Next Article in Journal
Nitrogen Doped Superactivated Carbons Prepared at Mild Conditions as Electrodes for Supercapacitors in Organic Electrolyte
Next Article in Special Issue
Performing Quality Assurance of Carbon Dioxide for Carbon Capture and Storage
Previous Article in Journal
Achieving Climate Targets via the Circular Carbon Economy: The Case of Saudi Arabia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Why the Carbon-Neutral Energy Transition Will Imply the Use of Lots of Carbon
Article

Preparation of Synthesis Gas from CO2 for Fischer–Tropsch Synthesis—Comparison of Alternative Process Configurations

VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd., P.O. Box 1000, FI-02044 VTT Espoo, Finland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 21 August 2020 / Revised: 15 September 2020 / Accepted: 16 September 2020 / Published: 18 September 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue CO2 Capture and Valorization)
We compare different approaches for the preparation of carbon monoxide-rich synthesis gas (syngas) for Fischer–Tropsch (FT) synthesis from carbon dioxide (CO2) using a self-consistent design and process simulation framework. Three alternative methods for suppling heat to the syngas preparation step are investigated, namely: allothermal from combustion (COMB), autothermal from partial oxidation (POX) and autothermal from electric resistance (ER) heating. In addition, two alternative design approaches for the syngas preparation step are investigated, namely: once-through (OT) and recycle (RC). The combination of these alternatives gives six basic configurations, each characterized by distinctive plant designs that have been individually modelled and analyzed. Carbon efficiencies (from CO2 to FT syncrude) are 50–55% for the OT designs and 65–89% for the RC designs, depending on the heat supply method. Thermal efficiencies (from electricity to FT syncrude) are 33–41% for configurations when using low temperature electrolyzer, and 48–59% when using high temperature electrolyzer. Of the RC designs, both the highest carbon efficiency and thermal efficiency was observed for the ER configuration, followed by POX and COMB configurations. View Full-Text
Keywords: CCU; CO2 utilization; electrofuels; power-to-fuels; synfuels; reforming; rWGS; POX; resistance heating; Fischer–Tropsch CCU; CO2 utilization; electrofuels; power-to-fuels; synfuels; reforming; rWGS; POX; resistance heating; Fischer–Tropsch
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Hannula, I.; Kaisalo, N.; Simell, P. Preparation of Synthesis Gas from CO2 for Fischer–Tropsch Synthesis—Comparison of Alternative Process Configurations. C 2020, 6, 55. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/c6030055

AMA Style

Hannula I, Kaisalo N, Simell P. Preparation of Synthesis Gas from CO2 for Fischer–Tropsch Synthesis—Comparison of Alternative Process Configurations. C. 2020; 6(3):55. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/c6030055

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hannula, Ilkka, Noora Kaisalo, and Pekka Simell. 2020. "Preparation of Synthesis Gas from CO2 for Fischer–Tropsch Synthesis—Comparison of Alternative Process Configurations" C 6, no. 3: 55. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/c6030055

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop