Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/he
article info
abstract
Article history:
Five models were developed for the use of biogas-based electricity and sewage sludge
obtained from a municipal wastewater treatment plant for hydrogen production. These
models included alkaline, PEM, high temperature water electrolysis, alkaline hydrogen
sulfide electrolysis and dark fermentation biohydrogen production processes. Energy and
economic analyses were performed on the models by applying thermodynamic procedures
Keywords:
and the results were compared. The daily hydrogen production rates of the models were
Hydrogen production
calculated as 594, 625.4, 868.6, 10.8 and 56.74 kg for models 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. The
Electrolysis
electricity costs of the models were calculated as 3.60, 3.43, 2.47, 1.16 and 6.7 $/kg-H2, for
Biohydrogen
models 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. In terms of the hydrogen production rate, the high
temperature electrolysis process was found to be superior to the other models, followed by
Biogas
the PEM electrolysis process, whereas, in terms of the hydrogen production cost, hydrogen
sulfide electrolysis was found to be superior to the other models. This paper aimed to
determine the most appropriate model for a wastewater treatment plant among the
considered models in terms of both hydrogen production and hydrogen production cost.
2016 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
Hydrogen is an energy carrier and it is proposed as an alternative energy source at present and in the future. Several
hydrogen production processes exist, including steam
methane reforming, partial oxidation of methane, autothermal reforming of methane, coal gasification, biomass
pyrolysis and gasification, electrolysis, the sulfureiodine
cycle, photo-synthetic/photo-biological water splitting, and
direct photocatalytic water splitting [1]. Each technology is at a
different stage of development, and each offers unique opportunities, benefits and challenges [2]. As of today, most
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
13427
Model descriptions
The GASKI WWTP is a municipal wastewater treatment plant
located in the city of Gaziantep, Turkey, and the flow schematic of the facility is given in Fig. 1. The plant treats nearly
222,000 m3/day of domestic wastewater using primary, secondary (biological) and tertiary (anaerobic sludge digestion)
treatments. The daily biogas production is nearly 15,200 m3, as
a result of the sludge stabilization process which takes place
in the anaerobic digesters of the plant. 61% (9275 m3/day) of
the total biogas produced in the anaerobic digestion system is
used as a fuel for the installed gas engine powered cogeneration facility on the campus of the WWTP. The remaining
part (5925 m3/day) is reserved in the biogas storage tank. The
electricity production of the cogeneration plant is 1000 kWh.
The digested sludge is sent to the de-watering unit of the
WWTP to increase the dry matter content to 22%. The mass
flow rate of the digested sludge is reduced to 2.48 kg/s as it
exists the de-watering stage. In this study, five models were
developed for the use of actual WWTP outputs (biogas, electricity and sewage sludge) for hydrogen production. The
models are described in detail below.
In model 1 (see Fig. 2), an alkaline electrolysis process was
considered for hydrogen production. In this model, the work
output of the biogas engine powered cogeneration plant,
1000 kWh, is used as the work input to the electrolysis process. Water is heated before entering the electrolysis stage.
For the process of heating water, there are two different options at the plant. The first involves the use of a very small
amount of reserved biogas (about 0.001 kg/s) in a boiler (see
Fig. 1a); the second option is to use the waste heat of the
exhaust gas from the cogeneration plant by means of an
exhaust gas heat exchanger (see Fig. 1b). The mass flow rate of
the water entering the electrolysis process is taken as 0.062 kg/
s. The temperature and pressure of preheated water by the
boiler are 80 C and 1 bar, respectively.
13428
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
Fig. 2 e Hydrogen production model 1 with an alkaline electrolysis process using a (a) biogas boiler or, (b) exhaust gas heat
exchanger.
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
13429
Fig. 3 e Hydrogen production model 2 with a PEM electrolysis process using a (a) biogas boiler or, (b) exhaust gas heat
exchanger.
13430
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
Fig. 5 e Hydrogen production model 4 with an alkaline electrolysis process of the H2S.
DGelect;H2 O
kJ=kg
MH2
(1)
wrev;elect
DGelect;H2 S
kJ=kg
MH2
(2)
Where DGelect;H2 O and DGelect;H2 S are the Gibbs free energy (kJ/
kmol) of water and hydrogen sulfide, respectively, and MH2 is
the molar mass of hydrogen (kg/kmol). Thus, the actual work
demand can be calculated as:
wact;elect
wrev;elect
kj=kg
hth
(3)
DH
EDH
DG Losses Ecell
(4)
13431
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
State no
State No
hth
1:48
Ecell
(5)
(6)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Fluid
Values
Biogas inlet
Work
Water
Pure water
Heated water
Biogas (with boiler)
Heat (with EGHE)
Hydrogen (g)
Oxygen (g)
0.129 (kg/s)
1000 kWh
0.062 (kg/s) @25 C and 1 bar
0.062 (kg/s) @25 C and 1 bar
0.062 (kg/s) @80 C and 1 bar
0.001 (kg/s) (Fig. 1 (a))
14.25 kW (Fig. 1 (b))
594 kg/day
4762.8 kg/day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Fluid
Values
Biogas inlet
Work
Water
Pure water
Heated water
Biogas (with boiler)
Heat (with EGHE)
Hydrogen gas
Oxygen gas
0.129 (kg/s)
1000 kWh
0.065 (kg/s) @25 C and 1 bar
0.065 (kg/s) @25 C and 1 bar
0.065 (kg/s) @80 C and 1 bar
0.0011 (kg/s) (Fig. 2 (a))
15.0 kW (Fig. 2 (b))
625.4 kg/day
5003.2 kg/day
13432
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
State No
State No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Fluid
Values
Biogas inlet
Work
Water
Pure water
Steam
Biogas (with boiler)
Heat (with EGHE)
Hydrogen gas
Oxygen gas
0.129 (kg/s)
1000 kWh
0.09 (kg/s) @25 C and 1 bar
0.09 (kg/s) @25 C and 1 bar
0.09 (kg/s) @800 C and 5 bar
0.025 (kg/s)
363 kW
868.6 kg/day
6948.8 kg/day
Fluid
Values
Biogas inlet
Biogas
H2S
Work
Hydrogen gas
Sulfur gas
0.212 (kg/s)
0.129 (kg/s)
0.0021 (kg/s)
5.83 kWh
10.8 kg/day
170.6 kg/day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Property
Value
Sludge
Sludge
Hydrogen gas
Hydrogen gas
Carbon dioxide gas
Sludge
Heated water
Water
Work
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
13433
620
H2 (kg/day)
610
600
590
580
570
275
310
345
380
415
450
T (K)
(a)
650
H2 (kg/day)
640
630
620
610
600
275
310
345
T (K)
380
415
450
(b)
850
H2 (kg/day)
815
780
745
710
675
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
T (K)
(c)
Fig. 7 e Daily hydrogen production rate with respect to the
electrolysis operation temperature for (a) model 1 (b) model
2 (c) model 3.
13434
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Model 4
Model 5
H2 production
rate
H2 electricity cost
Capital investment
cost
Operating and
maintenance cost
Total H2 cost
kg/year
$/kg H2
$/year
$/kg H2
$/year
$/kg H2
$/year
$/kg H2
$/year
207,900
218,890
304,010
3600
18,913.3
3.60
3.43
2.47
1.16
6.7
748,440
750,792.7
750,792.7
4176
126,719.1
5.66
5.39
0.96
1.82
6.87
1,120,680
1,123,635.3
277,852
6552
129,936.6
1.03
0.98
0.75
0.33
2.06
203,940
204,297.3
217,150
1188
38,981
10.29
9.8
4.18
3.31
15.63
2,037,420
2,042,973.3
1,210,249
11,916
295,614.9
Conclusion
In this study, five hydrogen production models were developed, and energy and economic analyses were performed
considering the actual operation data from an existing
municipal WWTP. The following conclusions can be drawn
based on the analyses and results:
The daily hydrogen production rates of the models were
calculated as 594,625.4, 868.6, 10.8 and 56.74 kg, for models
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. Of the models considered in this
study, model 3 had the highest hydrogen production rate,
whereas model 4 had the lowest hydrogen production rate
due to the inadequate H2S level present in the biogas produced from the anaerobic digestion process in the WWTP.
The electricity costs of the models were calculated as 3.60,
3.43, 2.47, 1.16 and 6.7 $/kg-H2, for models 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5,
respectively. According to these results, model 5 had the
highest electricity costs while model 4 has the lowest
electricity costs due to the lower Gibbs free energy of H2S as
compared to water at the same temperature.
The total hydrogen production costs (capital, operating and
maintenance, electricity) of the models were 10.29, 9.8, 4.18,
3.31 and 15.63 $/kg-H2, for models 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5,
respectively.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the support provided by the Scientific Research Projects Unit at the University of Gaziantep.
Nomenclature
wrev;elect
wact;elect
DG
MH2
DH
E
Celectricity
W
Abbreviations
PEM
proton exchange membrane
WWTP wastewater treatment plant
Greek letters
h
energy efficiency
references
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 1 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 3 4 2 6 e1 3 4 3 5
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
13435