4.6 Review

Comprehensive Review of the Design Optimization of Natural Gas Liquefaction Processes: Current Status and Perspectives

期刊

INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH
卷 57, 期 17, 页码 5819-5844

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.7b03630

关键词

-

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education [2015R1DIA3A01015621]
  2. Priority Research Centers Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education [2014R1A6A1031189]
  3. Engineering Development Research Center (EDRC) - Ministry of Trade, Industry Energy (MOTIE) [N0000990]
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2014R1A6A1031189, 2015R1D1A3A01015621] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Globally, liquefied natural gas (LNG) has drawn interest as a green energy source in comparison with other fossil fuels, mainly because of its ease of transport and low carbon dioxide emissions. However, LNG production is an energy and cost intensive process because of the huge power requirements for compression and refrigeration. Therefore, a major challenge in the LNG industry is to improve the energy efficiency of the LNG processes through economic and ecological strategies. Optimizing the design and operational parameters of the natural gas liquefaction cycles has been considered as one of most effective and popular approaches to address this issue. This paper reviews recent developments in the design optimization of LNG processes. In the choice of the most suitable and competitive LNG process, the operating costs, capital costs, environmental impact, and safety concerns must be considered for the optimal design and operation of LNG processes. The challenges in comparing recent researches are also discussed, along with suggestions for future directions to improve the energy efficiency of natural gas liquefaction processes.

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

4.6
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