Maqola

Hydrogen production, storage and transport for renewable energy and chemicals: An environmental footprint assessment

Robert HrenFaculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17, Maribor, SloveniaAnnamaria VujanovićFaculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17, Maribor, SloveniaYee Van FanSustainable Process Integration Laboratory – SPIL, NETME Centre, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Brno University of Technology- VUT Brno, Technická 2896/2, 616 69, Brno, Czech RepublicJiří Jaromír KlemešSustainable Process Integration Laboratory – SPIL, NETME Centre, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Brno University of Technology- VUT Brno, Technická 2896/2, 616 69, Brno, Czech RepublicDamjan KrajncFaculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17, Maribor, SloveniaLidija ČučekFaculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17, Maribor, Slovenia

2022en

ABI

Annotatsiya

Hydrogen applications range from an energy carrier to a feedstock producing bulk and other chemicals and as an essential reactant in various industrial applications. However, the sustainability of hydrogen production, storage and transport are neither unquestionable nor equal. Hydrogen is produced from natural gas, biogas, aluminium, acid gas, biomass, electrolytic water splitting and others; a total of eleven sources were investigated in this work. The environmental impact of hydrogen production, storage and transport is evaluated in terms of greenhouse gas and energy footprints, acidification, eutrophication, human toxicity potential, and eco-cost. Different electricity mixes and energy footprint accounting approaches, supported by sensitivity analysis, are conducted for a comprehensive overview. H2 produced from acid gas is identified as the production route with the highest eco-benefit (−41,188 €/t H2), while the biomass gasification method incurred the highest eco-cost (11,259 €/t H2). The water electrolysis method shows a net positive energy footprint (60.32 GJ/t H2), suggesting that more energy is used than produced. Considering the operating footprint of storage, and transportation, gaseous hydrogen transported via a pipeline is a better alternative from an environmental point of view, and with a lower energy footprint (38 %–85%) than the other options. Storage and transport (without construction) could have accounted for around 35.5% of the total GHG footprint of a hydrogen value chain (production, storage, transportation and losses) if liquefied and transported via road transport instead of a pipeline. The identified results propose which technologies are less burdensome to the environment.

Hali tarjima qilinmagan

Identifikatorlar

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.113113

Iqtiboslar va manbalar

2 ta iqtibos0 ta foydalanilgan manba

Koʻrsatkichlar — AkademScholar