MefCO2 Final dissemination event

Thermo-economic and LCA analysisProf. Dr.-Ing. Klaus Görner – University of Duisburg-Essen

Prof. Dr. Loredana Magistri –University of Genoa

28th May, 2019

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

1. LCA analysis

UDE’s contribution to Work Package 2 and 3

• The tasks of UDE in the project MefCO2 are divided into three areas

Development of process

models in Aspen Plus

Support of the operation

of the electrolyzer (HYGS)

Development of

LCA models in GaBi

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

1. LCA analysis

Thermodynamic Analysis

Goal of the thermodynamic analysis

• The goal of the thermodynamic analysis is to identify optimal process parameters for the plant operation and provide data for the economic analysis and LCA analysis

PFR

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

1. LCA analysis

Thermodynamic Analysis

Results of the thermodynamic analysis

• Key results:

• Isothermal operation of the reactor is preferable to adiabatic operation

• High pressures and low temperatures result in higher methanol yields

• Adjusting the syngas composition can result in lower energy demand for the methanol synthesis and lower hydrogen consumption

SN = 𝑛𝐻2 − 𝑛𝐶𝑂2 𝑛𝐶𝑂 + 𝑛𝐶𝑂2

H2

CO2

CH3OH

Vent

PFR

Separator

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

1. LCA analysis

Environmental due diligence

Goal of the LCA analysis

• The goal of this study is to compare the environmental impacts of two pathways

• Methanol synthesised via a CCU route using CO2 captured from a power plant

• Conventional route using natural gas (SMR)

Power plantConventional

MeOH production

Power plant

(with CO2 capture)

CCU

MeOH production1

2

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

1. LCA analysis

Environmental due diligence

Key results of the LCA analysis

• The environmental impacts of the CCU process are highly dependent upon the electricity used

• GHG emissions were reduced by up to 90% by using electricity from either PV or Wind

• Electrolysis unit is the biggest consumer of electricity and consequently the main driver in terms of indirect global warming impacts

• The GHG emissions of the conventional route using natural gas is only modestly dependent upon the source of electricity

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Grid mix (Germany)

PV

Wind

Greenhouse gas emissions (kg CO2 eq. / t MeOH)

Ele

ctr

icit

yS

cen

ari

os

CCU SMR1

2

Wind

PV

Grid mix

(Germany)

Ele

ctr

icit

yS

ce

na

rio

s

1 2

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

2. Thermo-economic

Main role of UNIGE in the MefCO2 project

The main role of UNIGE in the MefCO2 Project is to carry out a thermo-economic analysis in order to evaluate the system feasibility and the main parameters that affect the economy of the system

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

• Production of clean fuel by renewable sources

• Recycle of wasted CO2

• Storage of Energy for grid stabilisation

• Increase of Power Plant Flexibility

2. Thermo-economic analysis

Overall MefCO2 Concept layout

The MefCO2 concept can be considered for multiple purpose

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

Variables of the thermo-economic analysis

A number of variables affect the economic feasibility of the system

2. Thermo-economic

Technological parameter Economic parameter Environmental parameter

1. Energy consumption

2. Efficiency

3. Conversion

4. Flexibility

5. Energy availability

6. Operating Hours

1. Capital Cost

2. Economy of Scale

3. Cost of electrical energy

4. Methanol Market Price

5. Cost of CO2

6. Taxation

1. CO2 emission taxation

2. Incentive for the reduction of

Fossil Fuel Consumption

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

2. Thermo-economic analysis

Analysis of the effects with the Response Surface Methodology

The RSM approach allows to analysed and quantified the effect of different parameters and their interaction on the cost of methanol production.

The parameters investigated are:

A. Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE)

B. Purchasing Cost of CO2 (CO2 cost)

C. Eq. Operating hours (HEQ)

D. Percentage reduction of electrolyser Cap. Cost (PEM%RED)

The analysis showed as the most affecting parameters is the LCOE followed by the HEQ, the PEM%RED, and the CO2 cost.

Also the interaction AC between the cost of electricity and the operating hours resulted significant

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

2. Thermo-economic analysis

Annual Fixed Cost Breakdown

39%

31%

5%

24%

1%

54%

17%

13%

2%10%

0,6%4%

CAPEX and OPEX of the

electrolyser represent more than

70% of the fixed costs

Annual Fixed and Variable Cost Breakdown

Including the variable cost, the el.

Energy purchasing cost becomes the

most significant terms (>50%),

significantly reducing the weight of the

other termsMethanol production cost as function of the Eq. Operating Hours

and LCOE for medium (10MW) to large(100MW) size and

different PEM % reduction (0-50%)

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

2. Thermo-economic Analysis

Methanol Production Cost for Large Plant

Methanol production cost

[€/ton] as function of the

Eq. operating hours and

the LCOE

Methanol Cost [€/ton]

MefCO2 – Methanol fuel from CO2

Next Steps and Main Challenges

The thermo-economic analysis showed that the power to methanol system for energy conversion and CO2 recycle has a great

potential in the next future but some issues have to be overcome:

1. The main critical aspect is the capital cost: a further technological development and the growth in the diffusion can bring at a

significant reduction of costs and, as consequence, in the methanol production cost

2. So far, the resulting production cost of methanol is higher than the actual methanol market price.

3. Nevertheless, the production of methanol by the PtF technology allows for

• an avoided consumption of about 900 m3 of NG for each ton of produced methanol and the correlated CO2 emission

(about 2 tonCO2/tonMEOH)

• the recycle of about 1.3 ton of CO2 emitted by a fossil fuelled plant for each ton of produced methanol

• The methanol so produced can represent an alternative to the traditional fossil fuel for automotive transportation

(gasoline and diesel)

4. The establishment of government’s regulation is fundamental to encourage the diffusion of low environmental impact fuels.

2. Thermo-economic Analysis

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon

2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement

No 637016.

Thank you