首页> 外文期刊>International journal of hydrogen energy >Comparative assessment of hydrogen production methods from renewable and non-renewable sources
【24h】

Comparative assessment of hydrogen production methods from renewable and non-renewable sources

机译:可再生和不可再生来源制氢方法的比较评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In this study, we present a comparative environmental impact assessment of possible hydrogen production methods from renewable and non-renewable sources with a special emphasis on their application in Turkey. It is aimed to study and compare the performances of hydrogen production methods and assess their economic, social and environmental impacts, The methods considered in this study are natural gas steam reforming, coal gasification, water electrolysis via wind and solar energies, biomass gasification, thermochemical water splitting with a Cu-Cl and S-I cycles, and high temperature electrolysis. Environmental impacts (global warming potential, GWP and acidification potential, AP), production costs, energy and exergy efficiencies of these eight methods are compared. Furthermore, the relationship between plant capacity and hydrogen production capital cost is studied. The social cost of carbon concept is used to present the relations between environmental impacts and economic factors. The results indicate that thermochemical water splitting with the Cu-Cl and S-I cycles become more environmentally benign than the other traditional methods in terms of emissions. The options with wind, solar and high temperature electrolysis also provide environmentally attractive results. Electrolysis methods are found to be least attractive when production costs are considered. Therefore, increasing the efficiencies and hence decreasing the costs of hydrogen production from solar and wind electrolysis bring them forefront as potential options. The energy and exergy efficiency comparison study indicates the advantages of biomass gasification over other methods. Overall rankings show that thermochemical Cu-Cl and S-I cycles are primarily promising candidates to produce hydrogen in an environmentally benign and cost-effective way.
机译:在这项研究中,我们对可再生和不可再生来源的可能制氢方法的环境影响进行了比较评估,重点是在土耳其的应用。目的是研究和比较制氢方法的性能并评估其经济,社会和环境影响。本研究中考虑的方法是天然气蒸汽重整,煤气化,通过风能和太阳能进行水电解,生物质气化,热化学通过Cu-Cl和SI循环进行水分解,并进行高温电解。比较了这八种方法的环境影响(全球变暖潜力,全球升温潜能值和酸化潜力,AP),生产成本,能源和火用效率。此外,研究了装置容量与制氢成本之间的关系。碳概念的社会成本用于表示环境影响与经济因素之间的关系。结果表明,就排放而言,与其他传统方法相比,通过Cu-Cl和S-I循环进行的热化学水分解对环境的影响更大。风,太阳能和高温电解的选项也提供了对环境有吸引力的结果。当考虑生产成本时,发现电解方法的吸引力最小。因此,提高效率并因此降低太阳能和风能电解制氢的成本使它们成为潜在的选择。能量和火用效率的比较研究表明,生物质气化优于其他方法。总体排名显示,热化学Cu-Cl和S-I循环主要有望以对环境无害且具有成本效益的方式生产氢。

著录项

  • 来源
    《International journal of hydrogen energy》 |2014年第1期|1-12|共12页
  • 作者

    Canan Acar; Ibrahim Dincer;

  • 作者单位

    Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, Ontario L1H 7K4, Canada;

    Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, Ontario L1H 7K4, Canada;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);美国《生物学医学文摘》(MEDLINE);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Hydrogen production; Global warming potential; Emissions; Energy; Exergy; Efficiency;

    机译:制氢;全球变暖的潜力;排放物;能源;火用;效率;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号