Advertisement

Renewable hydrogen-rich syngas from CO2 reforming of CH4 with steam over Ni/MgAl2O4 and its process optimization

  • N. RahmatEmail author
  • Z. Yaakob
  • N. A. Rahman
  • S. S. Jahaya
Original Paper
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

In this study, carbon dioxide reforming of methane with steam was carried out over Ni/MgAl2O4 catalyst in a fixed bed reactor. Various characterization methods were employed, such as X-ray diffraction, nitrogen adsorption–desorption isotherm, transmission electron microscopy, and field emission scanning electron microscopy to validate the synthesis of freshly annealed catalyst. The effects of process variables, such as reaction temperature, catalyst weight, steam-to-carbon ratio, and methane-to-carbon dioxide feed ratio, were evaluated using response surface methodology through a four-factor, three-level central composite design. Quadratic regression models were chosen in this investigation to analyse the interactions between process variables towards CH4 and CO2 conversions, as well as hydrogen yield. The optimum values for the process variables were set by maximizing the H2 yield and CH4 and CO2 conversions in the process model. In this study, the results indicated that catalyst weight was the most significant factor that determined the yield of hydrogen and the conversion of CH4 and CO2. The process optimization suggested the optimum process for reasonably high CH4 conversion (96.13%), CO2 conversion (53.77%), and high H2 yield (53.14%) can be obtained at 697.65 °C, S/C of 2.42, CH4/CO2 of 1.92, and catalyst weight of 2.30 g, which was then demonstrated by reproducing the experimental results. The spent catalyst was sent for characterization to determine the graphitic carbon formation on catalyst surface.

Keywords

Greenhouse gas Reforming Process optimization Response surface methodology Renewable hydrogen 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work was funded by Yayasan Sime Darby, UKM [Grant Number PKT 6/2012], and Sime Darby Research [Grant Number KK-2014-014]. The team is thankful to the Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia, the Centre of Research Instrumentation and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, and the Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA for the continuous technical support.

References

  1. Abreu-Harbich LV, Labaki LC, Matzarakis A (2015) Effect of tree planting design and tree species on human thermal comfort in the tropics. Landsc Urban Plan 138:99–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmed S, Lee SHD, Ferrandon MS (2015) Catalytic steam reforming of biogas: effects of feed composition and operating conditions. Int J Hydrog Energy 40(2):1005–1015.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.11.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Álvarez A, Centeno MÁ, Odriozola JA (2016) Ru–Ni Catalyst in the combined dry-steam reforming of methane: the importance in the metal order addition. Top Catal 59(2–4):303–313.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11244-015-0426-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson-Teixeira KJ et al (2013) Altered dynamics of forest recovery under a changing climate. Glob Change Biol 19(7):2001–2021.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Angeli SD et al (2016) Catalyst development for steam reforming of methane and model biogas at low temperature. Appl Catal B 181:34–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2015.07.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Avraam DG et al (2010) An experimental and theoretical approach for the biogas steam reforming reaction. Int J Hydrog Energy 35(18):9818–9827.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bej B, Pradhan NC, Neogi S (2013) Production of hydrogen by steam reforming of methane over alumina supported nano-NiO/SiO2 catalyst. Catal Today 207:28–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2012.04.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buonocore JJ et al (2016) Health and climate benefits of different energy-efficiency and renewable energy choices. Nat Clim Change 6(1):100–106.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2771 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elsayed NH et al (2016) Comparison of Pd–Ni–Mg/Ceria–Zirconia and Pt–Ni–Mg/Ceria–Zirconia catalysts for syngas production via low temperature reforming of model biogas. Top Catal 59(1):138–146.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11244-015-0513-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eltejaei H et al (2012) Methane dry reforming on Ni/Ce0.75Zr0.25O2–MgAl2O4 and Ni/Ce0.75Zr 0.25O2–γ-alumina: effects of support composition and water addition. Int J Hydrog Energy 37(5):4107–4118.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.11.128 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fan MS, Abdullah AZ, Bhatia S (2011) Hydrogen production from carbon dioxide reforming of methane over Ni–Co/MgO–ZrO2 catalyst: process optimization. Int J Hydrog Energy 36(8):4875–4886.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.01.064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goula MA et al (2015) Nickel on alumina catalysts for the production of hydrogen rich mixtures via the biogas dry reforming reaction: influence of the synthesis method. Int J Hydrog Energy 40(30):9183–9200.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.05.129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hadian N et al (2012) CO2 reforming of methane over nickel catalysts supported on nanocrystalline MgAl2O4 with high surface area. J Nat Gas Chem 21(2):200–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-9953(11)60355-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Herrero M et al (2016) Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nat Clim Change 6(5):452–461.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2925 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jiang D, Tian Z, Lang X (2016) Reliability of climate models for China through the IPCC third to fifth assessment reports. Int J Climatol 36(3):1114–1133.  https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4406 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Katheria S et al (2016) Effect of calcination temperature on stability and activity of Ni/MgAl2O4 catalyst for steam reforming of methane at high pressure condition. Int J Hydrog Energy.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.05.109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Khajenoori M, Rezaei M, Meshkani F (2015) Dry reforming over CeO2-promoted Ni/MgO nano-catalyst: effect of Ni loading and CH4/CO2 molar ratio. J Ind Eng Chem 21:717–722.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2014.03.043 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mei DH, Liu SY, Tu X (2017) CO2 reforming with methane for syngas production using a dielectric barrier discharge plasma coupled with Ni/γ-Al2O3 catalysts: process optimization through response surface methodology. J CO2 Util 5:314–326.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2017.06.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nguyen HH et al (2015) Analysis on CO2 reforming of CH4 by corona discharge process for various process variables. J Ind Eng Chem 32:58–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2015.07.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Promaros E et al (2007) Carbon dioxide reforming of methane under periodic operation. Korean J Chem Eng 24(1):44–50.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-007-5007-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rahmat N, Yaakob Z, Pudukudy M, Rahman NA, Jahaya SS (2018) Single step solid-state fusion for MgAl2O4 spinel synthesis and its influence on the structural and textural properties. Powder Technol 329:409–419.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2018.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Roy PS et al (2015) Steam-biogas reforming over a metal-foam-coated (Pd–Rh)/(CeZrO2–Al2O3) catalyst compared with pellet type alumina-supported Ru and Ni catalysts. J CO2 Util 12:12–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2015.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sahraei OAZ et al (2017) Hydrogen production by glycerol steam reforming catalyzed by Ni-promoted Fe/Mg-bearing metallurgical wastes. Appl Catal B 219:183–193.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2017.07.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sidik SM et al (2016) CO2 reforming of CH4 over Ni–Co/MSN for syngas production: role of Co as a binder and optimization using RSM. Chem Eng J 295:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.03.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Soler J, Herguido J, Mene M (2013) Stable hydrogen production by methane steam reforming in a two-zone fluidized-bed reactor: effect of the operating variables. Int J Hydrog Energy 8:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.04.122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tanios C et al (2017) Syngas production by the CO2 reforming of CH4 over Ni–Co–Mg–Al catalysts obtained from hydrotalcite precursors. Int J Hydrog Energy 42(17):12818–12828.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.01.120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thommes M et al (2015) Physisorption of gases, with special reference to the evaluation of surface area and pore size distribution (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure Appl Chem 87(9–10):1051–1069.  https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2014-1117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Turchetti L et al (2016) Kinetic assessment of Ni-based catalysts in low-temperature methane/biogas steam reforming. Int J Hydrog Energy 41(38):16865–16877.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.07.245 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vita A et al (2014) Biogas as renewable raw material for syngas production by tri-reforming process over NiCeO2 catalysts: optimal operative condition and effect of nickel content. Fuel Process Technol 127:47–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang F et al (2018) Crucial support effect on the durability of Pt/MgAl2O4 for partial oxidation of methane to syngas. Appl Catal B: Environ 231:292–298.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2018.03.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wollenberg E et al (2016) Reducing emissions from agriculture to meet the 2 °C target. Glob Change Biol 22(12):3859–3864.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13340 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Centre for Sustainable Process Technology (CESPRO), Faculty of Engineering and Built EnvironmentUniversiti Kebangsaan MalaysiaBangiMalaysia
  2. 2.Faculty of Chemical EngineeringUniversiti Teknologi MARAShah AlamMalaysia
  3. 3.Research and Development CentreSime Darby Research Sdn. Bhd.Carey IslandMalaysia

Personalised recommendations