production cost with a payback time of over 6 years, higher than those of methane-to-ammonia (400 $/ton, 5 years). The power-to-ammonia is currently not economically feasible due to high stack costs and electricity prices; however, it can be competitive with a payback time of below 5 years with mass production of solid-oxide industry and increased renewable power penetration.
机译:为了减少化石燃料消耗和常规氨生产对气候变化的影响,需要研究使用绿色氢的绿色氨生产工艺。对于商业生产规模,潜在的替代方案可以基于生物质气化和通过可再生能源(即生物质和动力氨)的水电解。前者通常使用气流床气化炉,因为二氧化碳含量低且几乎没有焦油,并且气化炉和氨合成共用空气分离装置。由于高电效率以及与氨合成过程热结合的可能性,后者可以使用固体氧化物电解器。在本文中,研究了这两种绿色氨生产工艺的技术经济可行性,并将其与最新的甲烷制氨工艺进行了比较,并考虑了系统级的热集成和蒸汽循环的最佳位置以进行热回收。以每年50吨的参考氨产量计算,结果表明,在这三种情况下,总能效(LHV)和氨生产成本之间都需要权衡取舍。生物质对氨的放热最大,但很大程度上受酸性气体去除所需的大量热量的限制。具有三个压力水平的蒸汽循环能够在系统水平上最大化热量利用。氨气能实现最高的系统效率,超过74%,远高于生物质氨气(44%)和甲烷氨气(61%)的效率。生物质制氨法的氨生产成本达到450美元/吨以上,投资回收期超过6年,高于甲烷制氨法(400美元/吨,5年)。由于烟囱成本和电价高昂,目前氨气发电在经济上不可行。但是,随着固态氧化物行业的大规模生产和可再生能源渗透率的提高,投资回收期低于5年可能具有竞争力。

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