STATUS OF HYDROGEN PRODUCTION WITH CO2 CAPTURE- INCLUDING PERSPECTIVES ON EMISSIONS AND SCALE

Sigmund Ø. Størset, SINTEF

Research Manager, Leader of SINTEF

Coorporate Hydrogen Initiative

CSLF Workshop, Chatou Nov. 6 2019

Integrated syngas production & gas separation

2Voldsund, M., Jordal, K. and Anantharaman, R. (2016) ‘Hydrogen production with CO2 capture’, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

Protonic Membrane Reformer technology

3

NG + Steam

H2

PCR

Q

PMRCO2

Today’s solution Protonic Membrane Reformer (PMR)

Process Stepreduction

Key advantages:

✓ H2 Compression

✓ Heat integration

✓ SMR+WGS as single stage

✓ H2 Separation

✓ Simple CO2 capture

Syngas

Fuel

Air

NG + Steam

Q

H2

CO2

WGSSMRHeat H2

Separation

H2

Compression

CO2

capture

Steam Methane Reforming w. CCS (6 steps)

Malerød-Fjeld, H. et al. (2017) ‘Thermo-electrochemical production of compressed hydrogen from methane with near-zero energy loss’. Nature Energy

Protonic Membrane Reformer (PMR) technology

4

• "Tube-in-shell" membrane reactor producing pure H2

from natural gas

• Membrane wall has three layers:

• Anode (thickest layer, porous material - BZCY and Ni)

• Solid electrolyte (dense proton conductor - BZCY)

• Cathode (porous material - BZCY and Ni)

• High-pressure H2 is delivered to shell (electrochemical

compression)

Malerød-Fjeld, H. et al. (2017) ‘Thermo-electrochemical production of compressed hydrogen from methane with near-zero energy loss’. Nature Energy

5

PSA

Membrane

Berstad, D., Anantharaman, R. and Nekså, P. (2013) ‘Low-temperature CO2 capturetechnologies – Applications and potential’, International Journal of Refrigeration.

Low temperature CO2 separation – capture conditions

• H2-rich off-gas can be partially recycled to the reactor

maximizing the overall HRF and CO conversion

Low-temperature separation technology

• Vapor–liquid phase separation after compression and cooling of the gaseous mixture

• Obtainable CO2 capture rate, specific separation and compression work, and thus power consumption, are

sensitive to the CO2 concentration of the incoming flue- or syngas

• CO2-enhanced retentate stream ideal incoming stream

Berstad, D., Anantharaman, R. and Nekså, P. (2013) ‘Low-temperature CO2 capturetechnologies – Applications and potential’, International Journal of Refrigeration.

6

Membane + Low temperature processfor H2 & CO2 production from syngas

7

ELEGANCY –Enabling a low carbon economy by H2 and CCS

8

Sustainable Decisions

• Duration: 2017-08-31to 2020-08-31.

• Budget: 15 599 kEUR

Hydrogen production with CCS

Anne Streb, Marco Mazzotti, ETH Zurich 9

→VPSA promising for process intensification

→New adsorption processes are needed for this separation

→Cycle design for a generic inlet stream and a commercial activated carbon

Hydrogen production with CCS

• Cycle designs developed for generic inlet stream and optimized for case studies:

• Steam methane reforming (SMR)

• Autothermal reforming (ATR)

• High temperature WGS (HT-WGS)

• High and low temperature WGS (LT-WGS)

• Lab pilot completed and first experimental results obtained

10

Vent

BPR

1

BPR

2

Vent

Co

lum

n 2

V12 V13V15

V11V10

V16

V8

V25

V19

V23

V21

V14

V9

V24

V22

V26

V17

VP

Tank 1C

Co

lum

n 1

V40

V41

V42

V43 V44

V45

V47 V48

V46

V50

V49

V51 V53 V54V52

V55V56

Tank 2

Cycle D application: Separation performance for different case studies

SMR + HT-WGSSMR + LT-WGS

ATR + LT-WGS

ATR + HT-WGS

𝑟CO2≥ 0.90

𝛷CO2≥ 0.96

SMR + HT-

WGS

SMR + HT-WGS

+ LT-WGS

ATR + HT-WGS

ATR + HT-WGS

+ LT-WGS

H2 mol% 75.81 76.2 70.6 72.73

CO2 mol% 16.31 19.6 19.74 25.6

CH4 mol% 3.03 3.5 0.34 0.5

CO mol% 4.65 0.4 9 0.9

N2 mol% 0.2 0.3 0.24 0.2

Ar mol% 0 0 0.08 0.07

Adsorbent Zeolite 13X

11

H2 Separation Performance

▪ Very high H2 purity possible

▪ H2 purity limited for ATR: Argon in H2 product

"Green" or "Blue" hydrogen?

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

CO

2in

ten

sity

of

LH2

pro

du

ctio

n [

kg/M

Wh

HH

V]

CO2 intensity of grid electricity [kg/MWh]

Mythbusting: "Blue hydrogen" vs. "Green hydrogen"

13

Up-/mid-stream emissions from natural gas production

Indirect CO2 emissions from electricity consumption

Natural gas reforming with 93.4 % CO2 capture+ Liquefaction

16.4 kg/MWhel

Norway average (2017, NVE)

Direct CO2 emissions from reforming plant (93.4 % CO2 capture)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

CO

2in

ten

sity

of

LH2

pro

du

ctio

n [

kg/M

Wh

HH

V]

CO2 intensity of grid electricity [kg/MWh]14

Up-/mid-stream emissions from natural gas production

Indirect CO2 emissions from electricity consumption

Water electrolysis+ Liquefaction

Natural gas reforming with 93.4 % CO2 capture+ Liquefaction

16.4 kg/MWhel

Norway average (2017, NVE)

Direct CO2 emissions from reforming plant (93.4 % CO2 capture)

Mythbusting: "Blue hydrogen" vs. "Green hydrogen"

"Green" or "Blue" hydrogen?

15

= Clean hydrogen?

16

How large is large is large-scale?In perspective: 500 ton liquid hydrogen per day

• 820 MWHHV hydrogen energy flux

• 7 TWh per year of hydrogen energy

output

• Decabonised fossil route (NG with CCS):

• < 1 % of annual Norwegian natural gas production

• Renewable route (electricity as sole

primary energy source):

• > 1200 MW electric power

• ≈ 10 TWhel annually (about 7 % of annual Norwegian

power generation)17

Source: Kawasaki Heavy Industries

~70% efficiency for H2 production, CO2

capture and H2 liquefcation

18

Liqu

id h

ydro

genMWel

MW LHVMW HHV

MW LHVMW HHVInput/Output MWLHV MWHHV

Natural gas input 810.9 891.7

Hydrogen LH2 product output 694.4 821.2

MWel

Net power requirement 245.2

Plant Efficiency (1st law efficiency) LHV basis HHV basis

Stand-alone for the NG-based system 66.9 % 72.8 %

Stand-alone for the electrolyser-based system 57.1 % 67.5 %

Overall for the 450 + 50 t/d plant 65.8 % 72.2 %

Including > 93 % CO2 capture ratio

• Comparison of greenhouse gas emissions related to production of hydrogen from

• European grid electricity via electrolysers

• Natural gas with carbon capture

• Hydrogen production from natural gas using autothermal reformers with 93 % (2016) to 96 % (2030 - 2050) CO2 capture ratio

• European grid electricity mix shown in the pie-chart – forecasts based upon the IRENA REmapcase for 2030 and the decarbonised scenarios from "A Clean Planet for All" for 2050

• Without deep decarbonization of the European power generation, emissions from production of hydrogen from dedicated renewably based electricity must account for potentially reduced emission reductions of the power sector

19

Hydrogen produced from natural gas with CCS will have lower GHG emissions than hydrogen from electricity in the EU grid for decades

• Estimated upper bounds for annual emission reductions in Europe due to the use of hydrogen to replace fossil fuels

• Hydrogen consumption estimated from predictions for final energy consumption in 2050

• Total potential: 813 Mt CO2(2016 emissions: 4300 Mt CO2)

20

The potential for reducing Europe's greenhouse gas emission by use of clean hydrogen is more than 800 Mt CO2/year in 2050 (19% of current GHG emissions)

4300

3487

207

276

30129

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

European GHG emissions in 2016 Share of emission reductions in 2050

GH

G e

mis

sio

ns

[Mt

CO

2eq

.]

Power

Residential and commercial

Transport

Industry

Other emission reductions

European GHG emissions in 2016

Almost 20% of current European CO2 emissions can be abated by clean hydrogen in 2050

21

Industry; 207 Mt abated

Residential and commercial; 301 Mt

abated

Transport; 276 Mt abated

Power; 29 Mt abated

Technology for a better society