Toward the practical application of direct CO2 hydrogenation technology for methanol production
Hee W. Lee
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Division of Energy & Environment Technology, KIST school, Korea University of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
These authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorKyeongsu Kim
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
These authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorJinJoo An
Carbon Resources Institute, Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology, Daejeon, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorJonggeol Na
Division of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorHonggon Kim
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorHyunjoo Lee
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Division of Energy & Environment Technology, KIST school, Korea University of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Ung Lee
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Division of Energy & Environment Technology, KIST school, Korea University of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Green School, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea
Correspondence
Ung Lee, Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul 02792, South Korea.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorHee W. Lee
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Division of Energy & Environment Technology, KIST school, Korea University of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
These authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorKyeongsu Kim
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
These authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorJinJoo An
Carbon Resources Institute, Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology, Daejeon, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorJonggeol Na
Division of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorHonggon Kim
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorHyunjoo Lee
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Division of Energy & Environment Technology, KIST school, Korea University of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Ung Lee
Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Division of Energy & Environment Technology, KIST school, Korea University of Science and Technology, Seoul, South Korea
Green School, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea
Correspondence
Ung Lee, Clean Energy Research Center, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul 02792, South Korea.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorFunding information: National Research Foundation, Grant/Award Number: 2017M1A2A2043134
Summary
Methanol production via direct CO2 hydrogenation is one of the most promising means of utilizing greenhouse gases owing to the significant market for methanol and the potential to simultaneously reduce CO2 emissions. However, the practical applications of this process still suffer from high production costs owing to the expensive raw materials required and the severe operating conditions. Herein, we propose an economically attractive methanol production process that also works to sequester CO2, developed through technoeconomic optimization. This economically optimized process design and the associated operating conditions were simultaneously obtained from among thousands of possible configurations using a superstructure optimization. A modified machine learning-based optimization algorithm was also employed to efficiently achieve this complex superstructure optimization. The optimum process design involves a multistage reactor together with an interstage product recovery system and substantially improves the CO2 conversion to greater than 52%. Consequently, the revenue obtained from methanol production changes from a $4.3 deficit to a $2.5 profit per ton. In addition, the proposed process is capable of generating the same amount of methanol with only half the CO2 emissions associated with conventional methanol production methods. A comprehensive sensitivity analysis is also provided along with the optimum process design to identify the influence of various technoeconomic parameters.
Supporting Information
Filename | Description |
---|---|
er5573-sup-0001-Supinfo.docxWord 2007 document , 521.9 KB | Data S1. Supporting Information. |
Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
REFERENCES
- 1Kattel S, Ramírez PJ, Chen JG, Rodriguez JA, Liu P. Active sites for CO2 hydrogenation to methanol on Cu/ZnO catalysts. Science. 2017; 355(6331): 1296-1299.
- 2Alvarado M. Methanol Industry Overview. Opportunities and Challenges for Methanol as a Global Liquid Energy Carrier. Stanford, CA: Stanford Natural Gas Initiative; 2017.
- 3Szima S, Cormos C-C. Improving methanol synthesis from carbon-free H2 and captured CO2: a techno-economic and environmental evaluation. J CO2 Util. 2018; 24: 555-563.
- 4Methanol from renewable energy and flue gas using electrolysis and catalytic chemistry. Retrieved from https://members.luxresearchinc.com/research/profile/Carbon_Recycling_International.pdf. Published 2019.
- 5Na J, Seo B, Kim J, et al. General technoeconomic analysis for electrochemical coproduction coupling carbon dioxide reduction with organic oxidation. Nat Commun. 2019; 10(1): 1-13.
- 6Lyngfelt A. Statistical reconstruction of gas oil cuts. Oil Gas Sci Technol–Revue D'IFP Energies Nouvelles. 2011; 66: 461-477.
- 7Graaf G, Stamhuis E, Beenackers A. Kinetics of low-pressure methanol synthesis. Chem Eng Sci. 1988; 43(12): 3185-3195.
- 8Peppley BA, Amphlett JC, Kearns LM, Mann RF. Methanol–steam reforming on cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalysts. Part 2. A comprehensive kinetic model. Appl Catal Gen. 1999; 179(1-2): 31-49.
- 9Skrzypek J, Lachowska M, Serafin D. Methanol synthesis from CO2 and H2: dependence of equilibrium conversions and exit equilibrium concentrations of components on the main process variables. Chem Eng Sci. 1990; 45(1): 89-96.
- 10Graciani J, Mudiyanselage K, Xu F, et al. Highly active copper-ceria and copper-ceria-titania catalysts for methanol synthesis from CO2. Science. 2014; 345(6196): 546-550.
- 11Martin O, Martín AJ, Mondelli C, et al. Indium oxide as a superior catalyst for methanol synthesis by CO2 hydrogenation. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2016; 55(21): 6261-6265.
- 12Larmier K, Liao WC, Tada S, et al. CO2-to-Methanol hydrogenation on zirconia-supported copper nanoparticles: reaction intermediates and the role of the metal–support Interface. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2017; 56(9): 2318-2323.
- 13An X, Li J, Zuo Y, Zhang Q, Wang D, Wang J. A cu/Zn/Al/Zr fibrous catalyst that is an improved CO 2 hydrogenation to methanol catalyst. Catal Lett. 2007; 118(3-4): 264-269.
- 14Xin A, Yizan Z, Zhang Q, Jinfu W. Methanol synthesis from CO2 hydrogenation with a cu/Zn/Al/Zr fibrous catalyst. Chin J Chem Eng. 2009; 17(1): 88-94.
- 15Joo O-S, Jung K-D, Moon I, et al. Carbon dioxide hydrogenation to form methanol via a reverse-water-gas-shift reaction (the CAMERE process). Ind Eng Chem Res. 1999; 38(5): 1808-1812.
- 16Rahimpour M. A two-stage catalyst bed concept for conversion of carbon dioxide into methanol. Fuel Process Technol. 2008; 89(5): 556-566.
- 17Bayat M, Rahimpour M. Production of hydrogen and methanol enhancement via a novel optimized thermally coupled two-membrane reactor. Int J Energy Res. 2013; 37(2): 105-120.
- 18Rahimpour M, Bayat M. A novel cascade membrane reactor concept for methanol synthesis in the presence of long-term catalyst deactivation. Int J Energy Res. 2010; 34(15): 1356-1371.
- 19Ghosh S, Uday V, Giri A, Srinivas S. Biogas to methanol: a comparison of conversion processes involving direct carbon dioxide hydrogenation and via reverse water gas shift reaction. J Clean Prod. 2019; 217: 615-626.
- 20Kiss AA, Pragt J, Vos H, Bargeman G, De Groot M. Novel efficient process for methanol synthesis by CO2 hydrogenation. Chem Eng J. 2016; 284: 260-269.
- 21Zhang C, Jun K-W, Gao R, Kwak G, Park H-G. Carbon dioxide utilization in a gas-to-methanol process combined with CO2/steam-mixed reforming: techno-economic analysis. Fuel. 2017; 190: 303-311.
- 22Kim J, Henao CA, Johnson TA, et al. Methanol production from CO2 using solar-thermal energy: process development and techno-economic analysis. Energy Environ Sci. 2011; 4(9): 3122-3132.
- 23Hogerwaard J, Dincer I, Naterer GF, Patterson BD. Solar methanol synthesis by clean hydrogen production from seawater on offshore artificial islands. Int J Energy Res. 2019; 43(11): 5687-5700.
- 24Wiesberg IL, de Medeiros JL, Alves RM, Coutinho PL, Araújo OQ. Carbon dioxide management by chemical conversion to methanol: HYDROGENATION and BI-REFORMING. Energy Convers Manage. 2016; 125: 320-335.
- 25An J, Na J, Lee U, Han C. Design of carbon dioxide dehydration process using derivative-free superstructure optimization. Chem Eng Res Des. 2018; 129: 344-355.
- 26Na J, Kshetrimayum KS, Lee U, Han C. Multi-objective optimization of microchannel reactor for Fischer-Tropsch synthesis using computational fluid dynamics and genetic algorithm. Chem Eng J. 2017; 313: 1521-1534.
- 27Lee U, Jeon J, Han C, Lim Y. Superstructure based techno-economic optimization of the organic rankine cycle using LNG cryogenic energy. Energy. 2017; 137: 83-94.
- 28Furman KC, Sahinidis NV. A critical review and annotated bibliography for heat exchanger network synthesis in the 20th century. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2002; 41(10): 2335-2370.
- 29Esposito WR, Floudas CA. Deterministic global optimization in isothermal reactor network synthesis. J Global Optim. 2002; 22(1-4): 59-95.
- 30Na J, Lim Y, Han C. A modified DIRECT algorithm for hidden constraints in an LNG process optimization. Energy. 2017; 126: 488-500.
- 31Ghahramani Z. Probabilistic machine learning and artificial intelligence. Nature. 2015; 521(7553): 452-459.
- 32Hwang J, Kim J, Lee HW, et al. An experimental based optimization of a novel water lean amine solvent for post combustion CO2 capture process. Appl Energy. 2019; 248: 174-184.
- 33Leonzio G, Zondervan E, Foscolo PU. Methanol production by CO2 hydrogenation: analysis and simulation of reactor performance. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2019; 44(16): 7915-7933.
- 34Van-Dal ÉS, Bouallou C. Design and simulation of a methanol production plant from CO2 hydrogenation. J Clean Prod. 2013; 57: 38-45.
- 35Graaf G, Sijtsema P, Stamhuis E, Joosten G. Chemical equilibria in methanol synthesis. Chem Eng Sci. 1986; 41(11): 2883-2890.
- 36Heldebrant DJ, Koech PK, Rousseau R, et al. Are water-lean solvent systems viable for post-combustion CO2 capture? Energy Procedia. 2017; 114: 756-763.
- 37Gardarsdottir SO, De Lena E, Romano M, et al. Comparison of technologies for CO2 capture from cement production—part 2: cost analysis. Energies. 2019; 12(3): 542.
- 38Martínez-Salazar A, Melo-Banda J, Coronel-García M, García-Vite PM, Martínez-Salazar I, Domínguez-Esquivel J. Technoeconomic analysis of hydrogen production via hydrogen sulfide methane reformation. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2019; 44(24):12296–12302.
- 39Yilmaz C. Optimum energy evaluation and life cycle cost assessment of a hydrogen liquefaction system assisted by geothermal energy. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2019; 45: 3558-3568.
- 40Levene JI, Mann MK, Margolis RM, Milbrandt A. An analysis of hydrogen production from renewable electricity sources. Solar Energy. 2007; 81(6): 773-780.
- 41Parkinson B, Balcombe P, Speirs J, Hawkes A, Hellgardt K. Levelized cost of CO 2 mitigation from hydrogen production routes. Energy Environ Sci. 2019; 12(1): 19-40.
- 42Li J, Zhang W, Gao L, Gu P, Sha K, Wan H. Methanol synthesis on Cu—Zn—Al and Cu—Zn—Al—Mn catalysts. Appl Catal Gen. 1997; 165(1–2): 411-417.
- 43Pérez-Fortes M, Schöneberger JC, Boulamanti A, Tzimas E. Methanol synthesis using captured CO2 as raw material: techno-economic and environmental assessment. Appl Energy. 2016; 161: 718-732.
- 44Douglas JM. Conceptual Design of Chemical Processes. Vol 1110. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1988.
- 45 IEAGHG. Greenhouse gas emissions accounting for CO2 capture and utilisation(CCU) technologies (Grrenhouse gas accounting guidelines for CCU). IEAGHG: IEAGHG; March 15, 2018
- 46Khan I. Greenhouse gas emission accounting approaches in electricity generation systems: a review. Atmos Environ. 2019; 200: 131-141.
- 47Zakkour P, Akai M, Itaoka K, Chae S-O, Kemper J. Towards greenhouse gas accounting guidelines for carbon dioxide capture and utilization. Paper presented at: 14th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference Melbourne 2018.
- 48Bradford E, Schweidtmann AM, Lapkin A. Efficient multiobjective optimization employing Gaussian processes, spectral sampling and a genetic algorithm. J Global Optim. 2018; 71(2): 407-438.
- 49Sundararajan S, Keerthi SS. Predictive app roaches for choosing hyperparameters in Gaussian processes. Paper presented at: Advances in neural information processing systems 2000.
- 50Keerthi SS, Sundararajan S. Predictive approaches for choosing hyperparameters in Gaussian processes. Neural Comput. 2001; 13: 1103-1118.
- 51Goldberg DE. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley; 1989.
- 52Eggleston S, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Vol 5. Japan: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies Hayama; 2006, 2006.
- 53Cannavó F. Sensitivity analysis for volcanic source modeling quality assessment and model selection. Comput Geosci. 2012; 44: 52-59.
- 54McRae GJ, Tilden JW, Seinfeld JH. Global sensitivity analysis—a computational implementation of the Fourier amplitude sensitivity test (FAST). Comput Chem Eng. 1982; 6(1): 15-25.