4.7 Article

Hydrogen production via solid waste gasification with subsequent amine-based carbon dioxide removal using Aspen Plus

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 48, 期 64, 页码 24607-24618

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.07.103

关键词

Renewable blue hydrogen; Gasification; MEA; Aspen plus; Simulation; CO2 capture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This simulation study focuses on municipal solid waste gasification and the design of CO2 capture unit using monoethanolamine (solvent). Optimal operational parameters were determined to maximize the H2 content in the gasified product stream. The study also determined the required packing heights and column diameters for capturing CO2 from the product effluent. This research provides valuable insights for the design, operation, and optimization of large-scale gasifiers and CO2 capture units.
This simulation study presents the municipal solid waste gasification, along with a detailed design of CO2 capturing unit using monoethanolamine (solvent). The gasifier's operational parameters, such as pressure, temperature, and equivalence ratio, are chosen to optimize the gasified H2-enriched product stream. At optimal operational parameters, such as temperature (800 & DEG;C), pressure (1 bar), and equivalence ratio (0.2), a maximum H2 content of 27.9% could be attained. Following that, 39.5% H2 is found at the high-temperature shift reactor's exit, followed by 42.1% at the low-temperature shift reactor's output. It is observed that the absorber (16.5 m) and stripper (6 m) packing heights are required to capture 95% CO2 from the product effluent obtained after shift reactors, along with column diameters of 2.70 and 3.61 m, respectively. Hence, the proposed model can give vital information for large-scale gasifier and CO2 capture unit design, operation, and optimization with respect to different flue gases.& COPY; 2022 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据