Biogas is one of the most popular alternative energy resources to replace fossil fuels. The product of anaerobic fermentation in a digester contains several impurities such as H2S and especially CO2 that needs to be removed in order to upgrade the gas quality. Supported amine sorbents (SAS) might provide an attractive option to remove these impurities. However, little is known about the regeneration of the sorbent. This study evaluates experimentally and by modeling the options for regeneration of the SAS. Theoretically, pressure swing adsorption without purge flow is the most energy efficient method (1.7 MJ/kg CO2). It was found that when using a purge flow the desorption rate is strongly influenced by the equilibrium between the gas and adsorbed phase. With elevated temperature (>80 °C) both the working capacity and the productivity increase significantly. Finally, an energy evaluation for a typical biogas case study is carried out, showing the trade-offs between power consumption, heat demand, and sorbent inventory. Interestingly, at the expense of a somewhat higher power consumption, the use of inexpensive air as purge gas at 60 °C could be an attractive option, but case-specific costs are needed to identify the economic optimum.
Biogas is one of the most popular alternative energy resources to replace fossil fuels. The product of anaerobic fermentation in a digester contains several impurities such as H2S and especially CO2 that needs to be removed in order to upgrade the gas quality. Supported amine sorbents (SAS) might provide an attractive option to remove these impurities. However, little is known about the regeneration of the sorbent. This study evaluates experimentally and by modeling the options for regeneration of the SAS. Theoretically, pressure swing adsorption without purge flow is the most energy efficient method (1.7 MJ/kg CO2). It was found that when using a purge flow the desorption rate is strongly influenced by the equilibrium between the gas and adsorbed phase. With elevated temperature (>80 °C) both the working capacity and the productivity increase significantly. Finally, an energy evaluation for a typical biogas case study is carried out, showing the trade-offs between power consumption, heat demand, and sorbent inventory. Interestingly, at the expense of a somewhat higher power consumption, the use of inexpensive air as purge gas at 60 °C could be an attractive option, but case-specific costs are needed to identify the economic optimum.
Biogas is a renewable
alternative energy source, which is formed
via anaerobic fermentation of bio waste. It can be used directly as
a fuel or as a raw material of synthesis gas, with CH4 and
CO2 as main constituents and some other undesirable contaminants.
Depending on the source of biomass, the presence and the quantity
of the contaminants may fluctuate.[1] Before
biogas can be utilized, the sour gas compounds (CO2, and
H2S) and H2O should be removed from the gas
stream to prevent corrosion and to increase the heating value of the
gas. The most common technology for removing these components are
absorption using aqueous solvents and membrane separation.[2] The first technique requires a significant amount
of energy for the recovery of the solvent, and the second method requires
high capital costs and excessive maintenance.[2]In this study, adsorption using the supported amine sorbent
(SAS)
Lewatit VP OC 1065 has been evaluated to upgrade methane-rich biogas
to pipeline specification, especially for CO2 removal.
Methane and other components of biogas are known to be inert.[3,4] Additionally, H2S and H2O do adsorb but do
not influence CO2 capacity in a negative way.[4,5] Fixed bed operation has been selected for the ease and reliability
of operation. The main advantage in using SAS is the lower energy
requirement, since the heat capacity of the solid is lower and evaporation
of water and solvent can be avoided.[6] For
large scale CO2 capture, the ease of regeneration and the
stability of the sorbent are important parameters in determining the
efficiency, the cost, and the feasibility of a process.[7]In order to reuse the sorbent, the sorbent
needs to be regenerated.
The adsorbed CO2 might be desorbed by (1) increasing the
temperature (temperature swing adsorption, TSA) or lowering the partial
pressure of CO2 (pressure swing adsorption, PSA) by applying
either (2) vacuum (vacuum swing adsorption, VSA) or (3) introducing
purge gas (purge gas adsorption, PGA). Furthermore, these three methods
can also be combined to enhance the efficiency of the regeneration
process.Several studies have investigated the effect of the
regeneration
method on the desorption performance of SAS. Serna-Guerrero et al.[8] found that flow rate of the purge, temperature,
and pressure all have a statistically significant influence on the
working capacity but that the effect of temperature is dominant with
respect to the desorption rate. TSA at 150 °C was found to be
the most attractive with the highest CO2 adsorption loading
and the fastest desorption rate.[8] However,
urea formation was observed which significantly reduces the available
adsorption sites and therefore the lifetime of the sorbent.[9] It is thus important to first investigate the
temperature where urea formation starts for each specific sorbent.
For instance, the urea formation between PEI and CO2 occurs
above 130 °C.[7]Regeneration
of SAS by PGA under almost isothermal conditions was
shown to be an economical and energy efficient alternative in simulations
by Pirngruber et al.[10] In general, PSA
is mainly superior to TSA due to its lower thermal and mechanical
energy demand.[11] Other studies indicate
that temperature vacuum swing adsorption (TVSA) might be the most
attractive option.[12] Increasing the temperature
during the desorption step permits utilization of a weaker vacuum
for removal of CO2 and thus reduced energy requirements
for desorption.[13] TVSA conducted at 120
°C and 0.15 bar shortens the CO2 desorption time to
7.5 min and thus reduces a significant amount of energy penalty, while
TSA at 120 °C requires 25 min and VSA at 0.15 bar requires 30
min.[14] Serna-Guerrero et al.[8] showed that a TVSA at 70 °C results in a
13% reduction in working capacity compared to a TSA at 150 °C.
The desorption time influences the sorbent cycle time and hence system
productivity, equipment size, and ultimately costs of separation.It is important to note that opposite to CO2 capture
applications, for the case of biogas upgrading the purity of the desorbed
CO2 is not an issue, where in CO2 capture applications
pure CO2 is preferred for storage or utilization options.
In biogas upgrading releasing CO2 to the environment is
not an issue because biogas is considered a renewable source of CO2.The objective of this paper is to evaluate, optimize,
and compare
the various regeneration methods. First, the boundary operating conditions
for each regeneration method are identified. Within these constraints,
the effect of different process parameters on the degree of desorption
and corresponding energy use are determined. Finally, key performance
indicators for the most promising regeneration methods are compared.
Experimental and Methods
Materials
The
sorbent used in this
study is a commercial sorbent Lewatit VP OC 1065 from Lanxess. The
sorbent has a support of spherical polystyrene beads with primary
benzyl amine functional units. The Toth isotherm of this sorbent has
been investigated in previous work.[4] The
effect of CO2 pressure and temperature on the isotherm
equilibrium loading are shown in Figure and is used to evaluate the desorption performance.
Methane is known to be nonreactive with Lewatit.[3,4] H2S[4] and water[5] do not affect the CO2 capacity in a negative
way. For these reasons it was chosen to represent the biogas by a
mixture of CO2 and nitrogen in this study. In Table more details about
the properties of the materials used are given.
Figure 1
Toth isotherm for lewatit VP OC 1065 produced
using isotherm equations
of Sutanto et al.[4]
Table 1
Material Properties
symbol
value
unit
meaning
ref
CP,sorbent
1.5
kJ·kg–1·K–1
sorbent heat capacity
(15)
CP,CO2
0.85
kJ·kg–1·K–1
CO2 heat capacity
(16)
CP,N2
1.04
kJ·kg–1·K–1
N2 heat capacity
(16)
CP,O2
0.92
kJ·kg–1·K–1
O2 heat capacity
(16)
CP,steel
0.50
kJ·kg–1·K–1
steel heat capacity
(17)
μN2
1.2 × 10–5
Pa·s
kinematic viscosity nitrogen
(17)
dp
0.7
mm
average particle diameter
(18)
ρsorbent
880
kg·m–3
sorbent density
(15)
ρsteel
8000
kg·m–3
density steel
(17)
ρN2
1.2
kg·m–3
density
nitrogen
(17)
MWCO2
0.044
kJ·mol–1
molar mass CO2
ΔrH
65
kJ·mol–1
reaction heat
(15)
Toth isotherm for lewatit VP OC 1065 produced
using isotherm equations
of Sutanto et al.[4]
Equipment
The setup used for the
adsorption–desorption experiments consisted of a N2/CO2 gas supply, a temperature controlled reactor, and
CO2 analysis equipment. A simplified sketch of the setup
is shown in Figure . This setup can be operated at different temperatures, using a water
bath (Julabo F32/F25) or electrical heating (600W heat tracing controlled
by Eurotherm 2132). The pressure can be altered from atmospheric pressure
to reduced pressures using a vacuum pump (Vacuubrand PC-510NT).
Figure 2
Experimental
setup for fixed bed experiments of CO2 capture.
Experimental
setup for fixed bed experiments of CO2 capture.The fixed bed reactor has a diameter of 13 mm and
a length of 600
mm. The fixed bed reactor was filled with 30 g of wet Lewatit sorbent
for all experiments. This equals about 19 g of dry sorbent, which
is the amount used in the calculations of the sorbent loading. The
location of the adsorbent bed in the reactor is changed by a spacer
such that a K-type thermocouple is in the axial and radial center
of the bed (Tbed in the Results and Discussion section). Another K-type thermocouple
is placed at the outside reactor wall (Twall in the Results and Discussion section).High purity (Grade 5.0) CO2 and N2 were used
in the experiments and the flow rates were controlled with Brooks
mass flow controllers (SLA 5850 series). The reactor outlet stream
can be diluted with nitrogen, so that the CO2 concentration
is in the measurement range of the CO2 gas analyzer and
a constant flow through the vacuum pump—if operational—is
maintained. The concentration of CO2 in the outlet stream
was measured with a CO2 infrared gas analyzer (Sick Maihak
S700) with range of 0–50% and a detection limit of 0.5%. The
relative humidity of the gas can be analyzed using three humidity
analyzers installed before and after the reactor, respectively, and
after the CO2 analyzer.
Procedure
The fresh sorbent was pretreated
by heating to 150 °C under nitrogen flow before the start of
the experimental series. Thereby, any preadsorbed CO2,
H2O, or other components were removed. Each experimental
cycle consisted of three steps: (1) adsorption, (2) desorption, and
(3) regeneration of the sorbent. For all experimental cycles, adsorption
was performed at 45% CO2 at atmospheric pressure, 40 °C,
and with a total feed gas flow of 215 N mL/min. When the measured
outlet concentration of CO2 was equal to the inlet concentration,
the adsorption step was stopped. The adsorption loading of the sorbent
is calculated by integrating the inlet molar flow of CO2 and subtracting the integrated outlet molar flow of CO2. For the desorption loading, the integrated outlet molar flow of
CO2 is subtracted from the adsorption loading.The
procedure of the desorption step is dependent on the chosen method
of desorption. For the temperature swing, the pressure swing, and
the combined pressure–temperature swing experiments, the reactor
inlet was closed after ending the adsorption step. Next, the pressure
was reduced using the vacuum pump and/or the reactor was heated. When
using combined pressure and temperature swing, the pressure was reduced
before the reactor was heated. If a nitrogen or air purge was used,
the purge flow was started after the adsorption was stopped and the
heating was started simultaneously. When a reduced overall pressure
was used, first the reactor was evacuated and next the purge flow
was started. Desorption was stopped when no CO2 was detected
in the outflow by the analyzer. After the desorption step, the sorbent
was fully regenerated at 150 °C under nitrogen flow in order
to make sure that all adsorbed components were removed and the sorbent
was clean and ready for the next adsorption.
Error
Analysis
All experiments have
been performed with the same sample of sorbent. This allowed quick
successive experimentation and also gave an indication of degradation
of the sorbent. In Figure the adsorption loadings of all experiments are presented.
The average of the experimental equilibrium adsorption loading (40%CO2 40 °C) is 2.6 ± 0.1 mol/kg. All shown errors in
this article are defined via one standard deviation. The result in Figure shows that the reproducibility
of the adsorption experiments is good. The first two experiments in Figure show a lower adsorption
loading. Note that also the loading after regeneration is below zero.
Therefore, it is concluded that the sorbent was not completely empty
before the adsorption was started. Within these 55 experiments, no
signs of degradation have been observed within the experimental error.
Performing a t test at 95% significance level using
the first 27 and last 28 experiments showed that statistically these
two group have the same mean value.
Figure 3
Adsorption equilibrium loading (sphere)
and loading after regeneration
(triangle) for all experiments performed.
Adsorption equilibrium loading (sphere)
and loading after regeneration
(triangle) for all experiments performed.Another error analysis on the experiments can be made by
examining
the mass balance. In Figure the mass balance closure is expressed as the loading after
regeneration. Since all adsorbed CO2 should be removed
in the combined desorption and regeneration step, the theoretical
loading after regeneration should be zero. The average error on the
mass balance is 0.1 ± 0.2 mol/kg.In general, it is noted
that the experiments at lower desorption
temperatures have a larger error. For example, the three points in
the N2 purge section with an error around 0.5 mol/kg are
found in all experiments performed at 40 °C desorption temperature.
Because of the lower desorption temperature the desorption rate is
lower, resulting in CO2 outlet concentrations at/below
the detection limit of the CO2 analyzer. Consequently,
the CO2 removed from the reactor is not detected.The set of air purge experiments was performed using instrumental
air. During a measurement it was noted that the CO2 content
in the instrumental air was fluctuating between 50 and 250 ppm. Therefore,
a value of 150 ppm in the instrumental air was assumed for the calculations.
However, because the CO2 content is estimated, the error
in the CO2 loading after regeneration is increased as is
clearly visible in Figure .
Energy Calculations
In order to evaluate
the regeneration of solid amine sorbent in more detail energy calculations
have been performed. The total amount of energy needed for desorption
has been calculated for a selection of experiments. In the section
below the equations needed are discussed in more detail, and the material
properties are given in Table .
Calculations for Experiments without Purge
Flow
In the calculations for experiments without purge flow
the sensible heat of the sorbent and the produced CO2 are
included. Next to that, the reaction heat and—if necessary—the
energy for adiabatic compression are added. In Figure A an overview of the energy flows included
is given.
Figure 4
Overview of energy flows included in the calculations. (A) For
no purge (Figure )
and (B) for purge calculations (Figure ).
Overview of energy flows included in the calculations. (A) For
no purge (Figure )
and (B) for purge calculations (Figure ).
Figure 6
Energy use
(MJ/kg CO2) of the cases presented in Figure based on the reaction
heat, the adiabatic compression, and the sensible heat of the sorbent
and the produced CO2.
Figure 14
Required energy for the desorption with an adsorption velocity
of 0.25 m/s.
First of all, the sensible heat of the sorbent (Qsensible,sorbent [J·kgCO–1]) is calculated
using eq , where Tdesorption and Tadsorption are the desorption and adsorption temperatures, respectively.The sorbent mass msorbent is calculated
by the amount of dry sorbent mass needed to capture 1 kg of CO2 using the molar mass of CO2 MWCO and the working capacity Δqexp of the corresponding experiment:Because
the desorption reaction of the CO2 from the
amine is endothermic, energy is required for the reaction. The amount
of energy required per kg of CO2 is calculated by dividing
the reaction heat ΔrH by the molar
mass MWCO:The sensible
heat of the CO2 released is calculated
byIn the case of a pressure swing regeneration,
energy is required
to create a reduced pressure in the reactor during desorption. Adiabatic
compression[19] is assumed, and the required
energy is calculated by eq for the cases without purge flow. The efficiency of compression
η is assumed to be 0.75, and the ratio of Cp/Cv is k = 1.3.[20] In eq , P1 is the suction
pressure of the compressor, whereas P2 is the discharge pressure which is assumed to be 1 bar.
Calculations
for Experiments with Purge
Flow
The energy calculations for the cases including purge
flow are presented in Figure B. The energy flows calculated in the section below are expressed
in Joule per desorption step. In Figure the energy flow are expressed in J·kgCO–1 by dividing the calculated energy flows from this section by the
amount of CO2 produced per adsorption–desorption
cycle.For the cases including a purge gas flow, eq changes slightly because the amount
of flow has to be incorporated. The flow of the purge gas and the
produced CO2 are included. Again adiabatic compression
is assumed and calculated by[19]In eq , P1 is the suction
pressure of the compressor whereas P2 is
the discharge pressure. In the case of
gas compression for creating reduced pressure (Qad,comp in Figure B), P2 is considered to be 1 bar
and P1 is the pressure of the corresponding
experiment. In the case of gas compression to overcome the pressure
drop over the adsorbent bed (Qpressuredrop in Figure B), P2 is ΔP + 1 and P1 is assumed to 1 bar. The pressure drop over
the bed (ΔP) is calculated by the Ergun equation.[21] The length of the reactor is determined using
a short-cut design method; more details can be found in Section . The sensible
heat of the purge flow (in eq N2 is used as example) can be calculated using eq .The
amount of purge flow ϕ is
determined by keeping the ratio between CO2 and the
purge medium constant to the experimental ratio. The importance of
this is shown in Section . The amount of CO2 flow (see eq ) during desorption is equal to
the amount of CO2 fed in adsorption because capture efficiency
is assumed to be 100% in the short-cut design method.The sensible heat of the reactor is
estimated by calculating the
amount of steel needed—see eq —and the eq . In eq the ds and Lr are the diameter of the shell and length of the reactor, respectively. nt and dt are the
number and the diameter of the tubes. Calculations for the dimensions
of the reactor are discussed in Section . The wall thicknesses of the shell wts and the tubes wtt are assumed to be 10 mm and
0.8 mm, respectively.
Results and Discussion
Stability of SAS
The first step is
to check the temperature stability of the sorbent to set the boundaries
of utilized process conditions. The sorbent manufacturer recommends
an operating temperature in the range of 20 °C to 100 °C[18] and several studies have reported urea-bridge
formation in the presence of CO2 at high temperature.[7,22] Because air is the cheapest option of purge gas, a quick test of
oxidative stability of the sorbent was carried out at 80 and 100 °C
for 1 h, which showed degradation of 5–6% of capacity, but
insignificant degradation at 60 °C. These results are in line
with findings of Yu et al.[22] that show
that in the presence of oxygen the sorbent is only stable up to approximately
70 °C due to oxidative degradation. However, without the presence
of CO2 and O2, the thermal stability of the
sorbent can be maintained up to 150 °C. In the presence of CO2 the sorbent stability/regenerability is less well studied
but appears to be stable up to 130 °C, above which urea formation
might occur.[22,23] The option of using CO2 as purge gas was also considered. However, since the purity of CO2-rich product gas is not an issue in biogas upgrading, the
higher probability of urea formation, and lower working capacities,
this option is considered less attractive for the biogas case and
hence left out in this study.From stability tests, it was decided
to perform TSA at a maximum temperature of 120 °C when CO2 is present. When air is used as purge gas, the temperature
is limited to 60 °C to prevent oxidative degradation. So far,
no significant degradation has been observed or reported for regeneration
methods using reduced absolute pressure.
Desorption
without Purge Flow
First,
experiments without purge flow were executed, and the results are
shown in Figure . The 30 min working capacity is defined
as the difference between the adsorption equilibrium capacity and
desorption loading after 30 min of desorption. The final working capacity
is defined as the difference between the adsorption loading and the
loading at the end of the desorption step (t >
40
min). By integration of the outlet CO2 mole flow during
the regeneration step the residual loading is found.
Figure 5
Residual CO2 loading (mol/kg) on the sorbent after 30
min and at the end of the desorption step without purge flow. Desorption
was varied between the methods: PSA was performed at 40 °C, PTSA
at 100 mbar, and TSA at 1 bar.
Residual CO2 loading (mol/kg) on the sorbent after 30
min and at the end of the desorption step without purge flow. Desorption
was varied between the methods: PSA was performed at 40 °C, PTSA
at 100 mbar, and TSA at 1 bar.Pure pressure swing experiments have been performed at the
adsorption
temperature of 40 °C. This would enable a more or less isothermal
adsorption/desorption process. This method of desorption is not very
effective, as shown in Figure . Even at a low system pressure of 10 mbar, only 40% of the
adsorption loading is removed during desorption. Increasing the temperature
is more effective in cleaning the sorbent as is shown by the temperature
swing experiments in Figure . This observation is in line with Lewatit VP OC 1065 being
a chemical sorbent, where energy is needed to break the chemical bond
between the sorbent and absorbed species. The effect of temperature
is larger than the effect of pressure due to the shape of the isotherm
for the sorbent used (see Figure ). The isotherm is very steep in the region of low
pressure of CO2 (<5 kPa).[4] Consequently, the system pressure must be lowered to a significantly
lower pressure (<1 Pa) in order to evacuate the sorbent completely
at a temperature of 40 °C. Combination of pressure and temperature
swing (PTSA) leads to higher working capacities at lower temperatures
and higher pressure compared to pure TSA of PSA.In order to
get more insight in the most optimal desorption method,
a comparison of energy consumptions is made. The required sensible
heat for the sorbent and the produced CO2 are calculated.
The compression cost is estimated by adiabatic compression of the
produced CO2. Using the experimental determined working
capacities from Figure , the amount of sorbent required to produce one kilogram of CO2 per cycle is calculated. A more detailed description of these
calculations can be found in Section .The energy comparison showed
a more favorable result for the PSA
as shown in Figure , merely as a result of the fact that for
PSA energy is only added to the product while for TSA energy is added
to the product and the sorbent. Therefore, the optimum based on energy
usage will be found for a PSA case with low-pressure difference between
the adsorption and the desorption step. However, this case can be
considered impractical since it will have a very low working capacity
and therefore a lot of adsorption/desorption cycles have to be performed
to produce one kilogram of CO2. This leads to larger equipment
size and investment costs, for a given capacity of the biogas plant.
Consequently, another optimum will be found if more factors (e.g.,
economic factors) are included in the optimization. Shortly, it can
be concluded that temperature swing is needed to reach a noteworthy
working capacity and pressure swing can be used to lower the required
sensible heat. The trade-off between these is subject of economic
optimization depending on cost and availability of utilities.Energy use
(MJ/kg CO2) of the cases presented in Figure based on the reaction
heat, the adiabatic compression, and the sensible heat of the sorbent
and the produced CO2.
Desorption with Purge Gas Flow
Instead
of reducing the CO2 pressure by reducing the system pressure,
a purge gas flow can be used to lower the CO2 partial pressure.
An effective purge gas should be inert, abundantly available, and
optimally inexpensive. In literature[7,8,15,22] nitrogen is considered
an effective purge gas and therefore evaluated in this paper. Alternatively,
especially for a larger scale operation, air might be a cheaper purge
gas although less inert due to the oxygen content. Emitting CO2 from biogas to the air is not considered a contribution to
CO2 related global warming as the CO2 in biogas
originates from renewable biomass.
Temperature
Effect on Capacity
From the isotherm of Lewatit[4] (see Figure ), it is clear that
an increasing temperature will lead to an increased working capacity.
This effect is clearly seen in Figure as the working capacity
increases from 1 mol/kg at 40 °C to 2.5 mol/kg above 100 °C
for both cases after 30 min of desorption. The significant faster
desorption above 80 °C is in line with results of Serna-Guerrero
et al.[8]
Figure 7
Effect of temperature on residual CO2 loading on the
sorbent after 30 min and at the end of the desorption step with a
purge flow of 226 mL/min.
Effect of temperature on residual CO2 loading on the
sorbent after 30 min and at the end of the desorption step with a
purge flow of 226 mL/min.In contrast to what the theory predicts, Figure shows a significant final
loading is present
for the 40 and 60 °C N2 purge cases. In Figure it is shown that a kind of equilibrium (at 0.9 mol/kg) is
reached for the 40 °C case after 7 h of the desorption. In the
next 9 h of the desorption step, no significant (<0.5% CO2, below detection limit) CO2 was measured in the outlet
of the reactor. In the following regeneration step only 0.4 mol/kg
was desorbed although 0.9 mol/kg was expected. In our opinion, the
missing 0.5 mol/kg (shown as “unaccounted capacity”
in Figure ) desorbed
during the last 9 h of the desorption step. This opinion is supported
by the fact that the subsequent adsorption step of the next experiment
showed again full adsorption capacity (see Figure ).
Figure 8
Experimental loading versus time for the 40
°C, 226 N mL/min
N2 purge case. The dashed line illustrates the decrease
in loading when the CO2 concentration was below the detection
limit of the analyzer.
Experimental loading versus time for the 40
°C, 226 N mL/min
N2 purge case. The dashed line illustrates the decrease
in loading when the CO2 concentration was below the detection
limit of the analyzer.Additionally, in Figure the nitrogen purge is compared with the air purge
experiments.
As seen, the working capacities after 30 min for the nitrogen purge
and air purge are almost equal. Therefore, it can be concluded that
the CO2 present in air does not have a significant effect
on the desorption rate in the first 30 min. This hypothesis is confirmed
when the average outlet CO2 molar fraction is calculated
(average XCO2 = 0.06 for 40 °C N2 purge case), and it is noted that the average outlet concentration
is not significantly changed by 400 ppm (XCO2 = 0.0004) of CO2 in air. Additionally, it is shown in Figure that the CO2 in air has an significant effect on the final loading. This
is predicted by theory, since the isotherm value at 150 ppm of CO2 in the instrument air used and 40 °C is 0.5 mol/kg.
However, this also shows that the presented final loading is not the
equilibrium loading. Note that the unaccounted capacity is small for
the 40 °C air purge experiment because it was stopped after 3.8
h of desorption when the CO2 outlet concentration was below
the detection limit, instead of running the experiment 17 h for the
40 °C nitrogen purge.
Temperature Effect on
Desorption Rate
In Figure it is
also observed that the desorption rate is increasing
with temperature since the difference between the 30 min and the final
working capacity is reduced with increasing temperature. Desorption
of CO2 will only happen when the equilibrium loading at
the local conditions is lower than the actual loading. This is analyzed
in Figure by plotting the bed-average experimental loading (1)
versus time. The experimental loading is compared to the Toth isotherm
loading, evaluated at the CO2 concentration at the reactor
outlet and the bed temperature (2), respectively, and the outside
wall temperature (3).
Figure 9
Experimental bed-average loading (1) at 40, 80, and 120
°C
and 226 N mL/min N2 purge. Additionally, the Toth isotherm
values evaluated at the outlet CO2 concentration and the
bed temperature (2) or the outside wall temperature (3) are shown.
Experimental bed-average loading (1) at 40, 80, and 120
°C
and 226 N mL/min N2 purge. Additionally, the Toth isotherm
values evaluated at the outlet CO2 concentration and the
bed temperature (2) or the outside wall temperature (3) are shown.In Figure is shown
that both the isotherm lines lay above the experimental line for the
40 °C experiment. Based on this observation desorption is not
expected. However, the isotherm lines are evaluated at the CO2 outlet concentration, which is the highest CO2 concentration in the column. Because CO2-free nitrogen
is entering the column, the local CO2 concentration will
be lower, and thus the local isotherm value will be lower. Therefore,
locally desorption can happen. Moreover, the experimental loading
is a column-averaged loading. Seeing that desorption will happen in
the beginning of the column first, the actual local experimental loading
will be lower in the beginning and higher at the end of the column.
For that reason, desorption is possible at the end of the column despite
that the isotherm lines are higher than the experimental line. This
is supported by the fact that the isotherm is extremely favorable
for adsorption, and it will be unfavorable for desorption. This will
lead to a flat mass transfer zone as described by Ruthven[24] and Seader et al.[25]On the other hand, the experimental loading for the 120 °C
case is higher than the isotherm line evaluated on the wall temperature
for all times (see Figure ). This means that, at least around the wall, desorption is
possible along the whole length of the column. Therefore, the desorption
front will be less distinct for the 120 °C experiments. For the
reason that desorption is possibly occurring in a larger fraction
of the column compared to the 40 °C case the desorption rate
will be higher for the 120 °C case. Additionally, the isotherm
line evaluated at the bed temperature suggests that the experimental
loading is in equilibrium with the outlet gas concentration.The large difference in isotherm values for the wall and the bed
shown in Figure for
the 120 °C case is a result of the large radial temperature gradient
of 35 °C seen during the experiments. A large radial temperature
gradient is present due to low thermal conductivity of the sorbent.
Consequently, there might be a large radial gradient in local loading.
For example, the sorbent might be empty at the wall but still contain
CO2 in the center of the bed. The low thermal conductivity
of the sorbent is an important factor for the design of an up-scaled
system because too large column diameters might lead to large radial
temperature gradients. As a result, large temperature gradients might
cause excessive regeneration times to remove all CO2 from
the column and thereby cause lower column productivities.The
above results suggest that desorption rate is strongly influenced
by the equilibrium between the gas and the adsorbed phase. For the
40 °C case this seems to be more locally at the desorption front
where for the 120 °C this seems to be along the length of the
whole column.
Equilibrium Model
The strong influence
of the equilibrium between gas and adsorbed phase is investigated
in more detail by use of an equilibrium PFR model of the column. The
gas phase has been modeled as an ideal PFR assuming local equilibrium
with the adsorbed phase as shown in eq . In this equation is Cg (mol·m–3) the gas phase concentration, qe and q (mol·kg–1) the equilibrium sorbent loading and the actual sorbent loading,
respectively, ug (m·s–1) the superficial gas velocity, ε (−) the bed voidage,
and ρs (kg·m–3) the sorbent
density (see also Table ).
Table 2
Values of Parameters in the Equilibrium
Model
symbol
value
unit
meaning
ε
0.38
–
bed voidage
k1
1 × 109
s–1
linear driving force constant
ρs
880
kg·m–3
sorbent
density
The
mass transfer between the gas and the solid phase has been
modeled using the linear driving force model with a sufficient large
linear driving force constant (k1, eq ). In this way, local
equilibrium is ensured between the gas and the solid phase.The experimental increase in temperature is approached using
a
segmented linear temperature increase as shown in Figure B. The equations used are shown in eq when the temperature is increasing with
slope determined from the experimental
temperature
increase and with eq when the temperature is constant. Using this method, the experimental
temperature profile is approached without extensive modeling of heat
transfer phenomena.
Figure 10
Experimental loading (A) and temperature (B) and predicted
values
by the equilibrium model for the nitrogen purge experiments presented
in Figure . The figures
have a shared legend.
Experimental loading (A) and temperature (B) and predicted
values
by the equilibrium model for the nitrogen purge experiments presented
in Figure . The figures
have a shared legend.The equations are solved using the ODE15s solver in Matlab.
The
differential is manually
discretized, while the differential is solved by the ODE15s solver.In Figure it
is shown that the prediction of the trend in loading by the equilibrium
PFR model matches with the experimental trend. Hence, the desorption
rate is strongly influenced by the equilibrium between the gas and
the solid phase as hypothesized in the previous section. Because the
isotherm is strongly dependent on temperature also the desorption
rate depends strongly on temperature. This implicates that heat transfer
is an important parameter when designing the adsorption/desorption
system. Better heat transfer will raise the reactor temperature faster
and thereby increase the desorption rate resulting is smaller equipment.In Figure A it
is seen that the model predicts the two extremes in temperatures (40
and 120 °C) the best. Surprisingly, the predictions for the temperatures
in between are worse. It is expected that slight imperfections of
the isotherm might influence the model results. Additionally, the
influence of the produced CO2 on the gas velocity is not
taken into account in the modeling. The desorption rate might be under-predicted
for this reason since the gas velocity will increase when the produced
CO2 is taken into account.It can be concluded that
the capacity of the sorbent as a function
of temperature is strongly influenced by the isotherm. At 40 and 60
°C the desorption is too slow to reach equilibrium without excessive
(above 3 h) regeneration times. Above 100 °C the sorbent is completely
clean within half an hour of desorption.
Effect
of Purge Gas Flow Rate
The
effect of purge gas flow rate also depends on the temperature, as
shown in Figure . While at 60 °C there is a significant
influence of the purge flow, at 120 °C there is only a minimal
increase in desorption rate. For the 60 °C experiments, especially
in the first 30 min a strong effect of flow on the desorption rate
is seen. In the following 2 h of the experiment it seems that the
desorption rates have the same order of magnitude, because the difference
between the 30 min loading and the residual loading is almost independent
of the flow rate.
Figure 11
Effect of purge gas flow rate [NmL/min] and temperature
on residual
CO2 loading on the sorbent after 30 min and at the end
of the desorption step at 60 and 120 °C.
Effect of purge gas flow rate [NmL/min] and temperature
on residual
CO2 loading on the sorbent after 30 min and at the end
of the desorption step at 60 and 120 °C.In Figure this effect is also clearly visible, and
in the first 600 s the desorption is influenced by the flow rate while
after 600 s the desorption rate appears to be the same for all flow
rates. This shows that in the first 600 s the desorption rate is strongly
influenced by the gas concentration. Desorption of CO2 will
only happen when the equilibrium loading at the local conditions is
lower than the actual loading. Initially, the desorption rate will
be higher for a higher flow rate because the gas concentration is
lower. Therefore, a larger fraction of the adsorbed CO2 can desorb from the bed before reaching equilibrium between the
gas and adsorbed phase, resulting in a lower sorbent loading. After
600 s, albeit having a lower gas concentration, also the local loading
is lower for the higher flow rate. Therefore, after 600 s the effect
of a lower gas concentration at higher flow rate is canceled by the
effect of lower local loading. Consequently, the desorption rate appears
to be same.
Figure 12
Experimental loading and predicted values by the equilibrium
model
for the nitrogen purge experiments presented in Figure .
Experimental loading and predicted values by the equilibrium
model
for the nitrogen purge experiments presented in Figure .For the high temperature experiments, it is shown in Figure that the difference
in desorption rates is minimal. In view of the high desorption rates,
the CO2 concentrations are high (>25%) during the experiment.
Because of the high temperature and CO2 concentration,
the isotherm is in the flat region (see Figure ). Consequently, the effect of a reduction
in CO2 concentration is small and therefore the influence
of flow is minimized. Additionally, Figure B indicates that after 700 s the sorbent
reaches 120 °C whereas the sorbent is also fully regenerated
after 700 s. Consequently, the desorption rate might be increased
by increasing the heating rate. It supports the idea that ensuring
good heat transfer to the sorbent is important when designing a SAS
CO2 removal system.
Effect
of System Pressure
Since
the maximum temperature using air purge is limited to 60 °C due
to oxidative degradation,[22] the effect
of lowering the system pressure while using an air purge is investigated.
Due to lower CO2 pressure, a lower final loading is expected
for a lower system pressure. Comparing the residual loadings in Figure , this effect can be clearly seen.
Figure 13
Effect of pressure on
residual CO2 loading on the sorbent
after 30 min and at the end of the desorption step at temperature
of 60 °C and an air-purge flow of 226 N mL/min.
Effect of pressure on
residual CO2 loading on the sorbent
after 30 min and at the end of the desorption step at temperature
of 60 °C and an air-purge flow of 226 N mL/min.Next to the lower final working capacity, the difference
between
the working capacity after 30 min and at the end of the desorption
step is also reduced with decreasing pressure. This increase in desorption
rate might be due to enhanced mass transfer as a result of an increased
diffusivity of CO2. Additionally, since the volume flow
is set in normal liters per minute and held constant during the experiments,
the gas velocity will increase with decreasing pressure. This will
increase both the mass transfer from the particle to the bulk and
the CO2 removal from the reactor. In general, it can be
said that the working capacity and the desorption rate are increased
with decreasing pressure. However, additional optimization (e.g.,
economics) has to be performed in order to determine the most optimal
desorption case.
Evaluating Regeneration
Options
In
the previous section, the working capacity for different options of
regeneration have been shown. As mentioned before, selection of the
most optimal conditions based on working capacity and desorption rate
is not trivial. Here, an energy comparison is performed, taking as
point of departure the CO2 removal for a 1000 N m3/h biogas plant. Three cases with a working capacity around 1.6 mol/kg
after 30 min are selected. Experimental results are used from the
following experiments: nitrogen (1) and air purge (2) at 60 °C
and 226 N mL/min and PTSA at 80 °C (3). To see the effect of
reduced pressure under flow conditions, the air purge at 60 °C
and 100 mbar (4) is added. The effect of temperature is investigated
by adding the nitrogen purge experiments at 80 (5) and 100 °C
(6). An overview of the experimental conditions used in the evaluation
below can be seen in Table .
Table 3
Operating Conditions of the Selected
Desorption Methods
case
pressure [bar]
desorption temperature
[°C]
exp. 30 min working
capacity [mol/kg]
30 min avg. CO2 concentration for 226 N mL/min experiments [mol CO2/mol N2]
1
air purge
0.1
60
2.2
0.14
2
air purge
1
60
1.7
0.11
3
nitrogen purge
1
60
1.7
0.11
4
nitrogen purge
1
80
2.2
0.14
5
nitrogen purge
1
100
2.6
0.16
6
PTSA
0.1
80
1.5
n/a
Design Method
In order to include
the energy loss by the pressure drop over the sorbent bed, a short-cut
design of a large scale adsorption column has been made. The column
has been designed for the case of 1000 N m3 h–1 of biogas containing 45% of CO2; for more details see Table . For the design it
is assumed that all of the CO2 is captured during 30 min
of adsorption. The possible broadening of the mass transfer zone and
early breakthrough because of incomplete regeneration are not taken
into account. However, in a more detailed design, it should be taken
into account since it might affect the realized working capacity and
thereby the equipment size.
Table 4
Design Specifications
and Assumptions
Used for the Short-Cut Design
meaning
symbol
value
unit
biogas flow
ϕV,feed
1000
N·m3·h–1
CO2 fraction
xCO2
0.45
–
CO2 capture capacity
–
872
kgCO2·h–1
temperature adsorption
Tads
40
°C
time adsorption and desorption
tads/tdes
1800
s
gas
velocity during adsorption
ug
0.25
m·s–1
The reactor is designed as a multitubular
reactor where the diameter
of the tubes is equal to the experimental diameter (13 mm). Thereby,
heat transfer into the reactor is similar to the experimental heat
transfer phenomena, ensuring the experimental working capacity can
be reached in the designed column. The total area for gas flow is
calculated using the flow of biogas and assuming a gas velocity of
0.25 m/s in the tubes during adsorption; see eq . The gas velocity during adsorption is fixed
to be able to specify the other two independent variables, the length
of column and diameter of the shell.The number
of tubes nt is determined
by dividing the total area for gas flow by the area of one tube.The area As of the shell is determined
by eq . From the area
of the shell the shell diameter can be determined.The amount of sorbent msorbent is calculated
using the experimentally determined 30 min working capacity Δqexp and the mole flow of CO2; see eq . The mole flow of CO2 is determined from the biogas feed flow and the fraction
of CO2 as shown in eq .Using the sorbent mass and the bulk density of the sorbent,
the
length of the reactor can be calculated. It is assumed that the reactor
has the same dimensions as the sorbent bed and no dead spaces are
present in the reactor.The amount of purge flow is calculated such that the average ratio
of N2 and CO2 in the designed situation is equal
to the average ratio between N2 and CO2 in the
corresponding experiment; see eq . The reason for this is that desorption is strongly influenced
by local equilibrium (as shown in Section ) and therefore the concentration of
CO2 in the outlet is an important factor to be considered.
Not included in the evaluation is the coadsorption of water, although
depending on the ratio of working capacity for H2O and
CO2, the energy penalty might be significant. If this ratio
is one, the penalty of desorption heat of H2O is already
0.98 MJ/kg CO2. However, assuming 100% RH and 40 °C
as feed conditions the amount of moles of H2O fed is only
20% of the amount of moles of CO2. Therefore, the aforementioned
ratio is significantly lower and translates into an energy penalty
of around 0.2 MJ/kg CO2.
Results
of Evaluation
The results
of the analysis, shown in Figure , illustrate that the reaction
heat is the major factor influencing the total energy needed for desorption.
The reaction heat for the Lewatit sorbent (65 kJ/mol) is in the same
range as for other amine sorbents.[26] Therefore,
it might be difficult to reduce the contribution of the reaction heat
in the total energy needed for desorption, although Fujiki et al.[27] reported a novel amine sorbent with reaction
heat around 40 kJ/mol. Since the heat of reaction is the same for
all regeneration options, the selection of the most attractive regeneration
option will be independent of the absolute value of this reaction
energy.Required energy for the desorption with an adsorption velocity
of 0.25 m/s.Furthermore, the sensible
heats of the sorbent and the reactor
are a significant factor in the total energy of desorption. The amount
of sensible heat needed is mainly a function of working capacity and
the desorption temperature. Increasing the working capacity and reducing
the temperature will decrease the sensible heat needed. An increased
working capacity will decrease sorbent mass and thereby reactor dimensions.
This is shown for the 100 mbar and 60 °C air purge case in Figure and Table . Nevertheless, for that case
the reduction in sensible heat for the sorbent is penalized by the
increase in the compression energy and thereby the advantage of the
reduction in sensible heat is lost.
Table 5
Overview of Key Performance
Indicators
(KPI) and Column Dimensions for an Adsorption Velocity of 0.25 m/s
KPI
air, 60 °C, 100 mbar
air, 60 °C, 1 atm
N2, 60 °C, 1 atm
N2, 80 °C, 1 atm
N2, 100 °C, 1 atm
PTSA 80 °C, 100 mbar
purge
flow (mpurge3/mCO23)
7.3
9.5
9.5
7.1
6.1
0
working capacity 30 min (molCO2 kgsorbent–1)
2.2
1.7
1.7
2.2
2.6
1.5
column length (m)
7.6
9.8
9.8
7.3
6.3
10.8
heat requirement (MJ kgCO2–1)
2.4
2.6
2.6
3.2
3.7
3.8
electricity req (kW h kgCO2–1)
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
desorption productivity (molCO2 mreactor–3 s–1)
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.8
0.5
The sensible heat of the reactor can be minimized
in a detailed
design. For example, doubling the tube diameter will already halve
the amount of steel needed, thereby reducing the sensible heat for
the reactor. However, it should be ensured that heat transfer will
not be negatively influenced, because the 30 min working capacity
and hence the system productivity are strongly influenced by the experimental
heating rate. In Section it is shown that the productivity is a function of
the equilibrium between the gas and the solid phase. As shown in Figure the isotherm is
a strong function of temperature. Therefore, it is expected that increasing
the heating rate of the sorbent will increase the desorption rate
significantly. Consequently, optimization of heat transfer and reaction
dimensions will go hand in hand.From Figure it
can be seen that in general the energy for the bed pressure drop is
reducing with increasing working capacity. The major reason for this
is that a lower amount of sorbent is needed with a higher working
capacity. Less sorbent will result in a shorter column and therefore
in a lower pressure drop. Next to increased sensible heat, more sorbent
will lead to a longer column because the diameter of the reactor is
held constant. Consequently, this will lead to a higher pressure drop.
Moreover, for the presented design the purge flow will increase for
the cases with lower working capacity to keep the CO2/N2 ratio equal to the experimental conditions. In this way,
the concentration of CO2 in the purge gas will be equal
to experimental conditions of which the importance was shown in Section . Of course,
in the final design the purge flow should be optimized for each temperature
to make a more fair comparison. The exception to the trend is the
PTSA case, where a relatively low working capacity also has a low
compression energy, since only the produced CO2 is compressed.
On the other hand, the 100 mbar, 60 °C air purge case has a high
energy demand for compression due to the large amount of gas flow
that needs to be extracted to reduce the pressure.Considering
that the price of electric energy per MJ is significantly
higher than that of thermal energy,[28] one
might focus on the reduction of the electricity requirement in Table . Standing out is
the PTSA case with low electricity need and medium heat requirements.
Additionally, this is the only considered case that will deliver a
high purity CO2 gas product stream. On the other hand,
a higher amount of sorbent is needed as a result of the lower working
capacity. When one is not interested in the product gas and the evaluation
is purely based on energy consumption, the 80 °C nitrogen purge
is the case with the lowest energy consumption during desorption.
It has a low electricity requirement and needs less sorbent due to
increased working capacity. However, this is penalized by an increase
in heat requirement. On the other hand, the air purge case at atmospheric
pressure will have the advantage that the purge gas is significantly
cheaper than nitrogen and therefore might be economically more favorable.
However, due to increased sorbent mass the requirement of electricity
(to overcome the pressure drop) is higher. It should be noted that
it is expected that the electricity requirement can be reduced by
optimizing the column design.Purely based on the energy evaluation
and a fixed reactor diameter,
either the 80 °C PTSA or 80 °C nitrogen purge case is the
most promising case. As has been noted the PTSA case will deliver
high purity CO2 by a 8% penalty in heat requirement and
a 50% increase in sorbent mass. However, when all economics of the
process are taken into account and depending on local conditions with
respect to prices or availability of “waste”-energy
streams, one might come to other conclusions.
Conclusion
In this paper the regeneration conditions of
a solid amine sorbent
for the removal of CO2 from biogas have been evaluated.
Without purge flow, pressure swing adsorption is the most favorable
option based on energy usage only. However, because of the very low
working capacity, pressure swing adsorption alone is most likely not
economic and should be combined with an increase in temperature (PTSA).When a purge gas is used, it was found that the desorption rate
is strongly influenced by the equilibrium between gas and solid phase.
Because of the temperature dependency of the isotherm, heat transfer
was determined to be a relevant parameter, also in relation to the
rate of desorption. At lower temperatures even air can be used, albeit
at the expense of lower working capacities and reduced desorption
productivity. At higher temperatures (80 °C or higher) the working
capacity increases drastically, but sensible heat requirements start
to become significant. In the end, economics for purge gas costs,
(local) costs for required heat and power, sorbent amount, and equipment
size will need to be determined to be able to select the most optimal
regeneration technology.