Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Chemical Science and Engineering

ISSN 2095-0179

ISSN 2095-0187(Online)

CN 11-5981/TQ

Postal Subscription Code 80-969

2018 Impact Factor: 2.809

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Chem. Sci. Eng.    2018, Vol. 12 Issue (4) : 598-618    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11705-018-1752-5
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Techno-economic evaluation of a biogas-based oxidative coupling of methane process for ethylene production
Alberto T. Penteado(), Mijin Kim, Hamid R. Godini, Erik Esche, Jens-Uwe Repke
Process Dynamics and Operations Group, Technische Universität Berlin, D-10623 Berlin, Germany
 Download: PDF(810 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

This contribution is a preliminary techno-economic assessment of a biogas-based oxidative coupling of methane (OCM) process. Biogas is frequently utilized as a renewable energy source within small scale combined heat and power plants or as a natural gas substitute. The activation of methane also enables its utilization as a feedstock to produce chemicals. In this sense, the OCM process allows for the direct conversion of methane into ethylene, which is a major building block for the chemical and polymer industries. Biogas resulting from the anaerobic digestion of vinasse, a liquid effluent from bioethanol industry, is treated for contaminant removal and its methane content is converted into ethylene, which is then purified as the main product. The biogas cleaning process is assessed based on literature data, while an experimentally validated simulation model is used to assess the OCM process. A techno-economic evaluation is then performed through a Monte Carlo simulation, wherein uncertain parameters take random values between reasonable bounds. The net present value results positive in 74% of the cases, indicating that the project is profitable under a wide range of scenarios. Some performance improvement opportunities have been identified and highlighted to guide future studies in the topic.
Keywords biogas conversion      ethylene production      oxidative coupling of methane      feasibility study     
Corresponding Author(s): Alberto T. Penteado   
Just Accepted Date: 09 August 2018   Online First Date: 18 December 2018    Issue Date: 03 January 2019
 Cite this article:   
Alberto T. Penteado,Mijin Kim,Hamid R. Godini, et al. Techno-economic evaluation of a biogas-based oxidative coupling of methane process for ethylene production[J]. Front. Chem. Sci. Eng., 2018, 12(4): 598-618.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcse/EN/10.1007/s11705-018-1752-5
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcse/EN/Y2018/V12/I4/598
Flow /(Nm3?h–1) 2200
Pressure /bar 1.6
Temperature /°C 30
CH4 mole fraction 0.70
CO2 mole fraction 0.30
Tab.1  Biogas feed conditions
Desulfurization method Iron chloride dosing Biological scrubbing Adsorption
Achievable H2S outlet concentration /ppmv 100 50 0.1
Specific removal cost /EUR per kg H2S 0.85 0.20 3.85
Tab.2  Biogas desulfurization methods and costs. adapted from [19]
Kij H2 N2 O2 CH4 C2H4 C2H6 CO CO2 H2O
H2 X X X X X X
N2 X X X X X X
O2 X
CH4 X X X X
C2H4 X X X
C2H6 X X
CO
CO2 X
H2O
Tab.3  availability of binary parameters for the standard peng-robinson mixing rule. binaries marked with an X are available
Fig.1  Process flow diagram of the base case bio-ocm process
Fig.2  Validation of pure component heat capacities
Fig.3  Validation of pure component vapor pressures for light components (left) and H2O and MEA (right)
Fig.4  Validation of the phase equilibrium for CO2, H2O and MEA
Fig.5  Validation of the phase equilibrium for CH4/C2H4 as a P-xy diagram at 150 and 190 K (left) and for C2H4/C2H6 as a P-xy diagram at 233 and 263 K (right)
Fig.6  Analysis of reactor performance as function of temperature and methane to oxygen ratio: methane conversion (left) and combined ethane and ethylene yield (right)
Fig.7  Analysis of reactor performance as function of temperature and methane to oxygen ratio: combined ethane and ethylene selectivity
Fig.8  Simulation flowsheet of the reaction section
Fig.9  Simulation flowsheet of the quench & compression section
Fig.10  Simulation flowsheet of the membrane section
Fig.11  Parity plot of experimental vs. simulated results in terms of CO2 removal (left) and C2H4 recovery (right). Scatter points represent experimental values in the abscissa and simulation values in the ordinate. Main diagonal is represented as a solid gray line and ±30% deviation lines are represented as dashed gray lines
Item Membrane area per module /m2 Number of modules CO2 removal C2H4 recovery CO2 mole fraction
Inlet Outlet
1st stage 7.5 50 67.6% 89.5% 0.227 0.093
2nd stage 8.0 11 96.9% 72.5% 0.732 0.929
Overall 61 66.9% 96.8% 0.234 0.093
Tab.4  Main optimization results for the membrane section
Fig.12  Simulation flowsheet of the absorption section
Fig.13  Simulation results (marks): Liquid to gas ratio as a function of the number of stages in the absorber for a constant CO2 removal of 99.99% and a lean amine loading of 0.2 mol CO2/molMEA. Trendline added to aid visualization
Fig.14  Simulation Results (marks): Reboiler duty per mass of CO2 removed as a function of the number of stages in the desorber for a constant CO2 removal of 99.99% and a lean amine loading of 0 .2 molCO2 /molMEA. Trendline added to aid visualization
Fig.15  Simulation results (marks): Total utility cost per mass of CO2 removed as a function of the lean amine loading for a constant CO2 removal of 99.99%. Trendline added to aid visualization
Fig.16  Simulation flowsheet for the distillation section
Fig.17  Simulation results (marks): Reboiler and condenser duties for the demethanizer column as a function of the number of theoretical stages (left) and feed stage (right). Trendlines added to aid visualization
Fig.18  Simulation results (marks): Reboiler and condenser duties for the C2-splitter column as a function of the number of theoretical stages (left) and feed stage (right). Trendlines added to aid visualization
Item Description Lower bound Reference value Upper bound Units
Treated biogas ≤0.1 ppm H2S 0 0.002 0.028 USD/Nm3
Liquid oxygen ≥95 mol-% 0.05 0.06 0.074 USD/Nm3
Ethylene Polymer grade 700 1000 1400 USD/t
Ethane Refinery grade 46.74 68.61 96.06 USD/t
Carbon dioxide ≥92 mol-% 3.00 4.00 5.00 USD/t
Electricity – 0.05 0.0775 0.09 USD/kWh
Medium pressure steam 8.87 bar 1.76×10–6 2.20×10–6 2.54×10–6 USD/kJ
Low pressure steam 2.31 bar 1.52×10–6 1.90×10–6 2.28×10–6 USD/kJ
Refrigeration 168 K 6.0×10–6 8.5×10–6 11.0×10–6 USD/kJ
Cooling water 293–298 K 1.70×10–7 2.12×10–7 2.54×10–7 USD/kJ
Operation & maintenance – 38675 55250 71825 USD/a
Tab.5  Cost assumptions for raw materials, products, utilities, and operation & maintenance
Fig.19  Estimating the bare module cost for compressor K-401 as a function of break power by using the cost estimation tool developed in [41] (in German language)
Item Fraction of Lower bound Upper bound
Direct costs
**Installation Plant equipment cost 0.01 0.06
**Pipelines Plant equipment cost 0.05 0.15
**Sensors & automation Plant equipment cost 0.05 0.15
Electric Plant equipment cost 0.05 0.15
Service facilities Plant equipment cost 0.70 1.00
Land and terrain Plant equipment cost 0 0.10
Civil engineering Plant equipment cost 0.15 0.90
Indirect costs
Engineering Plant equipment cost 0.25 0.75
Construction site Direct cost 0.10 0.15
Contingency Direct cost 0.08 0.25
Other costs
Start-up Fixed capital investment 0.05 0.12
Working capital Fixed capital investment 0.10 0.20
Tab.6  Costing factors* used for the capital cost estimation
Item Lower bound Upper bound
Inflation rate (ri) 0.02 0.09
Real escalation rate (rR) 0.03 0.06
Nominal escalation rate (rN) (1+ri) ? (1+rR) – 1
Effective interest rate (ieff) ri 0.15
Total income tax 0.10 0.30
Operation factor 0.85 0.98
Yearly operating hours 7446 h 8585 h
Plant operating life 30 years
Tab.7  Assumed ranges for economic variables
Fig.20  Equipment cost distribution per process section (left) and per equipment type (right). For each category in the pie charts, the name, values in kUSD, and percentage from total are given
Fig.21  Exemplary cumulative cash flow diagram for the base case
Fig.22  Frequency distribution of the net present value for the base case
Fig.23  Sensitivity of the NPV and DPP to the production scale
1 SRasi, A Veijanen, JRintala. Trace compounds of biogas from different biogas production plants. Energy, 2007, 8(8): 1375– 1380
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2006.10.018
2 MScheftelowitz, N Rendsberg, VDenysenko, JDaniel-Gromke, WStinner, KHillebrand, KNaumann, DPeetz, CHennig, DThran, et al. Stromerzeugung aus Biomasse (Vorhaben IIa Biomasse). Leipzig: German Biomass Research Center, 2015, 1–154 (in German)
3 J BHolm-Nielsen, TAl Seadi, POleskowicz-Popiel. The future of anaerobic digestion and biogas utilization. Bioresource Technology, 2009, 100(22): 5478–5484
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.12.046
4 YGao, J Jiang, YMeng, FYan, A Aihemaiti. A review of recent developments in hydrogen production via biogas dry reforming. Energy Conversion and Management, 2018, 171: 133–155
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.05.083
5 S NNaik, V V Goud, P K Rout, A K Dalai. Production of first and second generation biofuels: A comprehensive review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2010, 14(2): 578–597
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.003
6 ERyckebosch, M Drouillon, HVervaeren. Techniques for transformation of biogas to biomethane. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2011, 35(5): 1633–1645
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.02.033
7 Institute of Chemical Engineering—Research Division Thermal Process Engineering and Simulation. Guide to Cooperative Biogas to Biomethane Developments. Vienna: Vienna University of Technology, 2012: 1–17
8 XWang, X Lu, GYang, YFeng, G Ren, XHan. Development process and probable future transformations of rural biogas in China. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016, 55: 703–712
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.097
9 K RSalomon, E E S Lora. Estimate of the electric energy generating potential for different sources of biogas in Brazil. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2009, 33(9): 1101–1107
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.03.001
10 SBarros, C Berk. Brazil Biofuels Annual (Global Agricultural Information Network Report Number BR16009). US Department of Agriculture—Foreign Agricultural Serivces, 2016: 1–26
11 The website of ANEEL (Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica). 2016
12 P V LReddy, K HKim, HSong. Emerging green chemical technologies for the conversion of CH4 to value added products. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013, 24: 578–585
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.035
13 XChen, J Jiang, KLi, STian, F Yan. Energy-efficient biogas reforming process to produce syngas: The enhanced methane conversion by O2. Applied Energy, 2017, 185(1): 687–697
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.10.114
14 A TPenteado, M Kim, H RGodini, EEsche, J URepke. Biogas as a renewable feedstock for green ethylene production via oxidative coupling of methane: Preliminary feasibility study. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2017, 61: 589–594
15 G EKeller, M M Bhasin. Synthesis of ethylene via oxidative coupling of methane: I. Determination of active catalysts. Journal of Catalysis, 1982, 73(1): 9–19
https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9517(82)90075-6
16 W RTrue. Global ethylene capacity continues advance in 2011. Oil & Gas Journal, 2012, 110(7): 1–12
17 CWailes. The website of Siluria Technologies. 2016
18 RAlbanez, B C Chiaranda, R G Ferreira, A L P França, C D Honório, J A D Rodrigues, S M Ratusznei, M Zaiat. Anaerobic biological treatment of vinasse for environmental compliance and methane production. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2016, 178(1): 21–43
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-015-1856-z
19 QSun, H Li, JYan, LLiu, Z Yu, XYu. Selection of appropriate biogas upgrading technology—a review of biogas cleaning, upgrading and utilisation. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015, 51: 521–532
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.029
20 DRamírez-Sáenz, P BZarate-Segura, CGuerrero-Barajas, E IGarca-Peña. H2S and volatile fatty acids elimination by biofiltration: Clean-up process for biogas potential use. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2009, 163(2-3): 1272–1281
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.129
21 JKrischan, A Makaruk, MHarasek. Design and scale-up of an oxidative scrubbing process for the selective removal of hydrogen sulfide from biogas. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2012, 215-216: 49–56
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.02.028
22 MMiltner, A Makaruk, JKrischan, MHarasek. Chemical-oxidative scrubbing for the removal of hydrogen sulphide from raw biogas: Potentials and economics. Water Science and Technology, 2012, 66(6): 1354–1360
https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2012.329
23 E CCarlson. Don’t gamble with physical properties for simulations. Chemical Engineering Progress, 1996, 92(10): 35–46
24 C HTwu, W D Sim, V Tassone. Getting a handle on advanced cubic equations of state. Chemical Engineering Progress, 2002, 98(11): 58–65
25 D YPeng, D B Robinson. A new two-constant equation of state. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 1976, 15(1): 59–64
https://doi.org/10.1021/i160057a011
26 C CChen, Y Song. Generalized electrolyte—NRTL model for mixed—solvent electrolyte systems. AIChE Journal. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 2004, 50(8): 1928–1941
https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.10151
27 SArndt, T Otremba, USimon, MYildiz, HSchubert, RSchomäcker. Mn-Na2WO4/SiO2 as catalyst for the oxidative coupling of methane. What is really known? Applied Catalysis A, General, 2012, 425-426: 53–61
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcata.2012.02.046
28 JXu, L Peng, XFang, ZFu, W Liu, XXu, HPeng, R Zheng, XWang. Developing reactive catalysts for low temperature oxidative coupling of methane: On the factors deciding the reaction performance of Ln2Ce2O7 with different rare earth A sites. Applied Catalysis A, General, 2018, 552: 117–128
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcata.2018.01.004
29 ZStansch, L Mleczko, MBaerns. Comprehensive kinetics of oxidative coupling of methane over the La2O3/CaO catalyst. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 1997, 36(7): 2568–2579
https://doi.org/10.1021/ie960562k
30 SJaso, H Arellano-Garcia, GWozny. Oxidative coupling of methane in a fluidized bed reactor: Influence of feeding policy, hydrodynamics, and reactor geometry. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2011, 171(1): 255–271
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2011.03.077
31 H RGodini, S Xiao, MKim, NHolst, SJaso, O Görke, JSteinbach, GWozny. Experimental and model-based analysis of membrane reactor performance for methane oxidative coupling: Effect of radial heat and mass transfer. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2014, 20(4): 1993–2002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2013.09.022
32 V OIgenegbai, R JMeyer, SLinic. In the search of membrane-catalyst materials for oxidative coupling of methane: Performance and phase stability studies of gadolinium-doped barium cerate and the impact of Zr doping. Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2018, 230: 29–35
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2018.02.040
33 H ARafique, S Vuddagiri, HHarraz, GRadaelli, E CScher, JMcCormick, RIyer, S Duggal, JCizeron, JKi Hong. US Patent, 2015/0210610 A1, 2015-07-30
34 APenteado, E Esche, DSalerno, H RGodini, GWozny. Design and assessment of a membrane and absorption based carbon dioxide removal processs for oxidative coupling of methane. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2016, 55(27): 7473–7483
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.5b04910
35 SStünkel. Carbon dioxide separation in the gas scrubbing of the oxidative coupling of methane process. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Berlin: Technische Universität Berlin, 2013, 1–153 (in German)
36 EEsche, D Müller, SSong, GWozny. Optimization during the process synthesis: Enabling the oxidative coupling of methane by minimizing the energy required for the carbon dioxide removal. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2015, 91: 100–108
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.034
37 DSalerno, H R Godini, A Penteado, EEsche, GWozny. Techno-economic evaluation of an oxidative coupling of methane process at industrial scale production. Computer-Aided Chemical Engineering, 2016, 38: 1785–1790
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63428-3.50302-7
38 LGarcía, Y A Poveda, M Khadivi, GRodríguez, OGörke, EEsche, H RGodini, GWozny, AOrjuela. Synthesis and granulation of a 5A zeolite-based molecular sieve and adsorption equilibrium of the oxidative coupling of methane gases. Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data, 2017, 62(4): 1550–1557
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jced.7b00061
39 GNarin, V F D Martins, M Campo, A MRibeiro, AFerreira, J CSantos, KSchumann, A ERodrigues. Light olefins/paraffins separation with 13X zeolite binderless beads. Separation and Purification Technology, 2014, 133: 452–475
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2014.06.060
40 The website of S&P Global Platts. 2018
41 CLühe. Modular cost estimation in support of system planning for bidding and early basic engineering phase. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Berlin: Technische Universität Berlin, 2012, 1–135 (in German)
42 ABejan, G Tsatsaronis, MMoran. Thermal Design & Optimization. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1996, 1–560
43 EGudmundsson. Ramboll Group A/S. 2016
44 H RGodini, S Xiao, SJaso, SStünkel, DSalerno, N XSon, SSong, G Wozny. Techno-economic analysis of integrating the methane oxidative coupling and methane reforming processes. Fuel Processing Technology, 2013, 106: 684–694
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2012.10.002
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed