IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/masfgc/v25y2020i1d10.1007_s11027-019-9843-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Avoiding CO2 capture effort and cost for negative CO2 emissions using industrial waste in chemical-looping combustion/gasification of biomass

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Moldenhauer

    (Chalmers University of Technology)

  • Carl Linderholm

    (Chalmers University of Technology)

  • Magnus Rydén

    (Chalmers University of Technology)

  • Anders Lyngfelt

    (Chalmers University of Technology)

Abstract

Chemical-looping combustion (CLC) is a combustion process with inherent separation of carbon dioxide (CO2), which is achieved by oxidizing the fuel with a solid oxygen carrier rather than with air. As fuel and combustion air are never mixed, no gas separation is necessary and, consequently, there is no direct cost or energy penalty for the separation of gases. The most common form of design of chemical-looping combustion systems uses circulating fluidized beds, which is an established and widely spread technology. Experiments were conducted in two different laboratory-scale CLC reactors with continuous fuel feeding and nominal fuel inputs of 300 Wth and 10 kWth, respectively. As an oxygen carrier material, ground steel converter slag from the Linz–Donawitz process was used. This material is the second largest flow in an integrated steel mill and it is available in huge quantities, for which there is currently limited demand. Steel converter slag consists mainly of oxides of calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), iron (Fe), silicon (Si), and manganese (Mn). In the 300 W unit, chemical-looping combustion experiments were conducted with model fuels syngas (50 vol% hydrogen (H2) in carbon monoxide (CO)) and methane (CH4) at varied reactor temperature, fuel input, and oxygen-carrier circulation. Further, the ability of the oxygen-carrier material to release oxygen to the gas phase was investigated. In the 10 kW unit, the fuels used for combustion tests were steam-exploded pellets and wood char. The purpose of these experiments was to study more realistic biomass fuels and to assess the lifetime of the slag when employed as oxygen carrier. In addition, chemical-looping gasification was investigated in the 10 kW unit using both steam-exploded pellets and regular wood pellets as fuels. In the 300 W unit, up to 99.9% of syngas conversion was achieved at 280 kg/MWth and 900 °C, while the highest conversion achieved with methane was 60% at 280 kg/MWth and 950 °C. The material’s ability to release oxygen to the gas phase, i.e., CLOU property, was developed during the initial hours with fuel operation and the activated material released 1–2 vol% of O2 into a flow of argon between 850 and 950 °C. The material’s initial low density decreased somewhat during CLC operation. In the 10 kW, CO2 yields of 75–82% were achieved with all three fuels tested in CLC conditions, while carbon leakage was very low in most cases, i.e., below 1%. With wood char as fuel, at a fuel input of 1.8 kWth, a CO2 yield of 92% could be achieved. The carbon fraction of C2-species was usually below 2.5% and no C3-species were detected. During chemical-looping gasification investigation a raw gas was produced that contained mostly H2. The oxygen carrier lifetime was estimated to be about 110–170 h. However, due to its high availability and potentially low cost, this type of slag could be suitable for large-scale operation. The study also includes a discussion on the potential advantages of this technology over other technologies available for Bio-Energy Carbon Capture and Storage, BECCS. Furthermore, the paper calls for the use of adequate policy instruments to foster the development of this kind of technologies, with great potential for cost reduction but presently without commercial application because of lack of incentives.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Moldenhauer & Carl Linderholm & Magnus Rydén & Anders Lyngfelt, 2020. "Avoiding CO2 capture effort and cost for negative CO2 emissions using industrial waste in chemical-looping combustion/gasification of biomass," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 1-24, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:25:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11027-019-9843-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11027-019-9843-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-019-9843-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11027-019-9843-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Berdugo Vilches, Teresa & Lind, Fredrik & Rydén, Magnus & Thunman, Henrik, 2017. "Experience of more than 1000h of operation with oxygen carriers and solid biomass at large scale," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 1174-1183.
    2. Källén, Malin & Rydén, Magnus & Lyngfelt, Anders & Mattisson, Tobias, 2015. "Chemical-looping combustion using combined iron/manganese/silicon oxygen carriers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 330-337.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicole K. Bond & Robert T. Symonds & Robin W. Hughes, 2024. "Pressurized Chemical Looping for Direct Reduced Iron Production: Economics of Carbon Neutral Process Configurations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Shuo Li & Huili Zhang & Jiapei Nie & Raf Dewil & Jan Baeyens & Yimin Deng, 2021. "The Direct Reduction of Iron Ore with Hydrogen," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-15, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tomasz Czakiert & Jaroslaw Krzywanski & Anna Zylka & Wojciech Nowak, 2022. "Chemical Looping Combustion: A Brief Overview," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Rana, Shazadi & Sun, Zhenkun & Mehrani, Poupak & Hughes, Robin & Macchi, Arturo, 2019. "Ilmenite oxidation kinetics for pressurized chemical looping combustion of natural gas," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 747-759.
    3. Mendiara, T. & García-Labiano, F. & Abad, A. & Gayán, P. & de Diego, L.F. & Izquierdo, M.T. & Adánez, J., 2018. "Negative CO2 emissions through the use of biofuels in chemical looping technology: A review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 657-684.
    4. Cho, Won Chul & Lee, Jun Kyu & Nam, Gyeong Duk & Kim, Chang Hee & Cho, Hyun-Seok & Joo, Jong Hoon, 2019. "Degradation analysis of mixed ionic-electronic conductor-supported iron-oxide oxygen carriers for chemical-looping conversion of methane," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 644-657.
    5. Ksepko, Ewelina & Babiński, Piotr & Nalbandian, Lori, 2017. "The redox reaction kinetics of Sinai ore for chemical looping combustion applications," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 1258-1274.
    6. Huang, Xin & Fan, Maohong & Wang, Xingjun & Wang, Yonggang & Argyle, Morris D. & Zhu, Yufei, 2018. "A cost-effective approach to realization of the efficient methane chemical-looping combustion by using coal fly ash as a support for oxygen carrier," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 230(C), pages 393-402.
    7. Zeng, Jimin & Xiao, Rui & Zhang, Shuai & Zhang, Huiyan & Zeng, Dewang & Qiu, Yu & Ma, Zhong, 2018. "Identifying iron-based oxygen carrier reduction during biomass chemical looping gasification on a thermogravimetric fixed-bed reactor," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 404-412.
    8. Khallaghi, Navid & Hanak, Dawid P. & Manovic, Vasilije, 2019. "Gas-fired chemical looping combustion with supercritical CO2 cycle," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 249(C), pages 237-244.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:25:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11027-019-9843-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.