Process simulation for the production of methanol via CO2 reforming of methane route

Godstand Aimiuwu; Ebuwa Osagie; Osaze Omoregbe

doi:10.1515/cppm-2020-0049

Artikel

Process simulation for the production of methanol via CO₂ reforming of methane route

Godstand Aimiuwu , Ebuwa Osagie und Osaze Omoregbe

Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 29. September 2020

Veröffentlicht von

Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Manuskript einreichen Informationen für Autor*innen

Aus der Zeitschrift Chemical Product and Process Modeling Band 17 Heft 1

Abstract

Methanol is an essential chemical building block for the synthesis of numerous industrial products, and has the potential of becoming an alternative fuel. In this study, a simulation of methanol production process was carried out using Aspen Plus software. The process involves two stages, namely syngas production through the dry reforming of methane (DRM) in a reformer reactor and the actual methanol production by the conversion of the syngas obtained. Plug reactor unit operation was employed for the conversion of syngas from the DRM reactor to methanol. Thereafter, the influence of various operating parameters including DRM temperature, plug reactor specification temperature, and pressure effects was studied via the model analysis tool. A rundown of the optimal conditions obtained are DRM temperature of 1050 °C for better conversion of feed and minimal carbon deposit, CH₄/CO₂ ratio of 0.71, plug reactor constant temperature of 198 °C for optimum methanol yield (4600 kmol) for the given gaseous feed flow rates (5000 kmol/h methane and 7000 kmol/h CO₂).

Keywords: Aspen plus; carbon utilisation; CO2 conversion; dry reforming; methanol

Corresponding author: Osaze Omoregbe, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Benin, PMB 1154, Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria; and School of Chemical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK, E-mail: OXO850@bham.ac.uk

Author contribution: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: None declared.
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

1. Höök, M, Tang, X. Depletion of fossil fuels and anthropogenic climate change-A review. Energy Pol 2013; 52: 797–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.046.Suche in Google Scholar

2. Romero-Sáez, M, Dongil, AB, Benito, N, Espinoza-González, R, Escalona, N, Gracia, F. CO2 methanation over nickel-ZrO2 catalyst supported on carbon nanotubes: a comparison between two impregnation strategies. Appl Catal B Environ 2018; 237: 817–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2018.06.045.Suche in Google Scholar

3. Kapoor, R, Ghosh, P, Kumar, M, Sengupta, S, Gupta, A, Kumar, SS, Valorization of agricultural waste for biogas based circular economy in India: a research outlook. Bioresour Technol 2020; 304: 123036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123036.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Hall, AH. Review of changing climate, changing economy. J Homel Secur Emerg Manag 2011;8. 0000102202154773551934. https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1934.Suche in Google Scholar

5. Letcher, TM. Introduction with a focus on atmospheric carbon dioxide and climate change. In: Letcher, TM, editor. Future energy: improved, sustainable and clean options for our planet, 3rd ed.Elsevier; 2013:3–17 p.10.1016/B978-0-08-102886-5.00001-3Suche in Google Scholar

6. Treacy, D, Ross, JRH. The potential of the CO2 reforming of CH4 as a method of CO2 mitigation. A thermodynamic study. Prepr Pap-Am Chem Soc, Div Fuel Chem, 2004;49:126–7.Suche in Google Scholar

7. IEA. Global CO2 emissions in 2019; 2020. Retrieved July 28, 2020. (https://www.iea.org/articles/global-CO₂-emissions-in-2019).Suche in Google Scholar

8. Wahab, A, Hassan, A, Qasim, MA, Ali, HM, Babar, H, Sajid, MU. “Solar energy systems – potential of nanofluids.” J Mol Liq 2019; 289: 111049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.111049.Suche in Google Scholar

9. Akdağ, SA, Güler, Ö. Alternative moment method for wind energy potential and turbine energy output estimation. Renew Energy 2018; 120: 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.12.072.10.1016/j.renene.2017.12.072Suche in Google Scholar

10. Xia, L, Zhang, Y. “An overview of world geothermal power generation and a case study on China—the resource and market perspective. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019; 112: 411–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.058.Suche in Google Scholar

11. Abe, JO, Popoola, API, Ajenifuja, E, Popoola, OM. Hydrogen energy, economy and storage: review and recommendation. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2019; 44: 15072–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.04.068.Suche in Google Scholar

12. Abdulrasheed, A, Jalil, AA, Gambo, Y, Ibrahim, M, Hambali, HU, Hamid, MYS. A review on catalyst development for dry reforming of methane to syngas: recent advances. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019; 108: 175–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.03.054.Suche in Google Scholar

13. Bowker, M. Methanol synthesis from CO2 hydrogenation. ChemCatChem 2019; 11: 4238–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/cctc.201900401.Suche in Google Scholar

14. Sun, J, Yang, G, Peng, X, Kang, J, Wu, J, Liu, G, Beyond cars: fischer-tropsch synthesis for non-automotive applications. ChemCatChem 2019; 11: 1412–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/cctc.201802051.Suche in Google Scholar

15. Schubert, T. “Production routes of advanced renewable C1 to C4 alcohols as biofuel components – a review.” Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2020; 14: 845–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.2109.Suche in Google Scholar

16. Gautam, P, Upadhyay, SN, Dubey, SK. Bio-methanol as a renewable fuel from waste biomass: current trends and future perspective. Fuel 2020; 273: 117783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117783.Suche in Google Scholar

17. Tijm, PJA, Waller, FJ, Brown, DM. Methanol technology developments for the new millennium. Appl Catal Gen 2001; 221: 275–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0926-860x(01)00805-5.Suche in Google Scholar

18. Park, D, Lee, J. Biological conversion of methane to methanol. Kor J Chem Eng 2013; 30: 977–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-013-0060-5.Suche in Google Scholar

19. Sheets, JP, Ge, X, Li, YF, Yu, Z, Li, Y. Biological conversion of biogas to methanol using methanotrophs isolated from solid-state anaerobic digestate. Bioresour Technol 2016; 201: 50–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.11.035.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

20. Tursunov, O, Kustov, L, Kustov, A. A brief review of carbon dioxide hydrogenation to methanol over copper and iron based catalysts. Oil Gas Sci Technol 2017; 72: 30. https://doi.org/10.2516/ogst/2017027.Suche in Google Scholar

21. Ravi, M, Ranocchiari, M, van Bokhoven, JA. “The direct catalytic oxidation of methane to methanol—a critical assessment.” Angew Chem Int Ed 2017; 56: 16464–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201702550.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Podrojková, N, Sans, V, Oriňak, A, Oriňaková, R. Recent developments in the modelling of heterogeneous catalysts for CO2 conversion to chemicals. ChemCatChem 2020; 12: 1802–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/cctc.201901879.Suche in Google Scholar

23. Wu, X, Lang, J, Jiang, Y, Lin, Y, Hu, YH. Thermo-photo catalysis for methanol synthesis from syngas. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2019; 7: 19277–85. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b05657.Suche in Google Scholar

24. Chen, L, Jiang, Q, Song, Z, Posarac, D. Optimization of methanol yield from a lurgi reactor. Chem Eng Technol 2011; 34: 817–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201000282.Suche in Google Scholar

25. Abdullah, B, Ghani, NAA, Vo, DVN. Recent advances in dry reforming of methane over Ni-based catalysts. J Clean Prod 2017; 162: 170–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.176.Suche in Google Scholar

26. Lavoie, JM. Review on dry reforming of methane, a potentially more environmentally-friendly approach to the increasing natural gas exploitation. Front Chem 2014; 2: 1–17 https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2014.00081.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

27. Omoregbe, O, Danh, HT, Nguyen-Huy, C, Setiabudi, HD, Abidin, SZ, Truong, QD, Syngas production from methane dry reforming over Ni/SBA-15 catalyst: effect of operating parameters. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017; 42: 11283–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.03.146.Suche in Google Scholar

28. Singh, R, Dhir, A, Mohapatra, SK, Mahla, SK. Dry reforming of methane using various catalysts in the process: review. Biomass Convers Biorefinery 2020; 10: 567–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-019-00417-1.Suche in Google Scholar

29. Bu, K, Deng, J, Zhang, X, Kuboon, S, Yan, T, Li, H, Promotional effects of B-terminated defective edges of Ni/boron nitride catalysts for coking- and sintering-resistant dry reforming of methane. Appl Catal B Environ 2020; 267: 118692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2020.118692.Suche in Google Scholar

30. Liu, H, Yao, L, Taief, HBH, Benzina, M, Da Costa, P, Gálvez, ME. Natural clay-based Ni-catalysts for dry reforming of methane at moderate temperatures. Catal Today 2018; 306: 51–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2016.12.017.Suche in Google Scholar

31. Zhang, T, Liu, Z, Zhu, YA, Liu, Z, Sui, Z, Zhu, K, Dry reforming of methane on Ni-Fe-MgO catalysts: influence of Fe on carbon-resistant property and kinetics. Appl Catal B Environ 2020; 264: 118497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2019.118497.Suche in Google Scholar

32. Chong, CC, Cheng, YW, Setiabudi, HD, Ainirazali, N, Vo, DVN, Abdullah, B. Dry reforming of methane over Ni/dendritic fibrous SBA-15 (Ni/DFSBA-15): optimization, mechanism, and regeneration studies. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020; 45: 8507–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.01.056.Suche in Google Scholar

33. Bussche, KMV, Froment, GF. A steady-state kinetic model for methanol synthesis and the water gas shift reaction on a commercial Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalyst J Catal 1996; 16: 1–10.10.1006/jcat.1996.0156Suche in Google Scholar

34. Al-Malah, KIM. Aspen plus: chemical engineering applications John Wiley & Sons; 2016, Vol. 1: 1–595p.10.1002/9781119293644Suche in Google Scholar

35. Xiao, X, Wang, X, Zheng, Z, Qin, W, Zhou, Y. Catalytic coal gasification process simulation with alkaline organic wastewater in a fluidized bed reactor using aspen Plus. Energies 2019; 12: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12071367.Suche in Google Scholar

36. Chaves, IDG, López, JRG, Zapata, JLG, Robayo, AL, Niño, GR. Process analysis and simulation in chemical engineering Cham: Springer; 2015:1–595p.10.1007/978-3-319-14812-0_1Suche in Google Scholar

37. Chein, RY, Chen, YC, Yu, CT, Chung, JN. Thermodynamic analysis of dry reforming of CH4 with CO2 at high pressures. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 2015; 26: 617–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2015.07.001.Suche in Google Scholar

38. Bozzano, G, Manenti, F. “Efficient methanol Synthesis : perspectives, technologies and optimization strategies.” Prog Energy Combust Sci 2016; 56: 71–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2016.06.001.Suche in Google Scholar

39. Zhang, Y, Cruz, J, Zhang, S, Lou, HH, Benson, TJ. Process simulation and optimization of methanol production coupled to tri-reforming process. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2013; 38: 13617–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.08.009.Suche in Google Scholar

40. Martin-del-Campo, J, Coulombe, S, Jan, K. Influence of operating parameters on plasma-assisted dry reforming of methane in a rotating gliding arc reactor. Plasma Chem Plasma Process 2020; 40: 857–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11090-020-10074-2.Suche in Google Scholar

41. Serrano-Lotina, A, Daza, L. Influence of the operating parameters over dry reforming of methane to syngas. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2014; 39: 4089–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.05.135.Suche in Google Scholar

42. Simonov, M, Bespalko, Y, Smal, E, Valeev, K, Fedorova, V, Krieger, T, “Nickel‐containing ceria‐zirconia doped with Ti and Nb. Effect of support composition and preparation method on catalytic activity in methane dry reforming.” Nanomaterials 2020; 10: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10071281.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

43. Amin, NAS, Yaw, TC. Thermodynamic equilibrium analysis of combined carbon dioxide reforming with partial oxidation of methane to syngas. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007; 32: 1789–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.12.004.Suche in Google Scholar

44. Cui, X, Kær, SK. A comparative study on three reactor types for methanol synthesis from syngas and CO2. Chem Eng J 2020; 393: 124632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.124632.Suche in Google Scholar

45. Wang, H, Duan, X, Liu, X, Ye, G, Gu, X, Zhu, K, Influence of tubular reactor structure and operating conditions on dry reforming of methane. Chem Eng Res Des 2018; 139: 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2018.09.019.Suche in Google Scholar

46. Benguerba, Y, Dehimi, L, Virginie, M, Dumas, C, Ernst, B. Numerical investigation of the optimal operative conditions for the dry reforming reaction in a fixed-bed reactor: role of the carbon deposition and gasification reactions. React Kinet Mech Catal 2015; 115: 483–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11144-015-0849-9.Suche in Google Scholar

47. Andika, R, Bayu, A, Nandiyanto, D, Putra, ZA, Bilad, MR, Young, K, Co-electrolysis for power-to-methanol applications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018; 95: 227–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.07.030.Suche in Google Scholar

48. Kinoshita, CM, Wang, Y, Takahashi, PK. Chemical equilibrium computations for gasification of biomass to produce methanol. Energy Sources 1991; 13: 361–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00908319108908994.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2020-05-20

Accepted: 2020-09-10

Published Online: 2020-09-29

Sie haben derzeit keinen Zugang zu diesem Inhalt.

Artikel in diesem Heft

https://doi.org/10.1515/cppm-2020-0049

Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel

Aspen plus; carbon utilisation; CO2 conversion; dry reforming; methanol