Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as Feedstock
Hydrogen production is essential in the transition to sustainable energy. This study examines two hydrogen production routes, steam methane reforming (SMR) and chemical looping reforming (CLR), both using raw natural gas as feedstock. SMR, the most commonly used industrial process, involves reacting...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2024-10-01
|
| Series: | Hydrogen |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4141/5/4/40 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850049626581762048 |
|---|---|
| author | Salmi Mohd Yunus Suzana Yusup Siti Sorfina Johari Nurfanizan Mohd Afandi Abreeza Manap Hassan Mohamed |
| author_facet | Salmi Mohd Yunus Suzana Yusup Siti Sorfina Johari Nurfanizan Mohd Afandi Abreeza Manap Hassan Mohamed |
| author_sort | Salmi Mohd Yunus |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Hydrogen production is essential in the transition to sustainable energy. This study examines two hydrogen production routes, steam methane reforming (SMR) and chemical looping reforming (CLR), both using raw natural gas as feedstock. SMR, the most commonly used industrial process, involves reacting methane with steam to produce hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide. In contrast, CLR uses a metal oxide as an oxygen carrier to facilitate hydrogen production without generating additional carbon dioxide. Simulations conducted using Aspen HYSYS analyzed each method’s performance and energy consumption. The results show that SMR achieved 99.98% hydrogen purity, whereas CLR produced 99.97% purity. An energy analysis revealed that CLR requires 31% less energy than SMR, likely due to the absence of low- and high-temperature water–gas shift units. Overall, the findings suggest that CLR offers substantial advantages over SMR, including lower energy consumption and the production of cleaner hydrogen, free from carbon dioxide generated during the water–gas shift process. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-56441e1aa2b049769f40e9875254c694 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2673-4141 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-10-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Hydrogen |
| spelling | doaj-art-56441e1aa2b049769f40e9875254c6942025-08-20T02:53:41ZengMDPI AGHydrogen2673-41412024-10-015476177510.3390/hydrogen5040040Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as FeedstockSalmi Mohd Yunus0Suzana Yusup1Siti Sorfina Johari2Nurfanizan Mohd Afandi3Abreeza Manap4Hassan Mohamed5Materials Engineering and Testing Group, TNB Research Sdn Bhd, Kawasan Institusi Penyelidikan, No. 1 Lorong Ayer Itam, Kajang 43000, Selangor, MalaysiaGeneration Unit, TNB Research Sdn Bhd, Kawasan Institusi Penyelidikan, No. 1 Lorong Ayer Itam, Kajang 43000, Selangor, MalaysiaMaterials Engineering and Testing Group, TNB Research Sdn Bhd, Kawasan Institusi Penyelidikan, No. 1 Lorong Ayer Itam, Kajang 43000, Selangor, MalaysiaDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, Jalan IKRAM-UNITEN, Kajang 43000, Selangor, MalaysiaDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, Jalan IKRAM-UNITEN, Kajang 43000, Selangor, MalaysiaDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, Jalan IKRAM-UNITEN, Kajang 43000, Selangor, MalaysiaHydrogen production is essential in the transition to sustainable energy. This study examines two hydrogen production routes, steam methane reforming (SMR) and chemical looping reforming (CLR), both using raw natural gas as feedstock. SMR, the most commonly used industrial process, involves reacting methane with steam to produce hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide. In contrast, CLR uses a metal oxide as an oxygen carrier to facilitate hydrogen production without generating additional carbon dioxide. Simulations conducted using Aspen HYSYS analyzed each method’s performance and energy consumption. The results show that SMR achieved 99.98% hydrogen purity, whereas CLR produced 99.97% purity. An energy analysis revealed that CLR requires 31% less energy than SMR, likely due to the absence of low- and high-temperature water–gas shift units. Overall, the findings suggest that CLR offers substantial advantages over SMR, including lower energy consumption and the production of cleaner hydrogen, free from carbon dioxide generated during the water–gas shift process.https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4141/5/4/40steam methane reformingchemical looping reforminghydrogen productionfeedstock purificationnatural gas |
| spellingShingle | Salmi Mohd Yunus Suzana Yusup Siti Sorfina Johari Nurfanizan Mohd Afandi Abreeza Manap Hassan Mohamed Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as Feedstock Hydrogen steam methane reforming chemical looping reforming hydrogen production feedstock purification natural gas |
| title | Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as Feedstock |
| title_full | Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as Feedstock |
| title_fullStr | Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as Feedstock |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as Feedstock |
| title_short | Comparative Hydrogen Production Routes via Steam Methane Reforming and Chemical Looping Reforming of Natural Gas as Feedstock |
| title_sort | comparative hydrogen production routes via steam methane reforming and chemical looping reforming of natural gas as feedstock |
| topic | steam methane reforming chemical looping reforming hydrogen production feedstock purification natural gas |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4141/5/4/40 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT salmimohdyunus comparativehydrogenproductionroutesviasteammethanereformingandchemicalloopingreformingofnaturalgasasfeedstock AT suzanayusup comparativehydrogenproductionroutesviasteammethanereformingandchemicalloopingreformingofnaturalgasasfeedstock AT sitisorfinajohari comparativehydrogenproductionroutesviasteammethanereformingandchemicalloopingreformingofnaturalgasasfeedstock AT nurfanizanmohdafandi comparativehydrogenproductionroutesviasteammethanereformingandchemicalloopingreformingofnaturalgasasfeedstock AT abreezamanap comparativehydrogenproductionroutesviasteammethanereformingandchemicalloopingreformingofnaturalgasasfeedstock AT hassanmohamed comparativehydrogenproductionroutesviasteammethanereformingandchemicalloopingreformingofnaturalgasasfeedstock |