Advertisement

Environmental Chemistry Letters

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 1251–1261 | Cite as

Biogas upgrading by cryogenic techniques

  • Francisco M. Baena-MorenoEmail author
  • Mónica Rodríguez-Galán
  • Fernando Vega
  • Luis F. Vilches
  • Benito Navarrete
  • Zhien ZhangEmail author
Review

Abstract

The scarcity of fossil fuels and the worldwide pollution have led the scientific community to seek renewable energy alternatives. In particular, biogas has become a potential alternative fuel to be employed instead of traditional energies. Biogas is mainly composed by methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2). To obtain pure biomethane, a proper biogas upgrading to remove CO2 and other minority compounds is needed. For this purpose, upgrading processes have been developed, such as water or chemical scrubbing, membrane separation, pressure swing adsorption, and cryogenic techniques. Cryogenic techniques represent a good option to be optimized because these techniques yield high-purity products, ranging between 95 and 99%. Therefore, we present here a review on cryogenic techniques. In spite of many advantages, the high-energy penalty makes cryogenic techniques commercially inapplicable actually. Several authors have proposed novel configurations to reduce the energy consumption. Cryogenic packed-bed technology was recently tested in a coal-fired plant with an energy consumption of 1.8 MJ/kg CO2. Economic analyses were carried out for anti-sublimation CO2 capture, giving a cost of 34.5 €/ton CO2. Among the different alternatives of cryogenic hybrid systems, cryogenic membrane processes stand out due to a 54.4% of capital cost savings.

Keywords

Biogas upgrading Cryogenic techniques Hybrid cryogenic systems CO2 utilization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by University of Seville through V PPIT-US.

References

  1. Aguirre-Villegas HA, Larson R, Reinemann DJ (2015) Effects of management and co-digestion on life cycle emissions and energy from anaerobic digestion. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 5:603–621.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1506 Google Scholar
  2. Ali A, Maqsood K, Syahera N et al (2014) Energy minimization in cryogenic packed beds during purification of natural gas with high CO2 content. Chem Eng Technol 37:1675–1685.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201400215 Google Scholar
  3. Ali A, Maqsood K, Shin LP et al (2018) Synthesis and mixed integer programming based optimization of cryogenic packed bed pipeline network for purification of natural gas. J Clean Prod 171:795–810.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.060 Google Scholar
  4. Álvarez-Gutiérrez N, Victoria Gil M, Rubiera F, Pevida C (2015) Cherry-stones-based activated carbons as potential adsorbents for CO2/CH4 separation: effect of the activation parameters. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 5:812–825.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1534 Google Scholar
  5. Anantharaman R, Berstad D, Roussanaly S (2014) Techno-economic performance of a hybrid membrane: liquefaction process for post-combustion CO2 capture. Energy Proc 61:1244–1247Google Scholar
  6. Angelidaki I, Treu L, Tsapekos P et al (2018) Biogas upgrading and utilization: current status and perspectives. Biotechnol Adv 36:452–466.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2018.01.011 Google Scholar
  7. Awe OW, Zhao Y, Nzihou A et al (2017) A review of biogas utilisation, purification and upgrading technologies. Waste Biomass Valoriz 8:267–283.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-016-9826-4 Google Scholar
  8. Baena-moreno FM, Rodríguez-galán M, Vega F et al (2018a) Carbon capture and utilization technologies: a literature review and recent advances. Energy Sourc Part A Recover Util Environ Eff 00:1–31.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2018.1548518 Google Scholar
  9. Baena-Moreno FM, Rodríguez-Galán M, Vega F et al (2018b) Regeneration of sodium hydroxide from a biogas upgrading unit through the synthesis of precipitated calcium carbonate: an experimental influence study of reaction parameters. Processes 6:205.  https://doi.org/10.3390/pr6110205 Google Scholar
  10. Baena-Moreno FM, Rodríguez-Galán M, Vega F et al (2019a) Review: recent advances in biogas purifying technologies. Int J Green Energy 00:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15435075.2019.1572610 Google Scholar
  11. Baena-Moreno FM, Rodríguez-Galán M, Vega F et al (2019b) Understanding the influence of the alkaline cation K + or Na + in the regeneration efficiency of a biogas upgrading unit. Int J Energy Res.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1.er.4448 Google Scholar
  12. Canevesi RLS, Andreassen KA, Da Silva EA et al (2018) Pressure swing adsorption for biogas upgrading with carbon molecular sieve. Ind Eng Chem Res 57:8057–8067.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.8b00996 Google Scholar
  13. Chaterjee S, Krupadam RJ (2018) Amino acid-imprinted polymers as highly selective CO2 capture materials. Environ Chem Lett.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-018-0774-z Google Scholar
  14. Chatterjee P, Ghangrekar MM, Rao S (2016) Low efficiency of sewage treatment plants due to unskilled operations in India. Environ Chem Lett 14:407–416.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-016-0551-9 Google Scholar
  15. Clodic D, Paris M De, Hitti R El, et al (2005a) CO2 capture by anti-sublimation thermo-economic process evaluation. In: 4th annual conference on carbon capture and sequestrationGoogle Scholar
  16. Clodic D, Younes M, Bill A (2005b) Test results of CO2 capture by anti-sublimation capture efficiency and energy consumption for boiler plants. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on greenhouse gas control technologies, vol 5Google Scholar
  17. Corbellini V, Kougias PG, Treu L et al (2018) Hybrid biogas upgrading in a two-stage thermophilic reactor. Energy Convers Manag 168:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.04.074 Google Scholar
  18. Deremince B, Königsberger S (2017) Statistical report of the European Biogas Association, p 20Google Scholar
  19. DiMaria PC, Dutta A, Mahmud S (2015) Syngas purification in cryogenic packed beds using a one-dimensional pseudo-homogenous model. Energy Fuels 29:5028–5035.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b00624 Google Scholar
  20. Ebrahimzadeh E, Matagi J, Fazlollahi F, Baxter LL (2016) Alternative extractive distillation system for CO2-ethane azeotrope separation in enhanced oil recovery processes. Appl Therm Eng 96:39–47.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.11.082 Google Scholar
  21. European Biogas Association. Annual report 2018. http://european-biogas.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/EBA-Annual-Report-2018.pdf. Accessed 20 Feb 2019
  22. Fazlollahi F, Bown A, Ebrahimzadeh E, Baxter LL (2015) Design and analysis of the natural gas liquefaction optimization process-CCC-ES (energy storage of cryogenic carbon capture). Energy 90:244–257.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.05.139 Google Scholar
  23. Fazlollahi F, Bown A, Ebrahimzadeh E, Baxter LL (2016) Transient natural gas liquefaction and its application to CCC-ES (energy storage with cryogenic carbon captureTM). Energy 103:369–384.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.02.109 Google Scholar
  24. Fong JCLY, Anderson CJ, Xiao G et al (2016) Multi-objective optimisation of a hybrid vacuum swing adsorption and low-temperature post-combustion CO2 capture. J Clean Prod 111:193–203.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.033 Google Scholar
  25. Goto K, Yogo K, Higashii T (2013) A review of efficiency penalty in a coal-fired power plant with post-combustion CO2 capture. Appl Energy 111:710–720.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.05.020 Google Scholar
  26. Grande CA, Blom R (2014) Cryogenic adsorption of methane and carbon dioxide on zeolites 4A and 13X. Energy Fuels 28:6688–6693.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef501814x Google Scholar
  27. Hajilary N, Rezakazemi M, Shirazian S (2018) Biofuel types and membrane separation. Environ Chem Lett.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-018-0777-9 Google Scholar
  28. Hanak DP, Biliyok C, Manovic V (2015) Rate-based model development, validation and analysis of chilled ammonia process as an alternative CO2 capture technology for coal-fired power plants. Int J Greenh Gas Control 34:52–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2014.12.013 Google Scholar
  29. Hart A, Gnanendran N (2009) Cryogenic CO2 capture in natural gas. Energy Proc 1:697–706Google Scholar
  30. Hosseinipour SA, Mehrpooya M (2019) Comparison of the biogas upgrading methods as a transportation fuel. Renew Energy 130:641–655.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.06.089 Google Scholar
  31. Johansson N (2008) Production of liquid biogas, LBG, with cryogenic and conventional upgrading technology: description of systems and evaluations of energy balances. http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4468178
  32. Kadam R, Panwar NL (2017) Recent advancement in biogas enrichment and its applications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 73:892–903.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.167 Google Scholar
  33. Knapik E, Kosowski P, Stopa J (2018) Cryogenic liquefaction and separation of CO2 using nitrogen removal unit cold energy. Chem Eng Res Des 131:66–79.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2017.12.027 Google Scholar
  34. Kokkoli A, Zhang Y, Angelidaki I (2018) Microbial electrochemical separation of CO2 for biogas upgrading. Bioresour Technol 247:380–386.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.097 Google Scholar
  35. Kougias PG, Angelidaki I (2018) Biogas and its opportunities: a review. Front Environ Sci Eng 12:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-018-1037-8 Google Scholar
  36. Kumar S, Kwon HT, Choi KH et al (2011) LNG: an eco-friendly cryogenic fuel for sustainable development. Appl Energy 88:4264–4273.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.06.035 Google Scholar
  37. Langè S, Pellegrini LA, Vergani P, Lo Savio M (2015) Energy and economic analysis of a new low-temperature distillation process for the upgrading of high-CO2 content natural gas streams. Ind Eng Chem Res 54:9770–9782.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.5b02211 Google Scholar
  38. Li H, Hu Y, Ditaranto M et al (2013) Optimization of cryogenic CO2 purification for oxy-coal combustion. Energy Proc 37:1341–1347Google Scholar
  39. Liu S, Zhang Y, Jiang H et al (2018) High CO2 adsorption by amino-modified bio-spherical cellulose nanofibres aerogels. Environ Chem Lett 16:605–614.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-017-0701-8 Google Scholar
  40. Maqsood K, Ali A, Shariff ABM, Ganguly S (2014a) Synthesis of conventional and hybrid cryogenic distillation sequence for purification of natural gas. J Appl Sci 14:2722–2729.  https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2014.2722.2729 Google Scholar
  41. Maqsood K, Mullick A, Ali A et al (2014b) Cryogenic carbon dioxide separation from natural gas: a review based on conventional and novel emerging technologies. Rev Chem Eng 30:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1515/revce-2014-0009 Google Scholar
  42. Maqsood K, Pal J, Turunawarasu D et al (2014c) Performance enhancement and energy reduction using hybrid cryogenic distillation networks for purification of natural gas with high CO2 content. Kor J Chem Eng 31:1120–1135.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-014-0038-y Google Scholar
  43. Maqsood K, Ali A, Shariff ABM, Ganguly S (2017) Process intensification using mixed sequential and integrated hybrid cryogenic distillation network for purification of high CO2 natural gas. Chem Eng Res Des 117:414–438.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2016.10.011 Google Scholar
  44. Mehrpooya M, Rahbari C, Moosavian SMA (2017) Introducing a hybrid multi-generation fuel cell system, hydrogen production and cryogenic CO2 capturing process. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 120:134–147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2017.07.008 Google Scholar
  45. Miltner M, Makaruk A, Harasek M (2017) Review on available biogas upgrading technologies and innovations towards advanced solutions. J Clean Prod 161:1329–1337.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.045 Google Scholar
  46. Montingelli ME, Tedesco S, Olabi AG (2015) Biogas production from algal biomass: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 43:961–972.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.11.052 Google Scholar
  47. Moreira MA, Ribeiro AM, Ferreira AFP, Rodrigues AE (2017) Cryogenic pressure temperature swing adsorption process for natural gas upgrade. Sep Purif Technol 173:339–356.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2016.09.044 Google Scholar
  48. Omar B, Abou-Shanab R, El-Gammal M et al (2018) Simultaneous biogas upgrading and biochemicals production using anaerobic bacterial mixed cultures. Water Res 142:86–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.05.049 Google Scholar
  49. Pan X, Clodic D, Toubassy J (2013) CO2 capture by antisublimation process and its technical economic analysis. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 3:8–20.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1313 Google Scholar
  50. Pan Z, Liu Z, Zhang Z et al (2018) Effect of silica sand size and saturation on methane hydrate formation in the presence of SDS. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 56:266–280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2018.06.018 Google Scholar
  51. Patiño-Echeverri D, Hoppock DC (2012) Reducing the energy penalty costs of postcombustion CCS systems with amine-storage. Environ Sci Technol 46:1243–1252.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es202164h Google Scholar
  52. Pellegrini LA, De Guido G, Langé S (2018) Biogas to liquefied biomethane via cryogenic upgrading technologies. Renew Energy 124:75–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.08.007 Google Scholar
  53. Persson M, Jonsson O, Wellinger A (2007) Biogas upgrading to vehicle fuel standards and grid. IEA Bioenergy 1–32Google Scholar
  54. Petrakopoulou F, Iribarren D, Dufour J (2015) Life-cycle performance of natural gas power plants with pre-combustion CO2 capture. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 5:268–276.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1457 Google Scholar
  55. Ravina M, Genon G (2015) Global and local emissions of a biogas plant considering the production of biomethane as an alternative end-use solution. J Clean Prod 102:115–126.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.056 Google Scholar
  56. Riva M, Campestrini M, Toubassy J et al (2014) Solid-liquid-vapor equilibrium models for cryogenic biogas upgrading. Ind Eng Chem Res 53:17506–17514.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie502957x Google Scholar
  57. Romeo LM, Bolea I, Escosa JM (2008) Integration of power plant and amine scrubbing to reduce CO2 capture costs. Appl Therm Eng 28:1039–1046.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2007.06.036 Google Scholar
  58. Ryckebosch E, Drouillon M, Vervaeren H (2011) Techniques for transformation of biogas to biomethane. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1633–1645.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.02.033 Google Scholar
  59. Sahota S, Shah G, Ghosh P et al (2018) Review of trends in biogas upgradation technologies and future perspectives. Bioresour Technol Rep 1:79–88.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2018.01.002 Google Scholar
  60. Scholes CA, Ho MT, Wiley DE et al (2013) Cost competitive membrane-cryogenic post-combustion carbon capture. Int J Greenh Gas Control 17:341–348.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.017 Google Scholar
  61. Scholz M, Frank B, Stockmeier F et al (2013) Techno-economic analysis of hybrid processes for biogas upgrading. Ind Eng Chem Res 52:16929–16938.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie402660s Google Scholar
  62. Song C, Liu Q, Ji N et al (2017a) Advanced cryogenic CO2 capture process based on stirling coolers by heat integration. Appl Therm Eng 114:887–895.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.12.049 Google Scholar
  63. Song C, Liu Q, Ji N et al (2017b) Reducing the energy consumption of membrane-cryogenic hybrid CO2 capture by process optimization. Energy 124:29–39.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.054 Google Scholar
  64. Song C, Liu Q, Ji N et al (2018) Alternative pathways for efficient CO2 capture by hybrid processes: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 82:215–231.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.09.040 Google Scholar
  65. Song C, Liu Q, Deng S et al (2019) Cryogenic-based CO2 capture technologies: state-of-the-art developments and current challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 101:265–278.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.11.018 Google Scholar
  66. Spitoni M, Pierantozzi M, Comodi G et al (2019) Theoretical evaluation and optimization of a cryogenic technology for carbon dioxide separation and methane liquefaction from biogas. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 62:132–143.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2018.12.007 Google Scholar
  67. Sreenivasulu B, Gayatri DV, Sreedhar I, Raghavan KV (2015) A journey into the process and engineering aspects of carbon capture technologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 41:1324–1350.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.029 Google Scholar
  68. Sun Q, Li H, Yan J et al (2015) Selection of appropriate biogas upgrading technology-a review of biogas cleaning, upgrading and utilisation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 51:521–532.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.029 Google Scholar
  69. Surovtseva D, Amin R, Barifcani A (2011) Design and operation of pilot plant for CO2 capture from IGCC flue gases by combined cryogenic and hydrate method. Chem Eng Res Des 89:1752–1757.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2010.08.016 Google Scholar
  70. Tan Y, Nookuea W, Li H et al (2017a) Evaluation of viscosity and thermal conductivity models for CO2 mixtures applied in CO2 cryogenic process in carbon capture and storage (CCS). Appl Therm Eng 123:721–733.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.05.124 Google Scholar
  71. Tan Y, Nookuea W, Li H et al (2017b) Cryogenic technology for biogas upgrading combined with carbon capture-a review of systems and property impacts. Energy Proc 142:3741–3746Google Scholar
  72. Tuinier MJ, Van Sint Annaland M (2012) Biogas purification using cryogenic packed-bed technology. Ind Eng Chem Res 51:5552–5558.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie202606g Google Scholar
  73. Tuinier MJ, van Sint Annaland M, Kramer GJ, Kuipers JAM (2010) Cryogenic CO2 capture using dynamically operated packed beds. Chem Eng Sci 65:114–119.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2009.01.055 Google Scholar
  74. Tuinier MJ, Hamers HP, Van Sint Annaland M (2011a) Techno-economic evaluation of cryogenic CO2 capture: a comparison with absorption and membrane technology. Int J Greenh Gas Control 5:1559–1565.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.08.013 Google Scholar
  75. Tuinier MJ, van Sint Annaland M, Kuipers JAM (2011b) A novel process for cryogenic CO2 capture using dynamically operated packed beds: an experimental and numerical study. Int J Greenh Gas Control 5:694–701.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.11.011 Google Scholar
  76. Ullah Khan I, Hafiz Dzarfan Othman M, Hashim H et al (2017) Biogas as a renewable energy fuel: a review of biogas upgrading, utilisation and storage. Energy Convers Manag 150:277–294.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.08.035 Google Scholar
  77. Valenti G, Bonalumi D, MacChi E (2012) A parametric investigation of the chilled ammonia process from energy and economic perspectives. Fuel 101:74–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2011.06.035 Google Scholar
  78. Xiao L, Liu F, Xu H et al (2019) Biochar promotes methane production at high acetate concentrations in anaerobic soils. Environ Chem Lett.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-019-00863-3 Google Scholar
  79. Xu G, Liang F, Yang Y et al (2014) An improved CO2 separation and purification system based on cryogenic separation and distillation theory. Energies 7:3484–3502.  https://doi.org/10.3390/en7053484 Google Scholar
  80. Yan Y, Zhang Z, Zhang L et al (2014) Dynamic modeling of biogas upgrading in hollow fiber membrane contactors. Energy Fuels 28:5745–5755.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ef501435q Google Scholar
  81. Yousef AM, El-Maghlany WM, Eldrainy YA, Attia A (2018) New approach for biogas purification using cryogenic separation and distillation process for CO2 capture. Energy 156:328–351.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.05.106 Google Scholar
  82. Zanganeh KE, Shafeen A, Salvador C (2009) CO2 capture and development of an advanced pilot-scale cryogenic separation and compression unit. Energy Proc 1:247–252Google Scholar
  83. Zhang Z, Yan Y, Zhang L et al (2014a) Theoretical study on CO2 absorption from biogas by membrane contactors: effect of operating parameters. Ind Eng Chem Res 53:14075–14083.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie502830k Google Scholar
  84. Zhang Z, Yan Y, Zhang L et al (2014b) CFD investigation of CO2 capture by methyldiethanolamine and 2-(1-piperazinyl)-ethylamine in membranes: part B. Effect of membrane properties. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 19:311–316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2014.05.023 Google Scholar
  85. Zhang Z, Cai J, Chen F et al (2018) Progress in enhancement of CO2 absorption by nanofluids: a mini review of mechanisms and current status. Renew Energy 118:527–535.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.11.031 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemical and Environmental Engineering Department, Technical School of EngineeringUniversity of SevilleSevilleSpain
  2. 2.William G. Lowrie Department of Chemical and Biomolecular EngineeringThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations