Scribd
Upload
63 views1 page

DVGW Forschungsstelle at The Engler-Bunte-Institut

This document compares biological and catalytic methanation for power-to-gas applications. Biological methanation uses microorganisms as biocatalysts at temperatures of 40-70°C, while catalytic methanation uses nickel-based catalysts at higher temperatures of 300-600°C. Both can produce substitute natural gas (SNG) from hydrogen and carbon dioxide. Biological methanation has advantages like high tolerance of impurities and no thermodynamic limitations, but suffers from poor hydrogen mass transfer. Catalytic methanation allows for higher efficiencies through heat recovery and requires smaller reactors, but faces thermodynamic limitations. Overall, biological methanation is more feasible for small plants due to capital costs, while catalytic methanation has better efficiency

Uploaded by

Setiono Rachman
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
63 views1 page

DVGW Forschungsstelle at The Engler-Bunte-Institut

This document compares biological and catalytic methanation for power-to-gas applications. Biological methanation uses microorganisms as biocatalysts at temperatures of 40-70°C, while catalytic methanation uses nickel-based catalysts at higher temperatures of 300-600°C. Both can produce substitute natural gas (SNG) from hydrogen and carbon dioxide. Biological methanation has advantages like high tolerance of impurities and no thermodynamic limitations, but suffers from poor hydrogen mass transfer. Catalytic methanation allows for higher efficiencies through heat recovery and requires smaller reactors, but faces thermodynamic limitations. Overall, biological methanation is more feasible for small plants due to capital costs, while catalytic methanation has better efficiency

Uploaded by

Setiono Rachman
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

DVGW Forschungsstelle at the Engler-Bunte-Institut

Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)


Engler-Bunte-Ring 1, 76131 Karlsruhe

Comparison of Biological and Catalytic Methanation for


Power-to-Gas Applications
Manuel Götz*, Friedemann Mörs, Katharina Bär, Amy McDaniel Koch, Frank Graf
* Phone: +49 721 608 4 4815, email: [email protected]

Introduction
Aim BM BM
Concept AFB 3PM
 Utilization of surplus wind and sun power for H2 production In situ Separate
CSTR Bubble
 Production of Substitute Natural Gas (SNG) via electrolysis Reactor Type CSTR Fixed-bed
Trickle bed column
Phases involved G/L/S G/L/S G/S G/L/S
Fundamentals of methanation
High
4 H2 + CO2 → CH4 + 2 H2O (g) ∆RH0 = -165 kJ/mol Backmixing High Low Moderate
Low
 Removal of reaction heat is a significant issue Stage of development Pilot Lab scale Lab scale Commercial

Biological methanation (BM) Catalytic methanation


Fundamentals Technical tasks Fundamentals
 Microorganisms serve as  Supply of hydrogen to the  Nickel-based catalysts
biocatalysts microorganisms  Temperature: 300 to 600 °C
 Temperature: 40 to 70 °C  Poor solubility of H2 in
 Pressure: 1 to 100 bar
fermentation liquid
 Pressure: 1 to 10 bar  Thermodynamic limitations need to be considered
 Controlling the pH value in
 28 % higher standard enthalpy of
pressurized reactors
reaction due to liquid water
 Rector concepts featuring low Adiabatic fixed-bed Three-phase methanation
 So far no technical application for methanation (AFB) (3PM)
backmixing and high mass
SNG production
transfer coefficients

In situ biological methanation BM in separate reactor

 No further reactor necessary  Process conditions and reactor  Adiabatic operation  Isothermal operation
 Limited to biogas as carbon source design adjusted to biological  State of the art technology  Highly flexible
methanation
 Increase in CH4 content in product  High temperature leads to high  Catalyst removal during
gas from 50 to 75 vol%  High CO 2 conversion possible reaction rates operating

Comparison
Technical parameters  Reaction rate and tolerance of impurities Flexibility  minimum load and load change rate
 AFB: Highest GHSV and therefore Comparison of GHSV  All three concepts can be operated Three-phase methanation
smallest specific reactor volume dynamically
 3PM: simple process setup  Limiting factor for load change rate is
related to the process control system, e.
 BM: High tolerance of impurities
g. design of heat exchangers
 BM: No thermodynamic limitations
 Further investigations are required
regarding the minimum load (e.g. 20 %)
 All technologies have advantages  Flexibility depends on the specific plant
Efficiency Economics
Biological methanation Investment for different process steps in Mio €
 Additional significant power demand for stirring Plant size Electrolysis BM AFB
 Opportunities for utilization of waste heat are sparse 5 MW ≈ 7 – 13 2.9 2

Catalytic methanation 110 MW ≈ 150 – 280 37 14

 Heat can be used for steam/power production  Biological methanation is more feasible for small plant sizes
 Higher efficiency for catalytic methanation  Hydrogen production costs are the most significant contributor

Conclusion
 Biological methanation can be done in biogas digesters (addition of  Catalytic methanation requires much smaller reactor sizes for the
H2 to digester) or in separate reactors same feed gas flow 3PM:
 The poor H2 mass transfer is the limiting aspect regarding the  Use of catalytic methanation leads to higher efficiencies
process performance  Hydrogen production costs are relatively high due to the expansive
 Biological methanation has a high tolerance of impurities (e.g. H2S) electrolysis

Further information: www.dvgw-innovation.de (projects G3/01/12 and G3/01/13)


www.dvgw-ebi.de

You might also like