See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269688091

Review on Hydrogen Production Technologies

in Malaysia

Article · June 2010

CITATIONS READS

10 639

6 authors, including:

Zakir Khan Yusup Suzana

University of Glasgow Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS
31 PUBLICATIONS 186 CITATIONS 343 PUBLICATIONS 2,510 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Murni Ahmad Khalik M. Sabil

59 PUBLICATIONS 599 CITATIONS Heriot Watt Malaysia
56 PUBLICATIONS 373 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of Modified Si-MCM-41 with Amino Compounds and Studies on its Behaviour for CO2
Adsorption View project

Combustion performance of rubber seed and palm oil biodiesel fuel blends View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Zakir Khan on 23 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02
Review on Hydrogen Production Technologies in
Malaysia
Z. Khan, S. Yusup, M.M. Ahmad, V.S. Chok, Y. Uemura, K. M. Sabil
Abstract- Hydrogen has wide applications in petroleum,
chemical synthesis and has been successfully demonstrated as a
potentially zero emission fuel for transportations. As a country
that is rich with natural resources and with the aims to be a
developed country in 2020, Malaysia is currently intensified its
renewable energy activities. The present work reviews all the
resources and technologies related to hydrogen production in
Malaysia. These technologies include non-renewable e.g. steam
methane reforming (SMR) and renewable resources related to
biomass processes e.g. gasification, pyrolysis, supercritical
water gasification, biological water gas shift reaction,
fermentation and water electrolysis e.g. using solar and wind
energy. The techno-economic review is then presented for all
these technologies to highlight the potential of present and
future hydrogen production technologies in Malaysia.
Keywords-Review, hydrogen production technologies,
hydrogen production in Malaysia
I. INTRODUCTION
H YDROGEN economy has been promoted due to large
number of hydrogen applications in petroleum and
chemical sectors such as upgrading crude oil and
synthesizing of methanol and ammonia. Besides this,
hydrogen has been upgraded as an alternative to fossil fuel
products due to its environmental friendly, high energy
capacity and potentially gives high efficient processes such
as in fuel cell application. Currently, about 98% of hydrogen
comes from fossil fuel [1]. However, fast depleting rate and
Manuscript received March 10, 2010. This work is supported by Petroleum
Research Fund of PETRONAS.
Zakir Khan is a PhD student in the Department of Chemical
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar,
Tronoh 31750, Perak, Malaysia ( e-mail: khan.zakir@gmail.com).
Suzana Yusup is working as a Associate Professer in the Department of
Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri
Iskandar, Tronoh 31750, Perak, Malaysia (Ph:+605-3687642, fax: +605-
3656176, (e-mail: drsuzana_yusuf@petronas.com.my).
Murni Melati Ahmad is working as a Lecturer in the Department of
Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri
Iskandar, Tronoh 31750, Perak, Malaysia (e-mail:
murnim@petronas.com.my).
Vui Soon Chok is working as a Research Officer in the Department of
Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri
Iskandar, Tronoh 31750, Perak, Malaysia (e-mail:
chokvuisoon@yahoo.com.sg)
Yoshimitsu Uemura is working as Professor, Mitsubishi Chair in Green
Technology, in the Department of Chemical Engineering, Universiti
Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar, Tronoh 31750, Perak,
Malaysia (e-mail yoshimitsu_uemura@petronas.com.my)
Khalik Muhamad Sabil is working as a Lecturer in the Department of
Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri
Iskandar, Tronoh 31750, Perak, Malaysia (e-mail:
khalik_msabil@petronas.com.my)
1
other competing usage of fossil fuels has becoming a serious
concern and the search for alternative feedstock for
hydrogen production has been intensified.
Hydrogen as an energy carriers comprised numerous
advantages over other conventional energy carriers.
Hydrogen combustion provides energy based on mass basis
with lower heating value (LHV), which is 2.4, 2.8 and 4
times more than that of methane, gasoline and coal
respectively [2]. In addition, it is a clean fuel as the
combustion of hydrogen produced only water as by-product.
Malaysia is a country of vast renewable and non-
renewable sources of energy. The country energy demand
mainly depended on non-renewable sources comprising of
oil and gas. Up to 2005, non-renewable sources contributed
about 87.9% of country energy demand while renewable
sources shared 12.1% [3]. Due to fast growing economy, it
is expected that the country energy demand will go up to
18000 MW by the year 2010 [4]. Moreover, unwanted green
house gases emission and other serious environmental issues
associated with the transportation sector have become a
great concern to the future of the country development. As
part of the UN Convention on Climate Change and Kyoto
Protocol, Malaysia has to take steps to reduce green house
gases emissions. More recently, in Copenhagen Climate
Change Summit 2009, Malaysian Prime Minister has
showed commitment to reduce carbon emission. The Prime
Minister has also announced RM 1.5 billion in the 2010
national budget for green technology development in the
country [5]. In the present scenario, the country needs to
have abundant clean energy to maintain its journey towards
a developed country.
The present work provides a brief summary of current
and developing technologies available for the hydrogen
production in Malaysia. The hydrogen production
technologies are divided into two categories: non-renewable
(fossil fuel) and renewable resources. Non-renewable
hydrogen production technologies includes SMR while
renewable hydrogen production technologies related to
biomass utilization including gasification, pyrolysis,
supercritical water gasification, biological water gas shift
reaction, biological fermentation and hydrogen production
from water, which includes electrolysis using solar and wind
energy. The techno-economical comparison of available
technologies is then made to evaluate the processes that can
be used for future hydrogen production.
 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02 2

II. HYDROGEN FROM FOSSIL FUEL University Malaysia Terengganu (UMT). These research
institutes are actively involved in autothermal catalytic
Malaysia has vast fossil fuel resources in the form of
reforming of methane and methanol to enhance hydrogen
natural gas, oil and limited amount of coal. Malaysia is one
production. In addition, research work on hydrogen storage
of the main producers of natural gas in Asia producing 1000
by nanostructure carbon is also in progress to meet future
cubic feet per day [4]. Therefore, in the current scenario,
hydrogen storage demand. The intensive researches have
hydrogen is mainly produced from steam methane
been carried out on fuel cell development and can be found
reforming using natural gas as a feedstock.
elsewhere in detail [11]-[24].
Although limited, Malaysia has estimated coal reserves of
Several works have been carried out on SMR and steam
1712 million tons ranging from lignite to anthracite [4]. But
methanol reforming for hydrogen production in Malaysia.
in spite of that, Malaysia imports 90% of its coal from
Zein et al. [25] had investigated the performance of 20 mol%
Australia, China, Indonesia and South Africa [4]. This is due
NiO/TiO2 based catalyst doped with different transition
to high extraction cost of local coal as most of these reserves
metals for hydrogen production by SMR process. They
are situated in rural areas where no infrastructure is
found that 15 mol% MnOx with 20 mol% NiO/TiO2 was
developed so far. Due to this, coal gasification for hydrogen
remained active at 725°C with a GHSV (Gas hourly space
production is not a viable option to be developed in
velocity) of 2700/h for more than 3 hr and a hydrogen
Malaysia and therefore, will not be further discussed in the
composition of 48% in the product. Lwin et al. [26] had
present work. The present section only considers SMR for
presented thermodynamic equilibrium model for steam
hydrogen production.
methanol reforming to optimize theoretical hydrogen yield
at 1atm, 87-300°C and steam/methanol (S/M) ratio of 0-1.5.
A. SMR
They showed optimum hydrogen yield of 2.97 mol/mol-
SMR is well established and widely used process for
methanol at 127°C, 1 atm and S/M ratio of 1.5 without
hydrogen production. Currently, almost 48% of world wide
carbon and methane formation in the process. Based on the
hydrogen is produced from this method [6]. So far, this
findings, they proposed that the H2 yield cannot be raised
process is the most economical commercially available
above its theoretical limit of 3 mol/mol-methanol due to the
method for hydrogen production [7].
presence of higher amount of unreacted H2O. Yaakob et al.
SMR mainly consists of two steps. In the first step,
[27] studied the effect of Cu-Zn-Al catalyst with vanadium,
methane reforming takes place in the presence of catalyst at
zinc and copper for hydrogen production in autothermal
elevated temperature and pressure of 500-900°C and 30 atm
steam reforming methanol (ATRM) at 200-300°C. They
respectively [8]. Commercially, Ni is widely used as catalyst
showed catalyst containing vanadium (Cu-Zn-Al-V) has
[8]. The methane reforming is an endothermic reaction [9].
shown higher activity as compare to zinc and copper at
lower temperature of 200°C. Moreover, they showed that
CH4 + H2O <=> CO+ 3H2 ∆H= + 206 kJ/mol
100% methanol conversion and hydrogen composition of 70
mol% were achieved at 250°C. They also found that
In second step, CO then reacts with steam to produce H2 and
temperature higher than 300°C gave low catalyst
CO2 in water gas shift reaction (WGSR).
performance for all combinations due to CO presence which
deactivates the Cu and CuO. Yaakob et al. [28] presented
CO + H2O <=> CO2+ H2 ∆H= - 102 kJ/mol
the effect of Ni-Mo-Cu/γ-alumina trimetallic catalyst with
different compositions in methanol steam reforming for
WGSR is an exothermic reaction and takes place at lower
hydrogen production. From their findings, it is shown that
temperature as compared to SMR due to its equilibrium
composition of 7 wt% Cu, 0.2 wt% Mo and 0.2 wt% Ni
limitation. In current commercial practice, this reaction
gave the maximum hydrogen composition of more than 90
occurs in two stages. First stage known as high shift reactor,
wt% at 275°C and 3 atm. Yaakob et al. [29] investigated the
which utilizes usually iron based catalyst at a temperature of
multi compositions Cu-Zn-Al catalyst system supported on
350°C where second stage occurs at 205°C using copper
aluminosilicate zeolite (ZSM-5) for steam methanol
based catalyst and known as low shift reactor [8]. The final
reforming and ATRM. They found that Cu4Zn7Al2/ZSM-5
step is a purification step using pressure swing adsorption
catalyst showed high H2 composition of 76.88 mol% and
(PSA) to remove traces of CO, CO2, CH4, H2O and N2
CO concentration of 0.77 mol% at 300°C while
producing almost 99.99% pure hydrogen [8]. Typically,
Cu6Zn7Al2/ZSM-5 gave 73.09 mol% H2 and CO
hydrogen contributes to 70-75 mol% (dry basis) in product
composition of 0.12 mol% for steam methanol reforming at
gas [10].
300°C.
Currently, SMR process is the main process to produce
industrial grade hydrogen in Malaysia. The hydrogen
produce are mainly used for chemical synthesis or III. HYDROGEN FROM RENEWABLE RESOURCES
upgrading of crude oil quality. Beside these applications,
Malaysia has revised its energy policy from fourth-fuel to
Malaysia is targeting hydrogen as future fuel for
fifth-fuel under 8th Malaysian plan (2001-2005) in 1999.
transportation sector based on fuel cell technology. The
Renewable energy is considered the fifth fuel in the energy
initiation is already taken in the form of Fuel Cell Institutes
mix. In 2003, only biomass from renewable sources
(FCI) at University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) and
 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02
contributed 1.1% in energy mix. It was expected that about
5% of country’s electricity would be generated from
renewable sources by 2005 [4]. Moreover, according to the
9th Malaysian Plan (2006-2010), renewable energy will be
expected to contribute 300 MW in fuel mixture by 2010 [30].
Biomass is one of most promising source among
renewable resources to produce abundant, clean and
renewable hydrogen. As a tropical country involving in
agricultural sectors, Malaysia has a variety of biomass
residues produced from oil palm, rice, sugarcane, wood
industry and municipal solid waste as shown in Fig.1. Being
a second largest producer and exporter of oil palm in 2006,
Malaysia’s oil palm industry produced huge amount of
biomass wastes that contribute about 85.5% of total biomass
available in the country [31].
Fig. 1. Different biomass produced in Malaysia [31]
Biomass wastes produced from oil palm is derived from
its plantation area (e.g. trunk and fronds) and mill operation
(e.g. empty fruit bunch (EFB), mesocarp fibers, and palm
kernel shell). In 2008, total biomass wastes of 198.5 million
tons were produced according to the distribution as shown
in the Fig.2. It is noted that unlike other oil palm biomass
wastes, oil palm trunk is obtained only in the time of re-
plantation of oil palm trees.
Fig. 2. Different types of biomass produced from oil palm in Malaysia [32]
With the vast amount of biomass available in the country,
the possibilities of hydrogen production from these sources
are tremendous. Renewable hydrogen production
technologies include thermochemical and biological
conversion of biomass such as gasification, pyrolysis,
supercritical water gasification, biological water gas shift
reaction and fermentation. In addition, electrolysis using
3
solar and wind energy can also be considered as a method
for renewable hydrogen production. In the next section,
some of these technologies are briefly described.
A. Biomass Gasification
Gasification is thermochemical conversion of solid
biomass into gaseous product mainly consist of H2, CO,
CO2, CH4 and N2 by using air, oxygen and steam or in
combination as a gasifying medium. Air as gasifying
medium contains N2, which dilute the product gas. Pure
oxygen is considered expensive for an operation at small
scale [33]-[34]. Steam as sole gasification agent is taking
over due to numerous advantages over air or pure oxygen,
which includes high hydrogen yield [33]-[35], ability to
avoid product gas dilution due to N2 and can easily be
separated from product gas by condensation. The operating
condition usually varies from 800-900°C [1]. Biomass
gasification process can be performed in fixed bed or
fluidized bed reactor where the latter gives better
performance in terms of high carbon conversion [36].
Problems associated with quality of gas due to tar and char
impurities are the main challenges in the process. A
secondary reactor for tar cracking is often used to get better
purity of hydrogen at the end. Dolomite or Ni catalyst is
used for product gas treatment at the downstream reactor
[37]. Several other attempts are being carried out to reduce
tar content in product gas [38]-[45].
Recently, introduction of CO2 absorption in the process
makes it more viable for commercial application. The
presence of CO2 absorbent accelerates all the parallel
reforming and gasification reaction towards H2 production
[46]. Furthermore, CO2 absorption process is an exothermic
reaction provides heat for endothermic gasification reactions
and reduce overall energy requirement for the process in the
gasifier [46]-[47]. Addition of CO2 absorbent makes
possible for gasification process to take place at temperature
<800°C [46]-[52]. The typical hydrogen composition of 40
vol% (dry basis) is achieved, which can be increased up to
75 vol% (dry basis) in the presence of CO2 absorbent [51].
Very few works have been reported on hydrogen
production from biomass gasification in Malaysia. Zainal et
al. [53] used equilibrium modeling approach for biomass
gasification to predict performance of downdraft gasifier
using wood, paddy husk, paper and municipal waste
properties. They found that the hydrogen composition in
fuel gas for paper, paddy husk, wood and municipal waste at
800°C was 27, 25, 20 and 18 wt% respectively. Based on
the modeling approach, they predicted that hydrogen
composition in fuel gas increases from 20 to 25% with
increasing moisture content from 0 to 40% for wood at
800°C. Chok et al. [54] studied the palm shell gasification
in pilot scale compartmental fluidized bed gasifier (CFBG)
at 600-700°C and 1atm pressure. Their findings showed that
the produce gas contained 15-18 vol% H2, 25-38 vol% CO
and 9-10 vol% CH4. Ghani et al. [55] conducted
experiments in lab scale fluidized bed reactor for hydrogen
production using coconut shell (CS) and palm kernel shell
(PKS) as agriculture waste. They studied the effects of
 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02
temperature, fluidization ratio (superficial gas
velocity/minimum fluidization velocity), static bed height
and equivalence ratio (ER) on gas composition. They
reported maximum hydrogen composition of 67 and 66 mol%
(dry inert-gas) for CS and PKS at a temperature of 900°C
and 700°C respectively. Based on their work, fluidization
ratio and static bed height had minor effects on gas
compositions. Maximum hydrogen proportion of 66 and 82
mol% were reported in the product gas at ER of 0.15.
B. Biomass Pyrolysis
Pyrolysis is thermal decomposition of biomass into liquid
oil, solid charcoal, and gaseous products in the absence of
air/oxygen at temperature range of 350-525°C and pressure
of 1-5 atm [56]. Pyrolysis is an endothermic reaction [1].
Biomass + Heat => H2+CO+ CO2+ solid + liquid (bio-oil)
Most pyrolysis processes are designed to produce biofuel.
Hydrogen can be produced directly from fast or flash
pyrolysis at high temperature, high heating rate and longer
residence time of gaseous phase in the reactor [57].
The catalyst application in pyrolysis is helpful to enhance
product yield and to improve product gas quality. Ni et al.
[56] reported catalysts such as inorganic salts: chlorides,
carbonates and chromates have the ability to enhance
pyrolysis reaction rate. Some metal oxides such as Ni-based
[58], K2CO3 and Na2CO3 are also exhibited some catalytic
effect on pyrolysis [59].
Yang et al. [58] reported hydrogen composition of 38.45
vol% (dry N2 free basis) from pyrolysis of oil palm shell at
900°C using La (Lanthanide)/Al2O3 as a catalyst. Chen et al.
[60] produced 49.5 wt% of hydrogen in product gas at a
temperature of 850°C using rice straw in the presence of
Cr2O3 catalyst.
In Malaysia, pyrolysis process is widely used for bio-oil
production to generate biofuel based on oil palm wastes. In
2005, first pyrolysis plant for bio-oil production using
empty fruit bunch (EFB) has been completed in Malaysia
with cooperation of Malaysian based Genting Sanyen Bhd
and BTG Biomass Technology Group BV [61].
C. Supercritical Water Biomass Gasification (SWBG)
SWBG is relatively new technology for biomass
gasification. SWBG is preferably used when biomass
contains moisture more than 50 wt% that contributes to high
cost of moisture removal in conventional gasification
process [3]. The liquid and gas phase have alike properties
when water is treated at or higher than its critical point
(temperature higher than 374°C, pressure 220 atm). The
gaseous product comprised of H2, CO, CO2 and CH4. This
approach gives gasification conversion of almost 100% and
hydrogen composition up to 50 vol% in the product gas [56].
Kelly-Yong et al. [3] calculated theoretical amount of
hydrogen of 2.16×1010 kgH2/yr produced from 184.6 million
tons of worldwide oil palm wastes (PKS, EFB, mesocarp
fibers, fronds and trunks) via SWBG fulfilling almost 50%
of world hydrogen demand. Based on this calculation, they
4
further proposed the possibility of implementing SWBG in
Malaysia by using oil palm wastes.
Currently, hydrogen production from SWBG is still in
developing stage in Malaysia although it could be an
effective technique from hydrogen production. Therefore,
active research should be undertaken to develop and
detailing the process as well as to find out other possible
types of biomass that can be used to produce hydrogen
through SWBG.
D. Biomass based Biological Water Gas Shift Reaction
(BWGSR)
BWGSR is relatively new technology for bio-hydrogen
production. Some photo-heterotrophic bacteria are capable
of performing CO oxidation into H2 and CO2 in the dark at
ambient temperature and pressure [1]. These bacterial takes
CO as single carbon source and generate adenosine
triphosphate (ATP), which couple with CO oxidation with
reduction of H+ to H2. As reaction occurs at ambient
conditions, thermodynamic favors forward reaction to
produce H2 [62].
Several research works on BWGSR has been reported in
Malaysia. Najafpour et al. [63] investigated BWGSR for
hydrogen production using photosynthetic anaerobic
bacterium Rhodospirillum rubrum (R. rubrum) in
continuous stirred tank bio-reactor (CSTR). They had shown
that hydrogen production rate of 16 mmol/g-cell.h with
composition of 80 mol% was achievable with an inlet gas
flow rate of 14 ml/min in a continuous operation mode.
Najafpour et al. [64] studied the effects of different
concentration of acetate (organic substrate) on hydrogen
production using R. rubrum. They found that an acetate
concentration of 1.5 g/l gave high hydrogen yield of 2.3
mmol/mol-CO with composition of 98 mol% in the
produced gas. They also presented the kinetic study using
Monod and Andrew’s models and found that the data were
well fitted with those models. Ismail et al. [65] used
photosynthetic anaerobic bacterium R. rubrum to study the
effects of agitation rate and volumetric gas flow rate on
mass transfer coefficients (KL) and hydrogen production in
CSTR. Based on their findings, they reported that at an
optimum agitation rate of 500 rpm, they can produce 9.6
mmol H2/h with KL value of 86.4+3.5/h at 0.44+0.023 atm.
They also showed that the assistance of microsparger
enhanced the hydrogen production as compared to normal
sparger at the tested conditions.
E. Biomass Fermentation
Fermentation by microorganisms can be divided into dark
fermentation (anaerobic) and photoheterotrophic (photo-
fermentation). Photo-fermentation used non sulphur bacteria
under nitrogen environment in the presence of nitrogenase
catalyst and solar energy. The final product mainly consists
of H2 and CO2 [1]. Dark fermentation uses carbohydrates
rich biomass waste in the presence of anaerobic bacteria in
the dark. The final product mainly consists of H2 and CO2
along with lesser amount of CO, CH4 and H2S [66]. Dark
fermentation does not require energy and hence more
 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02
attractive to be used in commercial scale. Important
variables that affect the hydrogen production are pH value,
H2 partial pressure and hydraulic retention time (HRT). The
optimal pH value of 5-6 is reported for maximum hydrogen
yield [67]. An optimum hydrogen yield of 14 mmol/g-
carbohydrate at HRT of 0.5 day is reported using industrial
waste water [68].
In Malaysia, several research works have been done for
hydrogen production via fermentation. Sabaratnam et al. [69]
used oil palm mill effluent (POME) in the presence of mix
microflora population to produce hydrogen. They reported 1%
hydrogen concentration in 50 ml of gas at temperature of
37°C and initial pH value of 7.0. No traces of CH4 in
product gas were found. Atif et al. [70] investigated
hydrogen production using POME in the presence of
microflora at 60˚C and pH value of 5.5. They reported the
maximum hydrogen yield of 4708 mlH2/L-POME and
evaluation rate of 454 mlH2/L-POME-h. No CH4 is found in
the evolved gas. Alshiyab et al. [71] showed the effect of
salt addition to fermentation medium on hydrogen
production using glucose as substrate at 30˚C and an initial
pH of 7.0. They showed that hydrogen productivity dropped
from 77.5 ml/L/h without NaCl to 63.5 ml/L/h for 5g/L of
NaCl while values dropped from 72.5 ml/L/h without
NaCH3COOH to 66.5 ml/L/h for 3 g/L of NaCH3COOH.
Alshiyab et al. [72] studied the effect of CO2 removal from
the product gas on hydrogen yield using Clostridium
acteobutylicum NCIMB 13357 in Reinforced Clostridia
Medium (RCM). They concluded the increase of hydrogen
yield from 408 mlH2/g-glucose to 422 mlH2/g-glucose using
30% KOH as CO2 scavenging at 30˚C and an initial pH of
7.0. The CO2 concentration reduced from 185 ml/g-glucose
to 80 ml/g-glucose. Alalayah et al. [73] studied the effect of
initial substrate concentration, initial pH value and
temperature on hydrogen production using Clostridium
Saccharoperbutylacetonicum N1-4(ATCC 13564). They
reported maximum hydrogen of 3.10 mol/mol-glucose at an
initial glucose concentration of 10 g/L, initial pH value of
6.0+0.2 and temperature of 37˚C. Kalil et al. [74] showed
the RCM improvement using anaerobic bacterium
Cacetobutylicum NCIMB13357 to enhance hydrogen
productivity. They showed that maximum hydrogen yield of
308 ml/g-glucose is obtained, using 13 g/L-yeast extract as
nitrogen source with maximum biomass concentration of 1.1
g/L. Initial pH value of 7.0 and temperature of 30°C were
used. Chong et al. [75] studied the hydrogen production by
Clostridium butyricum EB6 in POME sludge at different pH
values. They presented the maximum hydrogen production
rate of 3195 mlH2/L-medium at pH 5.5 and 37°C with no
iron supplement. They also concluded that Clostridium
butyricum EB6 produced more hydrogen as compared to
medium supplemented with 4 g/L-yeast extract, which
corresponds to 198 mlH2/L-medium at the same conditions.
Ismail et al. [76] investigated the possibility of using POME
as a substrate by anaerobic digested sludge under
thermophilic condition for hydrogen production. They
concluded the average hydrogen production of 2.64
5
m3/m3/day at 55°C and HRT of 4 days. Hydrogen
contributed to 52 mol% in product gas with no CH4 detected.
F. Water Electrolysis using Solar and Wind Energy
Electrolysis is a process of splitting water into hydrogen
and oxygen using electrical current. Different sources of
energy like solar and wind can be utilized to produce
electrical current to split water. Malaysia is keen to utilize
renewable sources for hydrogen production to develop
sophisticated hydrogen technologies such as fuel cell. As an
initiative, Malaysian Government has assigned Pusat
Tenaga Malaysia to lead a project entitled “Roadmap for
Solar, Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Research and Development
Directions and Markets in Malaysia”. The aim of the project
is to look for any possible source of energy to fulfill the
increasing demand of energy [77].
Solar energy is one of the most promising sources to
generate electrical current for electrolysis to produce
hydrogen. Malaysia receives a massive amount of solar
energy i.e. 4-5 kWh/m2-day due to its location near to the
equator [78]. Moreover, it is reported that total solar energy
received per year by Malaysia is almost sixteen times the
country annual energy demand [79].
Bashi et al. [78] studied the feasibility of photovoltaic
(PV) electrolysis for hydrogen production using solar
energy. They used two different electrolytes, water and
NaOH (aq. solution) and concluded that 0.1 mol NaOH is
better choice for high hydrogen production.
A solar eco-house for hydrogen production is established
by Solar Energy Research Institute (SERI), UKM. The
system is the first of its nature in Malaysia funded by
Intensification of Research in Priority Areas (IRPA),
Malaysia. The house is an ordinary residence that uses
hydrogen as fuel. Hydrogen is produced by the electrolysis
using solar energy with the help of photovoltaic cell. The
system contains 40 multi-crystal photovoltaic panels with
maximum production capacity of 5 kW [77]. In addition,
fuel cell of 1 kW capacity is also available to operate
electrical equipments in day-off time.
Currently, an integrated PV-wind hydrogen production
system is constructed at Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia. This
project is a joint venture between UKM and UMT. The
system has capacity of 1 kW each for PV and wind turbine
system. The system produced 130-140 ml/min of hydrogen
at 200-800 W/m2 of solar radiation and 2.0-5.0 m/s of wind
speed [80].
IV. TECHNO-ECONOMICAL REVIEW ON HYDROGEN
PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES
Although it is undeniable that SMR is still the most
feasible commercial process for hydrogen production, the
consequences of limited amount of fossil fuel reserves all
over the world emphasizes on finding alternative sources for
hydrogen production. Recently, many studies have been
carried out for hydrogen production from renewable
resources. So far, an assessment of hydrogen production
technologies considered biomass gasification is the most
 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02
economical process for hydrogen production [81]. But in
the same scenario, some studies show that biomass
gasification process is economically unfeasible as compare
to SMR except for low cost biomass availability. Pyrolysis
is considered more attractive for hydrogen production due to
its additional valuable products in the process. SWBG is an
attractive option for clean hydrogen production. The process
has very little impurities like tar and char in hydrogen rich
gas mixture [56]. Some studies such as Kelly-Yong et al. [3]
strongly recommended this process as the best option for
hydrogen production in Malaysia using oil palm wastes as
main biomass feedstock. This study reported that the
produced hydrogen price of 3-7 US$/GJ, which is
reasonable as compared to 5-8 US$/GJ [82] for SMR.
Hydrogen from biological process has gained interest in the
last few years in Malaysia. Processes especially dark
fermentation that takes place at ambient temperature and
pressure is being targeted for future hydrogen production.
In addition, primarily researches show great potential using
POME as feedstock in dark fermentation which contains
high cellulose and lignocelluloses material [75]. In Malaysia,
oil palm industry annually produced 52.8 million tons of
POME [83] that can be utilized for hydrogen production
through fermentation.
Hydrogen from water electrolysis using solar and wind
energy is another potentially strong alternative due to
Malaysia location on the globe. But the hydrogen cost is
high due to low process efficiency and high cost of
electricity produced from photovoltaic cell. The electricity
generated by photovoltaic cell is almost twenty times costly
as compared to electricity generated by conventional
processes [84]. Research and development are focused on
this system by reducing its components cost and increasing
system efficiency [85], [86].
Table 1 compares hydrogen production price for different
biomass technologies.
Table 1
Hydrogen production technologies comparison
Technology Overall H2 cost
efficiency
(%) (US$/GJ)
SMR 65-75a 5-8
Biomass 42.5-46.5a 9-13
Gasification
Biomass 47.9b 9-13
Pyrolysis
SWBG 72.91c 3 [3]
46.54d
BWGSR N/A 14.6
Biomass 60-80e N/A
Fermentation
a Efficiency based on LHV
b Efficiency based on higher heating value (HHV)
c Theoretical efficiency using oil palm based on process heat recovery
d Theoretical efficiency using oil palm based on without process
recovery
e Maximum theoretical yield of 4 molH2 /mol-glucose metabolized
N/A: Data not available
6
V. CONCLUSION
The Malaysia hydrogen economy is still depended
heavily on fossil fuel such as natural gas, which is finite and
gradually depleting. There is a lot of research being pursued
in the development of hydrogen production system in
Malaysia. In this work, biomass has been shown to be
promising replacements for the existing fossil fuel in terms
of price and environmental issues. It is also been discussed
that most of these processes are still in developing stage.
Based on the current scenario, it is projected that the
replacement of fossil fuels with biomass for hydrogen
production will occur gradually. Biomass gasification, dark
fermentation and SWBG are some of the potential processes
to be further developed for hydrogen production from
biomass, especially oil palm waste, in Malaysia.
REFERENCES
[1] Y. Kalinci A. Hepbasli and I. Dincer, “Biomass-based hydrogen
production: A review and analysis”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 34
(2009) pp. 8799–8817.
[2] H.F. Abbas, and W.M.A.W. Daud, “Hydrogen production by methane
decomposition: A review”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 35 (2010)
pp.1160–1190.
[3] T.L. Kelly-Yong, K. T. Lee, and S. Bhatia, “Potential of hydrogen
from oil palm biomass as a source of renewable energy worldwide”,
Energy pol., 35(2007) pp. 692–701.
[4] A.R. Mohamed, and K. T. Lee, “Energy for sustainable development
in Malaysia: Energy policy and alternative energy”, Energy pol., 34
(2006) pp. 2388–2397.
[5] Malaysian National News Agency see also:
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsindex.php?id=462620
(last visit on 25 March, 2010).
[6] H. Jin, Y. Xu, R. Lin and W. Han, “A proposal for a novel multi-
functional energy system for the production of hydrogen and power”
Int .J. Hydrogen Energy 33 (2008) pp. 9-19.
[7] M. Balat, “Potential importance of hydrogen as future solution to
environmental and transportation problems’, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy,
33(2008) pp.4013-4029.
[8] M. Balat, “Possible methods of hydrogen production”, Energy source
PartA - recovery utilization and environmental effects, 31(2009)
pp.39-50.
[9] K. McHugh, “Hydrogen production methods”, Conference papers,
MPR Associates, Inc., MPRWP-0001, February 2005. Available from:
References www.mpr.com/pubs.
[10] T.E. Lipman, “What will power the hydrogen economy? Present and
future sources of hydrogen energy”, Analysis and report prepared for
[82] The Natural Resources Defense Council, Institute of Transportation
[82] Studies, publication No. UCD-ITS-RR-04-10, University of
California, Davis, CA, 2004.
[82] [11] S.E. Iyuke, A.W. Mohammad, A.A.H. Kadhum, W.R.W. Daud and R.
Chebbi, “Improved membrane and electrode assemblies for proton
exchange membrane fuel cells” J. Power Sources 114 (2) (2003)
pp.195-202.
[87] [12] S.K. Kamarudin, W.R.W. Daud, A.W. Mohammad, A.M. Som, M.S.
[88], [89] Takriff, “Design of a tubular ceramic membrane for gas separation in
PEMFC system”, Fuel Cells 3 (3) (2003) pp.1-10.
[13] S.E. Iyuke, W.R.W. Daud, A.B. Mohamad, A.A.H. Kadhum and R.
Chebbi, “Performance optimization of PEM fuel cell during MEA
fabrication” Energy Convers. Manage., 45 (2004) pp.3239-3249.
heat [14] S.K. Kamarudin, W. R.W. Daud, A.M. Som, A.W. Mohammad, M.S.
Takriff, and M.S. Masdar,. “The conceptual design of a PEMFC
system via simulation” Chem. Eng. J. 103 (2004) pp.99-113.
[15] S.K. Kamarudin, W. R.W. Daud, A.M. Som, M.S. Takriff, A.W.
Mohammad, and Y.K. Loke, “Design of a fuel processor unit for
PEM fuel cell via shortcut design method” Chem. Eng. J. 104 (2004)
pp.7-17.
[16] S.K. Kamarudin, W. R.W. Daud, A.M. Som, “Clean cheap and
compact (3c) power generation system for mobile and portable
 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02
application: PEM fuel cell”, J. Solid State Sci. Tec., 12(1) (2005) pp.
151.
[17] S.K. Kamarudin, W. R.W. Daud, A.W. Mohammad, “Hydrogen
purification system for PEMFC: a mesoporous tubular ceramic
membrane and a pressure swing adsorber in series”, J. Solid State Sci.
Tec., 12(1) (2005) pp.139.
[18] R. Dweiri and J. Sahari, “Electrical properties of carbon-based
polypropylene composites for bipolar plates in polymer electrolyte
membrane fuel cell (PEMFC)”, J. Power Sources 171 (2) (2007) pp.
424-432.
[19] E.H. Majlan, W.R.W Daud, S.E. Iyuke, A.B. Mohamad, A.A.H.
Kadhum, A.W. Mohammad, M.S. Takriff and N. Bahaman
“Hydrogen purification using compact pressure swing adsorption
system for fuel cell”, Intern. J. Hydrogen Energy, 34 (2009) pp.2771-
2777.
[20] R. Sitanggang, W.R.W. Daud, A.B. Mohamad, A.A.H. Kadhum and
S.E. Iyuke. “Fabrication of gas diffusion layer based on x-y robotic
spraying technique for proton exchange membrane fuel cell
application”, Energy Convers. Manage. 50(2009) pp.1419-1425.
[21] S.K. Kamarudin, W.R.W. Daud, A.M. Som and M.S. Masdar,
“Conceptual design of 5 kW PEM fuel cell stack” J. Kejuruteraan
19(2007) pp.43-53.
[22] R. Chebbi, A. Beicha, W.R.W. Daud and R. Zaamouche, “Surface
analysis for catalyst layer (PT/PTFE/C) and diffusion layer (PTFE/C)
for proton exchange membrane fuel cells systems (PEMFCs)” Appl.
Surf. Sci. 255 (2009) pp. 6367–6371
[23] S.K. Kamarudin, W.R.W. Daud, A.M. Som, M.S. Takriff and A.W.
Mohammad, “Synthesis and optimization of a PEM fuel cell system
via reactor-separation network (RSN)”. J. Power Sources 159(2006)
pp.1194-1204.
[24] S.K. Kamarudin, W. R.W. Daud, A.M. Som, M.S. Takriff and A.W.
Mohammad, “Technical design and economic evaluation of a PEM
fuel cell system. J. Power Sources 157 (2006) pp. 641-649.
[25] S. H. S. Zein, A. R. Mohamed, P.S.P. Sai, and N. A. M. Zabidi
“Production of hydrogen and carbon nanotubes from methane” J. Ind.
Eng. Chem. 10(6) (2004) pp.869-876.
[26] Y. Lwin, W.R.W. Daud, A. B. M and Z. Yaakob “Hydrogen
production from steam – methanol reforming: thermodynamic
analysis” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 25 (2000) pp.47–53.
[27] Z. Yaakob, M. S. Mahmud, W. R.W. Daud and A. B. Mohamad “Cu-
Zn-Al-V catalyst for hydrogen production from methanol reforming”
Proceedings International Hydrogen Energy Congress and Exhibition
IHEC 2005 Istanbul, Turkey, 13-15 July 2005.
[28] Z. Yaakob, S. K. Kamarudin, W. R. W. Daud, M. R. Yosfiah, K. L.
Lim and H. Kazemian“Hydrogen production by methanol-steam
reforming using Ni – Mo – Cu/γ -alumina trimetallic catalysts” Asia -
Pac. J . Chem. Eng. (2009), DOI: 10.1002/apj.
[29] Z. Yaakob, M.N. S. Kumar, M.A. Ibrahim, W.R.W. Daud and A.A.H.
Kadhum “Multi-composition Cu-Zn-Al catalyst supported on ZSM-5
for hydrogen production” Eur. J. Sci. Res. 28 (2009) pp.141-154.
[30] 9th Malaysian Plan, “Sustainable energy development”, Chapter 19
also see:
www.epu.gov.my/html/themes/epu/html/rm9/english/Chapter19.pdf-
[31] S.H. Shuit, K.T. Tan, K.T. Lee, A.H. Kamaruddin, “Oil palm biomass
as a sustainable energy source: A Malaysian case study”, Energy, 34
(2009) pp. 1225–1235.
[32] S. Yusup, M. T. Arpin, Y. Uemura, A. Ra mli, L. Ismail, S. H. Shuit,
K. T. Tan, K. T. Lee, “Review on agricultural biomass utilization as
energy in Malaysia,” Proceedings for 16th ASEAN Regional
Symposium on Chemical Engineering, (2009) pp.86-89.
[33] C. Pfeifer, and H. Hofbauer, “Development of catalytic tar
decomposition downstream from dual fluidized bed biomass steam
gasifier”, Powder Technol., 180, (2008) pp.9-16.
[34] P. Mckendry, “Energy production from biomass (part 3): gasification
technologies”, Bioresour. Technol., 83 (2002) pp. 55–63.
[35] N.H. Florin, and A.T. Harris, “Enhance Hydrogen production from
biomass with in situ carbon dioxide capturing using calcium oxide
sorbents”, Chem. Eng. Sci., 63 (2008) pp.287-316.
[36] W. Ragnar, “Gasification of biomass: comparison of fixed bed and
fluidized bed gasifier”, Biomass Bioenergy, 18 (2000) pp. 489-497.
[37] M. Asadullah, S.-I. Ito, K. Kunimori, M. Yamada, and K. Tomishige,
“Energy efficient production of hydrogen and syngas from biomass:
7
Development of low temperature catalytic process for cellulose
gasification”, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36 (2002) pp. 4476–4481.
[38] S. Rapagna, N. Jand, and P. U. Foscolo, “Catalytic gasification of
biomass to produce hydrogen rich gas”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 23
(1998) pp. 551-557.
[39] K. Tomishige, M.Asadullah, and K. Kunimori, “Syngas production by
biomass gasification using Rh/CeO2/SiO2 catalysts and fluidized bed
reactor”, Catal. Today, 4(2004) pp. 389-403.
[40] D. Świerczyński, C. Courson, L. Bedel, A. Kiennemann, and J. Guille
“Characterization of Ni−Fe/MgO/Olivine catalyst for fluidized bed
steam gasification of biomass, Chem. Mater., 18 (2006) pp. 4025-
4032.
[41] L. Wei, S. Xu, L.Zhang, C. Liu, H. Zhu, and S. Liu, “Steam
gasification of biomass for hydrogen-rich gas in a free-fall reactor”,
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 32, (2007) pp.24-31.
[42] R. Zhang, Y. Wang, and R. C. Brown, “Steam reforming of tar
compounds over Ni/olivine catalysts doped with CeO2”, Energy
Convers. Manage. 48 (2007) pp.68-77.
[43] Z. Abu El-Rub, E.A. Bramer, and G. Brem, “Experimental
comparison of biomass chars with other catalysts for tar reduction”,
Fuel, 87 (2008) pp.2243–2252.
[44] M. Azhar Uddin, H. Tsuda, S. Wu, and E. Sasaoka, “Catalytic
decomposition of biomass tars with iron oxide catalysts”, Fuel, 87
(2008) pp. 451–459.
[45] E. Gusta, A. K. Dalai, M. Azhar Uddin, and E. Sasaoka, Catalytic
decomposition of biomass tars with dolomites, Energy Fuels, 23
(2009) pp 2264–2272.
[46] T. Marquard Moellenstedt, P. Sichler, M. Specht, M. Michel, R.
Berger, K. Hein, E. Höftberger, R. Rauch, and H. Hofbauer, “New
approach for biomass gasification to hydrogen”, 2nd World Biomass
Conference (2004), Rome, Italy.
[47] M. R. Mahishi, and M.S. Sadrameli, S. Vijayaraghavan, “A novel
approach to enhance the hydrogen yield of biomass gasification using
CO2 sorbent”, J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 130 (2008) pp. 011501.1-
011501.8.
[48] P.Weerachanchai, M. Horio and C. Tangsathitkulchai, “Effect of
gasifying conditions and bed materials on fluidized bed steam
gasification of woody biomass”, Bioresour. Technol., 100(2009) pp.
1419-1427.
[49] G. Xu, T. Murakami, T. Suda, S. Kusama, and T. Fujimori,
“Distinctive effects of CaO additive on atmospheric gasification of
biomass at different temperatures”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 44, (2005)
pp.5864-5868.
[50] M. R. Mahishi, and D.Y. Goswami, “An experimental study of
hydrogen production by gasification of biomass in the presence of a
CO2 sorbent”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 32 (2007) pp. 2803–2808.
[51] C.Pfeifer, B. Puchner, and H. Houfbauer, “In-Situ CO2 absorption in a
dual fluidized bed biomass steam gasifier to produce a hydrogen rich
syngas”, Int. J. Chem. Reactor Eng., 5(2007), Article A9.
[52] T.Hanaoka, T.Yoshida, S.Fuijimoto, K.Kamei, M.Harada, Y.Suzuki,
H.Hatano,S.Yokoyama, and T. Minowa “Hydrogen production from
woody biomass by steam gasification using a CO2 sorbent”, Biomass
Bioenergy, 28 (2005) pp.63–68.
[53] Z.A Zainal, R. Ali, C.H. Lean and K.N. Seetharamu, “Prediction of
performance of a downdraft gasifier using equilibrium modeling for
different biomass materials” Energy Convers. Manage. 42(2001)
pp.499-1515.
[54] V.S. Chok, S. Yusup and A. Gorin “Palm shell gasification in pilot
scale compartmented fluidized bed gasifier: preliminary high
temperature performance and challenges” PIPOC 2009 Int. P.O. Cong.
– Chem, Process. Tech. & Bio Energy Conf.
[55] W.A.W.A.K. Ghani, R.A.Moghadam, M.A.M. Salleh and A.B. Alias,
“Air gasification of agricultural waste in a fluidized bed gasifier:
Hydrogen production performance”, Energies, 2(2) (2009) pp. 258-
268.
[56] Meng Ni, D.Y.C. Leung, M. K.H. Leung, and K. Sumathy, “An
overview of hydrogen production technology from biomass”, Fuel
Process. Technol., 87 (2006) pp.461 – 472.
[57] A. Demirbas, “Gaseous products from biomass by pyrolysis and
gasification: effects of catalyst on hydrogen yield”, Energy Convers.
Manage. 43 (2002) 897-909.
 International Journal of Engineering & Technology IJET-IJENS Vol: 10 NO: 02
[58] H. Yang, R. Yan, H. Chen, D.H. Lee, D.T. Liang and C. Zheng,
“Pyrolysis of palm oil wastes for enhanced production of hydrogen
rich gases”, Fuel Process Technology, 87 (10) (2006) pp.935–942.
[59] A. Caglar, A. Demirbas, “Conversion of cotton cocoon shell to liquid
products by pyrolysis”, Energy Convers. Manage. 41(2000) pp. 1749–
1756.
[60] G. Chen, J. Andries, H. Spliethoff, “Catalytic pyrolysis of biomass for
hydrogen rich fuel gas production”, Energy Convers. Manage. 44
(2003) pp.2289–2296.
[61] R.H. Venderbosch, E. Gansekoele, J.F. Florijn, D. Assink, “Pyrolysis
of oil palm residue in Malaysia”, BTG Biomass Technology Group
BV, Ng HY, Genting Bio-oil Bhd. See also
http://www.pyne.co.uk/docs/PyNe%20Section1.pdf; 2005.
[62] J.D. Holladay, J. Hu, D.L. King, and Y. Wang, “An overview of
hydrogen production technologies”, Catal. Today, 139 (2009) pp.
244–260.
[63] G. Najafpour, H. Younesi and A.R Mohamed, “Continuous hydrogen
production via fermentation of synthesis gas” Pet. Coal 45(3-4) (2003)
pp.154-158.
[64] G. Najafpour, H. Younesi and A.R Mohamed, “Effect of organic
substrate on hydrogen production from synthesis gas using
Rhodospirillum rubrum, in batch culture”, Biochem. Eng. J. 21 (2004)
pp.123–130.
[65] K. S. K. Ismail, G. Najafpour, H. Younesi A. R. Mohamed, and A. H.
Kamaruddin,“Biological hydrogen production from CO: Bioreactor
performance” Biochem. Eng. J., 39 (2008) pp.468–477.
[66] D.B. Levin, and R. Chahine, “Challenges of renewable hydrogen
production from biomass”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, Article in Press,
Corrected proof, (2009) pp. 1–8.
[67] S.K. Khanal, W.H. Chen, L. Li, and S. Sung, “Biological hydrogen
production: Effects of pH and intermediate products”, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy, 29(2004) pp.1123-1131.
[68] Y.Ueno, S. Otsuka, and M. Morimoto, “Hydrogen production from
industrial waste water by anaerobic micro flora in chemostat culture”,
J. Ferment. Bioeng. 82 (1996) pp.194-197.
[69] Sabaratnam, S. Ibrahim, M.A. Hasan, S. Abd-Aziz, M.I.A. Karim
C.W. Chung, F.R. Ahmadun, S. Iyuke and Y. Shirai, “Biological
hydrogen production by indigenous microbes from renewable
resources”, Investing in Innovation 2003.
[70] A.A.Y. Atif, A. Fakhru’l-Razi, M.A. Ngan, M. Morimoto, S.E. Iyuke,
N.T. Veziroglu, “Fed batch production of hydrogen from palm oil
mill effluent using anaerobic microflora” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 30
(2005) pp.1393–1397.
[71] H. Alshiyab, M.S. Kalil, A.A. Hamid and W.M. Yusoff, “Effect of
salts addition on hydrogen production by C. acetobutylicum” Pak. J.
Biol. Sci., 15;11(18) (2008) pp.2193-2200.
[72] H. Alshiyab, M.S. Kalil, A.A. Hamid and W.M.W.
Yusoff, ”Removal of headspace CO2 increases biological hydrogen
production by C. acteobutylicum” Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 11(19) (2008)
pp.2336-2340.
[73] W.M. Alalayah, M.S. Kalil, A. A. H. Kadhum, J. M. Jahim and N. M.
Alauj, “Hydrogen production using Clostridium
saccharoperbutylacetonicum N1-4 (ATCC 13564)”, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy, 33 (2008) pp.7392–7396.
[74] M.S. Kalil, H.S.S. Alshiyab and W.M.W. Yusoff,” Media
improvement for hydrogen production using C. acetobutylicum
NCIMB 13357”, Am. J. App. Sci., 6 (6) (2009) pp. 1158-1168.
[75] M.L. Chong, R.A. Rahim, Y. Shirai, and M.A. Hassan, “Biohydrogen
production by Clostridium butyricum EB6 from palm oil mill
effluent”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 34(2009) pp.764–771.
[76] I. Ismail, M.A. Hassan, N.A. Abdur Rahman, and C. S. Soon,
“Thermophilic biohydrogen production from palm oil mill effluent
(POME) using suspended mixed culture”, Biomass Bioenergy, 34
(2010) pp.42–47.
[77] K. Sopian, and W.R.W. Daud, “Development of the hydrogen energy
roadmap and current status for Malaysia”, ISESCO Science and
Technology Vision, 4 (95) (2008) pp.12-15.
[78] S.M. Bashi, N. F. Mailah, and M. Y. Yusof, “Production of hydrogen
using photovoltaic electrolysis”, Student Conference on Research and
Development (SCOReD) 2003 Proceedings, Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[79] G.S. Donald, and S.L. Lee, “Solar radiation estimates in Malaysia”,
Sol. Energy , 26, (1981) pp 33-40,
View publication stats
8
[80] K. Sopian , M. Z. Ibrahim, W.R. W. Daud , M.Y. Othman , B.Yatim,
and N. Amin “Performance of a PV–wind hybrid system for
hydrogen production”, Renewable Energy, 34(2009) pp.1973–1978.
[81] K. Nath, and D. Das, “Hydrogen from biomass”, Current Science,
85(2003) 3.
[82] B. Mclellan, E.Shoko, A.L. Dicks, and J.C. Diniz da Costa,
“Hydrogen production and utilization opportunities for Australia”, Int.
J. Hydrogen Energy, 30(2005) pp.669-679.
[83] S.L. Tong, “Development of biogas recovery and utilization for future
energy production in Malaysia” Oil and Fats International Congress
2008, 21-23 October 2008 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
[84] K. Sopian, M.Y. Othman and W.R. W. Daud, “Future development in
Malaysian environmental friendly renewable energy technology
research and development” ISESCO Science and Technology Vision,
1(2008) pp. 30-36.
[85] H. K. Yeoh, W. R. W. Daud, A. A. H Kadhum, A. B. Mohamad, K.
Sopian, and M. M. Salleh, “Dye-Sensitized photoelectrochemical
cells : towards splitting water”, The 14th Symposium of Malaysian
Chemical Engineers, Putrajaya, Selangor, Malaysia, (2000) pp.367-
374.
[86] F. H. Rahman, R. Daik, and W. R. W. Daud, “Synthesis and
characterization of tungstentris (dithiolene) photocatalyst for
production of hydrogen in fuel cell application”, Advances in
Malaysian Fuel Research and Development, (2003) pp. 203-206.
[87] E. Wolfrum, P.C. Manese, A. Watt, G. Vanzin, J. Huang, and S.
Smolinski, “Biological water gas shift development”, DOE Hydrogen,
Fuel Cell, and Infrastructure Technologies Program Review, 2003
(May 19 – 22).
[88] D.B. Levin, L. Pitt, and M. Love, “Biohydrogen production: prospects
and limitations to practical application”, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy,
29(2004) pp.173–85.
[89] J. Turner, G. Sverdrup, M.K. Mann, P.C. Maness, B. Kroposki, and
M. Ghirardi, “Renewable hydrogen production”, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy, 32(2008) pp.379–407.
Zakir Khan was born in February 04, 1978 at
Karak, Pakistan. He received his Master of Science
in Chemical Engineering in 2005 from Friedrich-
Alexander-Universität (FAU) Erlangen-Nürnberg,
Erlangen, Bayern, Germany. He did his Bachelor
of Science in Chemical Engineering in 2001 from
N.W.F.P University of Engineering & Technology,
Peshawar, N.W.F.P, Pakistan. From 2006-2009, he
served as Lecturer in the Department of Chemical
Engineering, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology (CIIT),
Lahore, Pakistan. Currently, he is on study leave to pursue his PhD in the
Department of Chemical Engineering, University Technology PETRONAS,
Malaysia.
Mr. Zakir Khan is a member of Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC).