Thermodynamic and Techno-Economic Performance Comparison of Methanol Aqueous Phase Reforming and Steam Reforming for Hydrogen Production

Changsong Hu, Chao Xu, Xiaojun Xi, Yao He () and Tiejun Wang ()
Additional contact information
Changsong Hu: School of Chemical Engineering and Light Industry, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China
Chao Xu: School of Chemical Engineering and Light Industry, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China
Xiaojun Xi: School of Chemical Engineering and Light Industry, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China
Yao He: School of Environmental Science and Technology, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China
Tiejun Wang: School of Chemical Engineering and Light Industry, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China

Energies, 2024, vol. 18, issue 1, 1-19

Abstract: Methanol, which can be derived from sustainable energy sources such as biomass, solar power, and wind power, is widely considered an ideal hydrogen carrier for distributed and mobile hydrogen production. In this study, a comprehensive comparison of the thermodynamic and techno-economic performance of the aqueous phase reforming (APR) and steam reforming (SR) of methanol was conducted using Aspen Plus and CAPCOST software to evaluate the commercial feasibility of the APR process. Thermodynamic analysis, based on the Gibbs free energy minimization method, reveals that while APR and SR have similar energy demands, APR achieves higher energy efficiency by avoiding losses from evaporation and compression. APR typically operates at higher pressures and lower temperatures compared to SR, suppressing CO formation and increasing hydrogen fraction but reducing methanol single-pass conversion. A techno-economic comparison of APR and SR for a distributed hydrogen production system with a 50 kg/h hydrogen output shows that although APR requires higher fixed operating costs and annual capital charges, it benefits from lower variable operating costs. The minimum hydrogen selling price for APR was calculated to be 7.07 USD/kg, compared to 7.20 USD/kg for SR. These results suggest that APR is a more economically viable alternative to SR for hydrogen production.

Keywords: methanol; hydrogen; aqueous phase reforming; steam reforming; thermodynamic analysis; techno-economic analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/1/81/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/1/81/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2024:i:1:p:81-:d:1555446

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().