Simulation study of deep eutectic solvent-based biogas upgrading process integrated with single mixed refrigerant biomethane liquefaction

Haider, Junaid; Qyyum, Muhammad Abdul; Kazmi, Bilal; Ali, Imran; Nizami, Abdul-Sattar; Lee, Moonyong

doi:10.18331/BRJ2020.7.4.3

Simulation study of deep eutectic solvent-based biogas upgrading process integrated with single mixed refrigerant biomethane liquefaction

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Junaid Haider ¹

Muhammad Abdul Qyyum ¹

Bilal Kazmi ²

Imran Ali ²

Abdul-Sattar Nizami ³

Moonyong Lee ¹

¹ School of Chemical Engineering, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 712–749, Republic of Korea.

² Department of applied Chemistry and Chemical Technology, University of Karachi, Pakistan.

³ Sustainable Development Study Center, Government College University, Lahore 54000, Pakistan.

10.18331/BRJ2020.7.4.3

Abstract

Deep eutectic solvents (DESs) comprise ChCl/urea, in combination with water, have been considered in removing acid gases (CO₂ and H₂S) from biogas. The evaluation of DES for biogas upgrading at relatively high pressure (i.e., >8.0 bar) has not been reported before. The aqueous DES performance has also not been analyzed compared to conventional amines-based solvent (MEA) and ionic liquid (IL). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that presents the integration of DES-based biogas upgrading with a mixed refrigerant liquefaction process to facilitate the safe and economical transportation of biomethane over long distances. The biogas considered in this study consisted of 60% CH₄, 39% CO₂, and 1% H₂S. The aqueous ChCl/urea (70 wt%) results in biomethane with ≥99.0 wt% purity and ≥97.0 wt% recovery. Then, this biomethane was liquefied with ≥90% liquefaction rate. Based on the results obtained herein, overall capital, operating, and total annualized cost savings of 2.8%, 25.82%, and 14.26% were achieved using the 70% DES-based integrated process in comparison with the MEA-based integrated process. Whereas 1.41%, 16.85%, and 8.71% capital, operating, and total annualized costs could be saved in comparison with the IL (i.e., [Bmim][PF₆])-based integrated process. It could be deduced that the overall cost of the biomethane value chain can be reduced using the proposed approach.

Graphical Abstract

Simulation study of deep eutectic solvent-based biogas upgrading process integrated with single mixed refrigerant biomethane liquefaction

Highlights

Biogas upgrading integrated with biomethane liquefaction was investigated.

ChCl/urea was evaluated for biogas upgrading at relatively high pressure.

The 70% DES led to biomethane with ≥99.0 wt% purity and ≥97.0 wt% recovery.

The upgraded biomethane was liquefied through a single mixed refrigerant process.

Biomethane liquefaction process consumed 0.43 kW/kg-biomethane.

Keywords

Acid gas removal

Liquefied biogas

Amines

Ionic liquids

Deep eutectic solvents

Single mixed refrigerant liquefaction process

[1] Alkhatib, I.I., Ferreira, M.L., Alba, C.G., Bahamon, D., Llovell, F., Pereiro, A.B., Araújo, J.M., Abu-Zahra, M.R., Vega, L.F., 2020. Screening of ionic liquids and deep eutectic solvents for physical CO₂ absorption by Soft-SAFT using key performance indicators. J. Chem. Eng. Data.

[2] Amundsen, T.G., Øi, L.E., Eimer, D.A., 2009. Density and viscosity of monoethanolamine + water + carbon dioxide from (25 to 80) °C. J. Chem. Eng. Data. 54(11), 3096-3100.

[3] Augelletti, R., Galli, S., Gislon, P., Granati, M., Monteleone, G., Murmura, M.A., Annesini, M.C., 2020. Biogas upgrading through CO₂ removal by chemical absorption in an amine organic solution: physical and technical assessment, simulation and experimental validation. Biomass Bioenergy. 141, 105729.

[4] Azimova, M.A., Morton III, S.A., Frymier, P.D., 2009. Comparison of three bacterial toxicity assays for imidazolium-derived ionic liquids. J. Environ. Eng. 135(12), 1388-1392.

[5] Barbosa, L.C., Nascimento, M.V.D.C., Ofélia de Queiroz, F.A., de Medeiros, J.L., 2020. A cleaner and more sustainable decarbonation process via ionic-liquid absorption for natural gas with high carbon dioxide content. J. Clean. Prod. 242, 118421.

[6] Bernasconi, R., Panzeri, G., Accogli, A., Liberale, F., Nobili, L., Magagnin, L., 2017. Electrodeposition from deep eutectic solvents. Intech. Prog. Dev. Lon. Liq. 235-261.

[7] Carnevale, E., Lombardi, L., 2015. Comparison of different possibilities for biogas use by life cycle assessment. Energy Procedia. 81, 215-226.

[8] Cucchiella, F., D’Adamo, I., Gastaldi, M., Miliacca, M.A., 2018. profitability analysis of small-scale plants for biomethane injection into the gas grid. J. Clean. Prod. 184, 179-187.

[9] Dubois, L., Thomas, D., 2010. Comparison of various alkaline solutions for H₂S/CO₂-selective absorption applied to biogas purification. Chem. Eng. Technol. 33(10), 1601-1609.

[10] Erwin, D., 2015. Industrial chemical process design. 2^nd Edition.

[11] Hadj-Kali, M.K., Althuluth, M., Mokraoui, S., Wazeer, I., Ali, E., Richon, D., 2020. Screening of ionic liquids for gas separation using COSMO-RS and comparison between performances of ionic liquids and aqueous alkanolamine solutions. Chem. Eng. Commun. 207(9), 1264-1277.

[12] Handy, H., Santoso, A., Widodo, A., Palgunadi, J., Soerawidjaja, T.H., Indarto, A., 2014. H₂S-CO₂ separation using room temperature ionic liquid [BMIM][Br]. Sep. Sci. Technol. 49(13), 2079-2084.

[13] Haider, J., Qyyum, M.A., Kazmi, B., Zahoor, M., Lee, M., 2019. Simulation study of biomethane liquefaction followed by biogas upgrading using an imidazolium-based cationic ionic liquid. J. Clean. Prod. 231, 953-962.

[14] Haider, J., Saeed, S., Qyyum, M.A., Kazmi, B., Ahmad, R., Muhammad, A., Lee, M., 2020. Simultaneous capture of acid gases from natural gas adopting ionic liquids: challenges, recent developments, and prospects. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 123, 109771.

[15] Hashemi, S.E., Sarker, S., Lien, K.M., Schnell, S.K., Austbø, B., 2019. Cryogenic vs. absorption biogas upgrading in liquefied biomethane production-an energy efficiency analysis. Fuel. 245, 294-304.

[16] Hsu, Y.H., Leron, R.B., Li, M.H., 2014. Solubility of carbon dioxide in aqueous mixtures of (reline + monoethanolamine) at T = (313.2 to 353.2) K. J. Chem Thermodyn. 72, 94-99.

[17] IPCC, 2018. Intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC).

[18] Juneidi, I., Hayyan, M., Ali, O.M., 2016. Toxicity profile of choline chloride-based deep eutectic solvents for fungi and Cyprinus carpio fish. Environ. Sci. Pohhut. Res. 23(8), 7648-7659.

[19] Kalhor, P., Ghandi, K., 2019. Deep eutectic solvents for pretreatment, extraction, and catalysis of biomass and food waste. Molecules. 24(22), 4012.

[20] Kamgar, A., Mohsenpour, S., Esmaeilzadeh, F., 2017. Solubility prediction of CO₂, CH₄, H₂, CO and N₂ in choline chloride/urea as a eutectic solvent using NRTL and COSMO-RS models. J. Mol. Liq. 247, 70-74.

[21] Kazmi, B., Haider, J., Qyyum, M.A., Saeed, S., Kazmi, M.R., Lee, M., 2019. Heating load depreciation in the solvent-regeneration step of absorption-based acid gas removal using an ionic liquid with an imidazolium-based cation. Int. J. Greenhous Gas Control. 87, 89-99.

[22] Lei, Z., Dai, C., Chen, B., 2014. Gas solubility in ionic liquids. Chem. Rev. 114(2), 1289-1326.

[23] Leron, R.B., Caparanga, A., Li, M.H., 2013. Carbon dioxide solubility in a deep eutectic solvent based on choline chloride and urea at T = 303.15-343.15K and moderate pressures. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 44(8), 879-885.

[24] Liu, F., Chen, W., Mi, J., Zhang, J.Y., Kan, X., Zhong, F.Y., Huang, K., Zheng, A.M., Jiang, L., 2019. Thermodynamic and molecular insights into the absorption of H₂S, CO₂, and CH₄ in choline chloride plus urea mixtures. AIChE J. 65(5), e16574.

[25] Li, X., Hou, M., Han, B., Wang, X., Zou, L., 2008. Solubility of CO₂ in a choline chloride + urea eutectic mixture. J. Chem. Eng. Data. 53(2), 548-550.

[26] Ma, C., Xie, Y., Ji, X., Liu, C., Lu, X., 2018a. Modeling, simulation and evaluation of biogas upgrading using aqueous choline chloride/urea. Appl. Energy. 229, 1269-1283.

[27] Ma, C., Liu, C., Lu, X., Ji, X., 2018b. Techno-economic analysis and performance comparison of aqueous deep eutectic solvent and other physical absorbents for biogas upgrading. Appl. Energy. 225, 437-447.

[28] Mirza, N.R., Nicholas, N.J., Wu, Y., Mumford, K.A., Kentish, S.E., Stevens, G.W., 2015. Experiments and thermodynamic modeling of the solubility of carbon dioxide in three different deep eutectic solvents (DESs). J. Chem. Eng. Data. 60(11), 3246-3252.

[29] Nawaz, A., Qyyum, M.A., Qadeer, K., Khan, M.S., Ahmad, A., Lee, S., Lee, M., 2019. Optimization of mixed fluid cascade LNG process using a multivariate Coggins step-up approach: overall compression power reduction and exergy loss analysis. Int. J. Refrig. 104, 189-200.

[30] Nematollahi, M.H., Carvalho, P.J., 2019. Green solvents for CO₂ capture. Curr. Opin. Green Sust. Chem. 18, 25-30.

[31] Pena-Pereira, F., Namieśnik, J., 2014. Ionic liquids and deep eutectic mixtures: sustainable solvents for extraction processes. ChemSusChem. 7(7), 1784-1800.

[32] Qyyum, M.A., Haider, J., Qadeer K., Valentina, V., Khan, A., Yasin, M., Aslam, M., De Guido, G., Pellegrini, L.A., Lee, M., 2020. Biogas to liquefied biomethane: assessment of 3P’s-production, Processing, and Prospects. J. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 119, 109561.

[33] Rehman, A., Qyyum, M.A., Qadeer, K., Zakir, F., Ding, Y., Lee, M., Wang, L., 2020. Integrated biomethane liquefaction using exergy from the discharging end of a liquid air energy storage system. Appl. Energy. 260, 114260.

[34] Scarlat, N., Dallemand, J.F., Fahl, F., 2018. Biogas: developments and perspectives in Europe. Renewable Energy. 129, 457-472.

[35] Słupek, E., Makoś, P., Gȩbicki, J., 2020. Theoretical and economic evaluation of low-cost deep eutectic solvents for effective biogas upgrading to bio-methane. Energies. 13(13), 3379.

[36] Tabatabaei, M., Aghbashlo, M., Valijanian, E., Panahi, H.K.S., Nizami, A.S., Ghanavati, H., Sulaiman, A., Mirmohamadsadeghi, S., Karimi, K., 2020. A comprehensive review on recent biological innovations to improve biogas production, part 2: mainstream and downstream strategies. Renewable Energy. 146, 1204-1220.

[37] Turton, R., Bailie, R.C., Whiting, W.B., Shaeiwitz, J.A., 2008. Analysis, synthesis and design of chemical processes. Pearson Education.

[38] UNFCCC, 2015. Adoption of the Paris agreement - Paris agreement text English. United Nation.

[39] Vega, F., Cano, M., Camino, S., Fernández, L.M.G., Portillo, E., Navarrete, B., 2018. Solvents for carbon dioxide capture, in: Karamé, I., Shaya, J., Srour, H, (Eds.), Carbon Dioxide Chem. Capture Oil Recover., Rijeka, IntechOpen.

[40] Wang, M., Zhang, J., Xu, Q., 2012. Optimal design and operation of a C3MR refrigeration system for natural gas liquefaction. Comput. Chem. Eng. 39, 84-95.

[41] Xie, Y., Dong, H., Zhang, S., Lu, X. and Ji, X., 2016. Solubilities of CO₂, CH₄, H₂, CO and N₂ in choline chloride/urea. Green Energy Environ. 1(3), 195-200.

[42] Xu, Y., Huang, Y., Wu, B., Zhang, X., Zhang, S., 2015. Biogas upgrading technologies: Energetic analysis and environmental impact assessment. Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 23(1), 247-54.

[43] Zain, M.M., Mohamed, A.R., 2018. An overview on conversion technologies to produce value added products from CH₄ and CO₂ as major biogas constituents. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 98, 56-63.

[44] Zhang, Q., Vigier, K.D.O., Royer, S., Jerome, F., 2012. Deep eutectic solvents: syntheses, properties and applications. Chem. Soc. Rev. 41(21), 7108-7146.