Techno-economic analysis of coal-to-liquid processes with different gasifier alternatives

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120006

	Techno-economic analysis of coal-to-liquid processes with different gasifier alternatives
	Yang, Sheng 3; Xiao, Zhenyu 3; Deng, Chengwei 4; Liu, Zhiqiang 3; Zhou, Huairong 1; Ren, Jingzheng 2; Zhou, Tian 3
	2020-04-20
关键词	Coal Costs Economic analysis Energy efficiency Fuels Gas emissions Greenhouse gases Investments Liquids Planning Pollution control Public policy Shells (structures) Sustainable developmentCleaner production Gasification technologies Gasifiers National conditions Syngas composition Techno-Economic analysis Texaco gasifier Total capital investments
卷号	253
DOI	10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120006
英文摘要	Considering the current national conditions of China, developing coal-to-liquid process is an attractive way to alleviate the domestic oil crisis. Coal-to-liquid process mainly includes six subsystems and the most essential unit of the system is the gasification unit. This paper aims to provide suggestions for the cleaner production and sustainable development of coal-to-liquid technology. Lurgi, Texaco, and Shell coal-to-liquid process are modelled and simulated. The techno-economic analysis is conducted to investigate their performance using simulation-based results. Results showed that the greenhouse gas emissions of Lurgi, Texaco, and Shell coal-to-liquid process are 5.26 t/t fuel, 4.86 t/t fuel, and 3.49 t/t fuel. Lurgi coal-to-liquid has better performance on reducing oxygen cost and total investment; Texaco coal-to-liquid is advantageous in saving steam cost and production cost; Shell coal-to-liquid shows better performance in terms of energy efficiency, reducing the consumption of coal and water, and greenhouse gas emission. Shell gasifier is recommended in water-deficient areas. Texaco gasifier is recommended when access to water and coal is sufficient. Lurgi gasifier is recommended in pilot-scale projects. In the view of sustainable development, Shell gasifier is prior to Texaco gasifier and Lurgi gasifier because of the low greenhouse gas emission and well resistance to high coal price and high carbon taxes. Gasification unit occupies the largest proportion of total capital investment of coal-to-liquid processes and significantly affects the syngas composition. Coal gasification technology is potentially limiting the overall acceptance and practice of coal-to-liquid process in the future. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd
会议录	Journal of Cleaner Production
会议录出版者	Elsevier Ltd
语种	英语
ISSN号	09596526
WOS研究方向	Science & Technology - Other Topics ; Engineering ; Environmental Sciences & Ecology
WOS记录号	WOS:000516788400114
内容类型	会议论文
源URL	[http://ir.lut.edu.cn/handle/2XXMBERH/132664]
专题	能源与动力工程学院
作者单位	1.College of Petrochemical Technology, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou; 730050, China; 2.Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong 3.School of Energy Science and Engineering, Central South University, Changsha; 410083, China; 4.Space Power Technology State Key Laboratory, Shanghai Institute of Space Power-Sources, Shanghai; 200245, China;
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Yang, Sheng,Xiao, Zhenyu,Deng, Chengwei,et al. Techno-economic analysis of coal-to-liquid processes with different gasifier alternatives[C]. 见:.