Yu Zhang, Mingjing Fan, HaoZe Wang, Hao Wang, Youjun Lu
{"title":"A comprehensive comparison of three renewable natural gas production technologies: Energy, exergy, economic, and environmental assessments","authors":"Yu Zhang, Mingjing Fan, HaoZe Wang, Hao Wang, Youjun Lu","doi":"10.1016/j.enconman.2025.119615","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study aims to conduct a comprehensive comparison of three technologies for producing renewable natural gas (RNG) from biomass, evaluating their technical, economic, and environmental perspectives: (i) Catalytic hydrothermal gasification (CHG) technology; (ii) Gasification and methanation (G&M) technology; (iii) Anaerobic digestion (AD) technology. Energy analysis reveals that the CHG system achieves the highest energy efficiency (81.30 %), attributed to its superior energy recovery and utilization capabilities. The AD system exhibits 50.17 % lower energy efficiency compared to the CHG system, primarily due to incomplete biomass conversion into biogas. Exergy analysis indicates that the CHG system demonstrates the highest exergy efficiency (63.38 %). The reaction unit constitutes the primary source of exergy losses across the three RNG production systems. Energy utilization diagram (EUD) analysis of the RNG production reaction in the CHG and G&M systems reveals that the CHG system experiences lower exergy losses, owing to its single-step conversion and milder reaction conditions. Economic evaluation highlights that the CHG system offers the most favorable economic performance, driven by its moderate investment cost (24.50 M€), high RNG and steam production, and a competitive RNG break-even cost of 0.41 €/Nm<sup>3</sup>. Raw material costs and by-product steam prices are critical factors influencing the economic viability of the process. Life cycle assessment reveals that the CHG and G&M systems exhibit superior environmental performance, whereas the AD system performs poorly due to the significant volume of digestate requiring treatment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11664,"journal":{"name":"Energy Conversion and Management","volume":"328 ","pages":"Article 119615"},"PeriodicalIF":9.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Conversion and Management","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890425001384","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study aims to conduct a comprehensive comparison of three technologies for producing renewable natural gas (RNG) from biomass, evaluating their technical, economic, and environmental perspectives: (i) Catalytic hydrothermal gasification (CHG) technology; (ii) Gasification and methanation (G&M) technology; (iii) Anaerobic digestion (AD) technology. Energy analysis reveals that the CHG system achieves the highest energy efficiency (81.30 %), attributed to its superior energy recovery and utilization capabilities. The AD system exhibits 50.17 % lower energy efficiency compared to the CHG system, primarily due to incomplete biomass conversion into biogas. Exergy analysis indicates that the CHG system demonstrates the highest exergy efficiency (63.38 %). The reaction unit constitutes the primary source of exergy losses across the three RNG production systems. Energy utilization diagram (EUD) analysis of the RNG production reaction in the CHG and G&M systems reveals that the CHG system experiences lower exergy losses, owing to its single-step conversion and milder reaction conditions. Economic evaluation highlights that the CHG system offers the most favorable economic performance, driven by its moderate investment cost (24.50 M€), high RNG and steam production, and a competitive RNG break-even cost of 0.41 €/Nm3. Raw material costs and by-product steam prices are critical factors influencing the economic viability of the process. Life cycle assessment reveals that the CHG and G&M systems exhibit superior environmental performance, whereas the AD system performs poorly due to the significant volume of digestate requiring treatment.
期刊介绍:
The journal Energy Conversion and Management provides a forum for publishing original contributions and comprehensive technical review articles of interdisciplinary and original research on all important energy topics.
The topics considered include energy generation, utilization, conversion, storage, transmission, conservation, management and sustainability. These topics typically involve various types of energy such as mechanical, thermal, nuclear, chemical, electromagnetic, magnetic and electric. These energy types cover all known energy resources, including renewable resources (e.g., solar, bio, hydro, wind, geothermal and ocean energy), fossil fuels and nuclear resources.