Techno-Economic Assessment of Chemical Looping Gasification of Biomass for Fischer–Tropsch Crude Production with Net-Negative CO₂ Emissions: Part 2

Abstract

This work presents a techno-economic analysis of a novel gasification system, chemical looping gasification (CLG), used as the primary gasification process for biofuel production through Fischer−Tropsch synthesis (FTS). Two different gas cleaning process configurations, cold-gas cleanup and hot-gas cleanup process trains, are explored, along with off-gas utilization possibilities, to study their influence on the process economics of an integrated CLG−FT process plant. Off-gas recirculation to increase Fischer−Tropsch (FT) crude production has a significant influence on reducing the levelized production costs for FT crude. The results indicate that the specific production cost estimated for a CLG−FT plant with a hot-gas cleanup train is roughly 10% lower than the case with a cold-gas cleanup train, while the total plant costs remain relatively the same for all plant configurations. In addition to this, the former has a considerably higher overall system energy efficiency of 63%, roughly 18% more than the latter, considering the co-production of FT crude, district heating, and electricity. The specific investment costs range from 1.5 to 1.7 M€ 2018 /MW LHV , and the specific FT crude production cost ranges from 120 to 147 € 2018 /MWh FT . Roughly 60% of total carbon fed to the process is captured, enabling net-negative CO 2 emissions. A CO 2 price for negative emissions would significantly reduce the specific fuel production costs and would, hence, be competitive with fossil-based liquid fuels.

Production of aviation fuel with negative emissions via chemical looping gasification of biogenic residues: Full chain process modelling and techno-economic analysis

“…8 (b) that the biggest proportion of the Total Plant Investment (TPI) is the Indirect Gasifier (gasifier used in CLG). It is the same in the paper by Heyne and Harvey (2014) [65] and Roshan et al (2022) [9]. The difference in component costs between LD slag and Ilmenite as oxygen carrier comes after the CLG (indirect gasifier) due to different syngas composition and mass flow in the gasifier for the two different oxygen carriers.…”

“…This study expands on the techno-economic analysis done by Roshan et al (2022) [9] by additionally evaluating the revenues to calculate the annual cash inflow for the project. Since syncrude needs a lesser number of units for refining compared to crude oil as per de Klerk [34] and also more valuable than conventional crude oil as per Michael J. Gradassi [71], the LCOF of syncrude is not compared with the current crude oil price in the market as done in Roshan et al (2022) [9], rather we distill syncrude to produce aviation fuel along with other valuable byproducts, sell them to generate revenue and estimate the annual cash inflow. Based on the assumptions done in the techno-economic analysis, it is predicted that there is an annual cash inflow/profit even without any CO 2 tax credit.…”

“…The annual catalysts and chemical costs are taken as 2% of TPC for sour WGS reactor as the catalysts for sour WGS reactions are much more expensive than the catalysts for sweet WGS reactions. The annual oxygen carrier cost is always assumed to be 1% of the TPC [9].…”

“…A process and techno-economic study for the production of biomass derived FT-crude has previously been done by Roshan et al (2022) using LD slag as oxygen carrier (OC) with no comparison between suitable OCs [9]. In this work, however, a techno-economic comparison of Biomass to Liquid (BtL) process for production of bio-aviation fuel with different oxygen carriers is conducted to compare the effect on the economic feasibility of the overall process.…”

Techno-Economic Evaluation of Solar Hybridized Biomass Gasification Polygeneration Plants

“…Comparison of green TLFs price produced from different techniques as derived from literature with average deterministic MFSP for assessed BTL and SBTL systems at different input scales. ,,,,,− …”