The_Catalyst_Review_August_2023 - 8

SPECIAL FEATURE
Considering the layout of the SEG process, it benefits from a simplified syngas processing train because the WGS reaction takes
place simultaneously with the gasification reaction in the sorption-enhanced gasifier. In addition, the syngas clean-up unit, which
includes a liquid oxidation catalyst process and zinc oxide bed for hydrogen sulfide (H2
Moreover, the SEG plant needs an air separation unit (ASU) and CO2 compression unit, and a calciner for sorbent regeneration.
capture sorbent and the cost of CO2
Consequently, the initial economic assessments
of the SEG of MSW (Figure 6) showed that the
levelized cost of hydrogen produced via this route
is expected to be nearly double (3.9-6.1 €/kgH2
)
than that produced from the conventional MSW
gasification (2.0-3.4 €/kgH2
to the cost of CO2
).15 This corresponds
avoided, which stands for
the minimum CO2 price to offset the difference
.15
2022, such a figure is still above the CO2
.25
between the low-carbon and conventional hydrogen
production, of about 115 €/tCO2
As of September
emission
allowance price on the EU Emission Trading Scheme
(ETS), which stands at about 90-100 €/tCO2
Consequently, the carbon tax or price alone there
may not provide sufficient financial incentives yet
for the technology developers to pursue deploying
this technology. However, the amount of allowed
CO2
emissions in the EU Emission Trading System
is expected to decrease gradually over time, in line
with the EU's " Fit For 55 " plan to achieve at least
55% greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions by 2030.26
In turn, this is expected to push the prices of CO2
emission allowances above 140 €/tCO2.27
Furthermore, the recent survey by the International
Emission Trading Association (IETA) found that to limit
global warming to 2°C, the global average carbon price
needs to be about €124.35/tCO2
2030 and 2050, respectively.28
and €200.50/tCO2
and €60/tCO2
when CO2
by
Such a level of the carbon
price (or tax) is significantly higher than the tax credits introduced recently in the US through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) that
assume €85/tCO2
is stored and utilized, respectively.29
Nevertheless, there is an alternative option to the ETS and carbon tax credits that can make carbon capture, utilization, and storage
(CCUS) technologies financially viable. Industrial use of CO2
SEG process. Taking the UK food industry as an example, the CO2
can provide a valid business opportunity for developers of the MSW
price has surged from €235/tCO2
(£200/tCO2
to €1,183/tCO2-€5,324/tCO2 (£1,000/tCO2-£4,500/tCO2) in September 2022.30,31
Even at the lowest end of this scale, the CO2
financially viable, and products which tie up the CO2
further than simple fossil fuel displacement. As the majority of CO2
) in September 2021
price is still substantially above the carbon price necessary for MSW SEG to be
captured such as polyols for polyurethanes, and olefins for polyolefins would go
supply in the UK comes from the fertilizer industry, such a drastic
increase in CO2 market price is associated with a sharp increase in the natural gas price. Although the latter figure comes from an
uncertain source, using CO2 from SEG of MSW can provide a financially viable supply for industrial utilization. Moreover, the waste
treatment facilities can attract a gate fee, which can vary between 40-60 € per tonne of waste processed.15
gate fee would promote investment in MSW utilization technologies via the sorption-enhanced route.
such as steam methane reforming (SMR; 1.0-1.5 €/
w/o capture; 1.2-3.4 €/kgH2
Such a carbon price and
Still, the levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH) production for the SEG of MSW does not appear to be economically competitive when
compared to more established hydrogen production technologies (Table 2),32
kgH2 w/o capture; 1.2-2.7 €/kgH2 w/ capture), coal gasification (0.9-1.8 €/kgH2
gasification (1.4-3.2 €/kgH2
w/capture) or biomass
the low fidelity estimate of the LCOH falls between 6.1-10.1 €/kgH2.15
w/o capture; 2.1-3.3 €/kgH2 w/ capture). It is, however, competitive with the SEG of biomass, for which
This can be attributed to the fact that, in contrast to biomass,
there is a potential gate fee that the plant operator can receive in return for processing MSW. SEG of MSW process will also result in
a competitive LCOH to variable renewables integrated with electrolysis, such as wind and solar, which currently is about 4-9 €/kgH2
but is expected to reach less than 2 €/kgH2 after 2030 and to below 1.5 €/kgH2
,
by 2050.1
8
The Catalyst Review
August 2023
S) removal, is not required. This is because of
the strong affinity of CaO to sulfur compounds; these will be removed in the sorption-enhanced gasifier and then removed with the
purged spent sorbent. However, the resulting CaSO4
would reduce the quality of the purged sorbent and reduce it market appeal.
Consequently, its capital cost is 20-50% higher than that of conventional biomass gasification. Moreover, the operating cost of the
SEG will be higher due to the need to factor in the cost of fresh CO2
transport and storage.
Figure 6. Levelised cost of hydrogen estimated for different technologies (solid
orange bars - unabated fossil fuels; pattern orange bars - fossil fuels with CO2
capture; solid amber bars - unabated biomass; pattern orange bars - biomass with
CO2
capture).27
capture; solid green bars - unabated municipal solid waste; pattern green bars -
municipal solid waste with CO2
The_Catalyst_Review_August_2023

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The_Catalyst_Review_August_2023
