Thermodynamic Analysis of Hydrogen Production from Methanol Reforming in Supercritical Water

Abstract:

The hydrogen production via methanol reforming in supercritical water (SCW) condition has been thermodynamically investigated by a Gibbs free energy minimization method to determine equilibrium yields and energy requirements in fuel processor over the temperature range between 673 and 1273 K and water-to-methanol (H₂O:MeOH) ratio of 1 – 5 corresponding to the methanol concentration from 64 to 26 wt%, respectively. In this research, the main objective is to compare the influence of operating pressure from atmospheric (ATM) pressure to SCW condition on the product yields. At ATM pressure, a hydrogen production increases with increasing reaction temperature up to 973 K while under SCW condition, an increase of temperature constantly increases the formation of hydrogen. As the reaction temperature increases, the hydrogen production and the total heat load increase but the hydrogen to carbon monoxide (H₂/CO) ratio decreases. Although the hydrogen yield is constantly higher at ATM pressure than under SCW condition, the H₂/CO ratios are always greater in SCW at temperatures above approximately 700 K. The amount of hydrogen and the heat load of both the preheater and the reactor also increase significantly as the H₂O:MeOH ratio increases.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 619)
• Pages: 99-104
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.619.99
• Online since: August 2014
• Authors: Nawadee Srisiriwat*, Chananchai Wutthithanyawat
• Keywords: Hydrogen, Methanol, Reforming, Supercritical Water, Thermodynamic Analysis

References

[1] J.D. Taylor, C.M. Herdman, B.C. Wu, K. Wally, S.F. Rice: International Journal of Hydrogen Energy Vol. 28 (2003), pp.1171-1178.

[2] N. Srisiriwat: Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 110-116 (2012), pp.72-82.

[3] Y. Guo, S.Z. Wang, D.H. Xu, Y.M. Gong, H.H. Ma, X.Y. Tang: Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews Vol. 14 (2010), pp.334-343.

[4] S. Yesodharan: Current Science Vol. 82 (2002), pp.1112-1122.

[5] J.B. Gadhe, R.B. Gupta: International Journal of Hydrogen Energy Vol. 32 (2007), pp.2374-2381.

[6] J.H. Lee, N.R. Foster: Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Vol. 5 (1999), pp.116-122.

[7] S. Therdthianwong, N. Srisiriwat, A. Therdthianwong, E. Croiset: International Journal of Hydrogen Energy Vol. 36 (2011), pp.2877-2886.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.11.108

[8] S. Therdthianwong, N. Srisiriwat, A. Therdthianwong, E. Croiset: The Journal of Supercritical Fluids Vol. 57 (2011), pp.58-65.

DOI: 10.1016/j.supflu.2011.02.005

[9] Y.J. Lu, H. Jin, L.J. Guo, X.M. Zhang, C.Q. Cao, X. Guo: International Journal of Hydrogen Energy Vol. 33 (2008), pp.6066-6075.

[10] G. Maggio, S. Freni, S. Cavallaro: Journal of Power Sources Vol. 74 (1998), pp.17-238.

[11] Y. Lwin, W.R.W. Daud, A.B. Mohamad, Z. Yaakob: International Journal of Hydrogen Energy Vol. 25 (2000), pp.47-53.

[12] N. Srisiriwat, S. Therdthianwong , A. Therdthainwong: Proc. World Renewable Energy Congress 2009-Asia, Bangkok, Thailand (2009), pp.696-701.

[13] F.A. P Voll., C.C.R.S. Rossi, C. Silva, R. Guirardello, R.O.M.A. Souza, V.F. Cabral, L. Cardozo-Filho: International Journal of Hydrogen Energy Vol. 34 (2009), pp.9737-9744.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.10.017

[14] N. Srisiriwat and C. Wutthithanyawat: Proc. 2013 International Conference on Alternative Energy in Developing Countries and Emerging Economies, Bangkok, Thailand (2013), pp.708-713.

[15] P. Ding-Yu, B.R. Donald: Ind. Eng. Chem. Vol. 15 (1976), pp.59-64.

[16] Yan Q., Guo L., Lu Y.; Thermodynamic Analysis of Hydrogen Production from Biomass Gasification in Supercritical Water, Energy Conversion and Management, Vol. 47, 2006, pp.1515-1528.

DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2005.08.004

[17] N. Boukis, V. Diem, W. Habicht, E. Dinjus: Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Vol. 42 (2003), pp.728-735.

DOI: 10.1021/ie020557i

[18] H. Tang, K. Kitagawa: Chemical Engineering Journal Vol. 106 (2005), pp.261-267.