4.7 Article

Energy and exergy analyses of an integrated underground coal gasification with SOFC fuel cell system for multigeneration including hydrogen production

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 40, 期 39, 页码 13323-13337

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.08.023

关键词

Underground coal gasification; Combined cycle; Solid oxide fuel cell; Hydrogen production; Exergy efficiency; Multigeneration

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel integrated system, including underground coal gasification (UCG), steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) based oil sands, syngas fueled Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC), integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) and an electrolyzer, for hydrogen production is proposed and analyzed for practical applications, especially for Alberta region in which there are huge capacity of oil sands and coal reserves. This combined multi generation system produces syngas from underground coal without mining, produced syngas is utilized for generating electricity from IGCC and SOFC. A part of generated electricity in the Rankine cycle is used for hydrogen production through an electrolyzer. The excess steam in IGCC is utilized for SAGD process in order to extract Bitumen from underground as in-situ extraction. Energy and exergy analyses are conducted to assess the performance of the cycle, and the effects of various system parameters on energy and exergy efficiencies of the overall system and its subsystems are studied comparatively. The overall energy and exergy efficiencies of the system are found as 29.2% and 26% respectively for 20 kg/s coal feed rate. Furthermore, the effects of varying ambient temperature and pressure, syngas temperature, coal and syngas lower heating value, air and steam injection rates on the system performance are investigated. Copyright (C) 2015, 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