Biogas robust processing with combined catalytic reformer and trap: BioRobur Project

Abstract

The present work summarizes experimental results obtained up to a lab scale level within the framework of the SP1-JTI-FCH.2-Collaborative Project 'BIOROBUR'. The main objective of the project is the development and testing of a robust and efficient fuel processor based on direct autothermal reforming (ATR) of biogas, and demonstration at a scale equivalent of 50 Nm 3 /h hydrogen production. Modelling and simulation (CFD and FEM) were carried out to select the catalyst support with promising results for the BioRobur fuel processor and, furthermore, 2D CFD analysis also were used to examine flow uniformity issues due to soot trap integration provided immediately downstream the reformer. Catalysts for the ATR reformer and soot trap were synthesized and tested. The results achieved so far are highly promising. Besides, safety studies and life cycle analysis (LCA) of the overall process are also being conducted. The partners involved in the

Development of a robust and efficient biogas processor for hydrogen production. Part 2: Experimental campaign

“…Li-delafossite based catalysts were prepared via solution combustion synthesis (SCS) method [56,57]. A concentrated aqueous solution of various precursors (metal nitrates and urea or glycine) was placed in an oven at 650 C for a few minutes in a crucible, so to ignite the highly exothermic and self-sustaining reactions [58e60].…”

“…A concentrated aqueous solution of various precursors (metal nitrates and urea or glycine) was placed in an oven at 650 C for a few minutes in a crucible, so to ignite the highly exothermic and self-sustaining reactions [58e60]. The catalysts were characterized by XRD and BET analysis [55,56].…”

Development of a robust and efficient biogas processor for hydrogen production. Part 1: Modelling and simulation

“…Based on the results of the study described above, two commercially available SiC monolithic honeycomb filter structures were selected that had 15 and 20 mm mean pore size and 46% porosity. The filters were evaluated in terms of: i) flow resistance (permeability), ii) filtration efficiency and iii) development of pressure drop during loading of carbonaceous materials [42].…”

“…The initial pressure drop during particle loading is identical for the two monoliths in both operating points and originates from the similar initial permeability of the monoliths. The difference in the pressure drop developed between the two operating points is mainly caused by the change in the microstructural characteristics of the particle deposit (different particle sizes) [42].…”

“…Fig.10e Filtration efficiency as a function of soot particle size for monoliths with different pore size (loading at two different CAST operating points corresponding to small (91 nm) and large (196 nm) mean particle diameter (left) and pressure drop as a function of the soot deposit on (right)[42].…”