Chemical looping gasification for hydrogen production: A comparison of two unique processes simulated using ASPEN Plus

Abstract The research compares the simulations of two chemical looping gasification (CLG) types using the ASPEN Plus simulation software for the production of H 2 . The simulated biomass type was poultry litter (PL). The first CLG type used in situ CO 2 capture utilizing a CaO sorbent, coupled with steam utilization for tar reforming, allowing for the production of a CO 2 -rich stream for sequestration. Near-total sorbent recovery and recycle was achieved via the CO 2 desorption process. The second type utilized iron-based oxygen carriers in reduction–oxidation cycles to achieve 99.8% Fe 3 O 4 carrier recovery and higher syngas yields. Temperature and pressure sensitivity analyses were conducted on the main reactors to determine optimal operating conditions. The optimal temperatures ranged from 500 to 1250 °C depending on the simulation and reactor type. Atmospheric pressure proved optimal in all cases except for the reducer and oxidizer in the iron-based CLG type, which operated at high pressure. This CLG simulation generated the most syngas in absolute terms (2.54 versus 0.79 kmol/kmol PL), while the CO 2 capture simulation generated much more H 2 -rich syngas (92.45 mol-% compared to 62.94 mol-% H 2 ).

[1]  J. F. González,et al.  Investigation on the reactions influencing biomass air and air/steam gasification for hydrogen production , 2008 .

[2]  Ibrahim Dincer,et al.  Exergy analysis of hydrogen production from biomass gasification , 2010 .

[3]  W. Kiatkittipong,et al.  Operation viability and performance of solid oxide fuel cell fuelled by different feeds. , 2009 .

[4]  Syuan-Hong Lin,et al.  Hydrogen production from coal by separating carbon dioxide during gasification , 2002 .

[5]  D. Y. Goswami,et al.  An experimental study of hydrogen production by gasification of biomass in the presence of a CO2 sorbent , 2007 .

[6]  Huang Hao,et al.  Hydrogen rich fuel gas production by gasification of wet biomass using a CO2 sorbent , 2009 .

[7]  Behdad Moghtaderi,et al.  Effects of controlling parameters on production of hydrogen by catalytic steam gasification of biomass at low temperatures , 2007 .

[8]  Liang-Shih Fan,et al.  Chemical Looping Systems for Fossil Energy Conversions , 2010 .

[9]  Prabir Basu,et al.  An investigation into steam gasification of biomass for hydrogen enriched gas production in presence of CaO , 2010 .

[10]  Laihong Shen,et al.  Simulation of hydrogen production from biomass gasification in interconnected fluidized beds , 2008 .

[11]  E. Kırtay,et al.  Recent advances in production of hydrogen from biomass , 2011 .

[12]  B. Acharya.  CHEMICAL LOOPING GASIFICATION OF BIOMASS FOR HYDROGEN-ENRICHED GAS PRODUCTION , 2009 .

[13]  K. Sumathy,et al.  AN OVERVIEW OF HYDROGEN PRODUCTION FROM BIOMASS , 2006 .

[14]  D. Y. Goswami,et al.  A Novel Approach to Enhance the Hydrogen Yield of Biomass Gasification Using CO2 Sorbent , 2008 .

[15]  Hermann Hofbauer,et al.  Comparison of dual fluidized bed steam gasification of biomass with and without selective transport of CO2 , 2009 .

[16]  Jianli Hu,et al.  An overview of hydrogen production technologies , 2009 .

[17]  Wim Turkenburg,et al.  Gasification of biomass wastes and residues for electricity production. , 1995 .

[18]  Andrew T. Harris,et al.  Hydrogen production from biomass coupled with carbon dioxide capture: The implications of thermodynamic equilibrium , 2007 .

[19]  Isabel Cabrita,et al.  The study of reactions influencing the biomass steam gasification process , 2003 .

[20]  Toshiaki Hanaoka,et al.  Hydrogen production from woody biomass by steam gasification using a CO2 sorbent , 2005 .