4.6 Article

Discovery of novel zeolites for natural gas purification through combined material screening and process optimization

期刊

AICHE JOURNAL
卷 60, 期 5, 页码 1767-1785

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/aic.14441

关键词

computational screening; zeolites; optimization; process synthesis; adsorption/gas

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [EFRI-0937706, CBET-1263165]
  2. National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) fellowship
  3. Princeton Institute for Computational Science and Engineering
  4. Princeton University Office of Information Technology
  5. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys
  6. Directorate For Engineering [1263165] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Emerging Frontiers & Multidisciplinary Activities
  8. Directorate For Engineering [0937706] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An efficient computational screening approach is proposed to select the most cost-effective materials and adsorption process conditions for CH4/CO2 separation. The method identifies eight novel zeolites for removing CO2 from natural gas, coalbed methane, shale gas, enhanced oil recovery gas, biogas, and landfill gas sources. The separation cost is minimized through hierarchical material screening combined with rigorous process modeling and optimization. Minimum purity and recovery constraints of 97 and 95%, respectively, are introduced to meet natural gas pipeline specifications and minimize losses. The top zeolite, WEI, can recover methane as economically as $0.15/MMBTU from natural gas with 5% CO2 to $1.44/MMBTU from natural gas with 50% CO2, showing the potential for developing natural gas reservoirs with higher CO2 content. The necessity of a combined material selection and process optimization approach is demonstrated by the lack of clear correlation between cost and material-centric metrics such as adsorption selectivity. (c) 2014 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J, 60: 1767-1785, 2014

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