Streamlined life cycle analysis for assessing energy and exergy performance as well as impact on the climate for landfill gas utilization technologies

Streamlined life cycle analysis for assessing energy and exergy performance as well as impact on the climate for landfill gas utilization technologies

•Different biogas energy utilization technologies are assessed.•Energy and exergy efficiencies and GWP are used as criteria.•In situ fuel cell systems are advantageous if all heat can be used.•Upgrading by amine scrubbing is advantageous if no heat can be used in situ.•The advantage of fuel cell sys...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied energy Vol. 185; pp. 805 - 813
Main Authors: Friesenhan, Christian, Agirre, Ion, Eltrop, Ludger, Arias, Pedro L.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier Ltd 01-01-2017
Subjects:
Amine scrubbing
Biogas
Cogeneration
Fuel cell
Hydrogen
Life-cycle analysis
Amine scrubbing
Biogas
Cogeneration
Hydrogen
Fuel cell
Life-cycle analysis
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:•Different biogas energy utilization technologies are assessed.•Energy and exergy efficiencies and GWP are used as criteria.•In situ fuel cell systems are advantageous if all heat can be used.•Upgrading by amine scrubbing is advantageous if no heat can be used in situ.•The advantage of fuel cell systems is supposed to rise in future. Three landfill gas (LFG) valorization technologies were compared using energy and exergy efficiency and a streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) method. The technologies were (i) steam reforming and hydrogen utilization in an in situ cogeneration fuel cell (SR-IS-FCC), (ii) biogas utilization in an in situ gas engine cogeneration plant (IS-GEC), and (iii) amine scrubbing and biomethane utilization in an ex situ gas engine cogeneration plant (AS-ES-GEC). The SR-IS-FCC alternative recorded the highest exergy efficiency and savings in cumulative energy demand (CED), and the lowest global warming potential (GWP) when all the heat is utilized in situ; otherwise, the highest exergy efficiency and the lowest GWP and CED were associated with the AS-ES-GEC alternative. The results indicate that AS-ES-GEC is the preferential choice when heat cannot be utilized in situ. Otherwise, SR-IS-FCC records the best values for the three criteria, and the AS-ES-GEC technology is the least interesting alternative.
ISSN:0306-2619
1872-9118
DOI:10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.10.097