Comprehensive process and environmental impact analysis of integrated DBD plasma steam methane reforming
Fuel, ISSN: 0016-2361, Vol: 304, Page: 121328
2021
- 26Citations
- 22Usage
- 67Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations26
- Citation Indexes26
- 26
- CrossRef18
- Usage22
- Abstract Views22
- Captures67
- Readers67
- 67
Article Description
Utilization of electricity generated from renewable sources to obtain hydrogen, H 2, is of critical importance to decrease the overall carbon footprint. In this work, integration of a dielectric discharge barrier (DBD) plasma reactor to convert low calorific value gas, such as landfill gas or coal mine gas into hydrogen, into the existing steam methane reforming (SMR) technology was evaluated using process design considerations. In particular, a DBD-enhanced catalytic SMR reactor was modeled to operate at near atmospheric pressure and 500 °C sequentially with the conventional reformer to obtain ~ 65 kmol/hr H 2 for distributed production. This allowed decreasing the size of the conventional reformer albeit at the increased overall electricity consumption. Calculated process economics showed that only at an electricity cost of less than $0.004/kWh does the hybrid DBD plasma process derived H 2 price become competitive with that of the conventional SMR. A Life Cycle Assessment framework was used to compare environmental impacts from the conventional SMR, hybrid DBD SMR and hybrid DBD SMR utilizing only onshore wind-derived electricity. Larger environmental impacts in the plasma reformer were obtained due to the use of electricity for the plasma reforming operation, which was modeled as coming from the typical U.S. grid mix. Utilizing only 100% wind-derived electricity provided certain environmental benefits, except for the ecotoxicity impact where the wind power scenario modeled here only reduced ecotoxicity impacts associated with electricity by 30%.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236121012072; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121328; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85109015520&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0016236121012072; https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/michigantech-p/15080; https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=34382&context=michigantech-p; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121328
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know