Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
• A low Grade fuel (CH4 55-65 % & • A high grade fuel (CH4 > 90 % and
CO2 35-45 %) with lower < 10 % other gases) with high
percentage of methane. percentage of methane.
• Mode of utilisation • Mode of utilisation
• Onsite/ Remote applications
• Methane burns faster hence
• The presence of CO2 besides
yields a higher specific output
being non combustible,
and thermal efficiency
restrains its compressibility
compared to raw biogas when
there by making biogas
used as engine fuel.
difficult to be stored in
containers. • Upgrading , compression and
bottling facilitates easy storage
and transportation as a vehicle
fuel
Utilization of Upgraded Biogas
Cascades of Upgraded biogas being Biogas Motorcycle in Thailand Biogas Car in India
transported
Low Pressure
Physical Gas – Liquid
Scrubbing separation
Chemical
Scrubbing
• Based on
Water Scrubbing
physical
Physical
Absorption
absorption
Not required,
H S removed
2
6-10
of<Medium
gases
2%,
inWater
water- no chemical No
reaction
95-98
involved.
No Cheapest, Simplest
0.13 -15
• No pre-cleaningalong of with
H2CO2
S required, since solubility of H2S is higher than CO2, it will also get
Physical dissolved in water
Physical at high4-7pressures.
Not required < 4%, Organic Medium,7 > 96, < 93- No 0.25 Difficult in
Absorption Absorption High solvents, 0-80C 98% operation
• Water is used as a solvent – cheap, easily and abundantly available.
CH rich (above
• Regeneration
Chemical Chemical ofRequired
water & is simple
1 – release
<0.1%, of Alkali
Amines, pressure. 4
90%) Too high > 98 No 0.28 Difficult in
Absorption Absorption Recommended Low solutions biomethane gas 120-160 C operation
• No heat requirement during absorption or regeneration stream and CO process.
2
rich (80-90%)
• No
Pressure Swing complicated
Adsorption and complex
Required & 4-8 bar equipment
<2, 6 -10%, required.
Molecular
off gas stream
No > 96, > 98 Yes 0.26 Extensive
with some CH
Adsorption
• Easy operation and Highly Medium Sieves 4 process
maintenance.
recommended
as loss
control
needed
•
Membrane
No use of chemicals.
Gas – Permeation Required & >10-20, High Membranes No 90-92%, Partly Cheap, Easy
Separation Gas Recommended 20-36 0.22
• Cheap,
Gas - Investment cost is1 less. High 96%
Liquid
Cryogenic Multistage Recommended 40 Lowest Not required CH4 rich (above No 99 No 0.40 - Complex,
Separation Compression 98%) 0.44, Most multifaceted
and biomethane gas expensive
condensation stream and
solid CO2 rich
(99%) off
stream
State of the Art
Awarded: Patent No. 284588 is granted on 27/06/2017 for “A Device and a Process for Conversion of Biogas to a Fuel Gas
with enhanced Thermal Efficiency. V.K.Vijay, P.M.V. Subbarao, R.R. Gaur and S.S. Kapdi. Patent Application No.
161/DEL/2006 dated 20.1.2006
Applied:
V .K. Vijay, Rimika Kapoor, P.M.V. Subbarao, “A System for Biomethane and Bio Carbon Dioxide Production from
Biogas and a Method Thereof”. (Indian) – Patent Application No.: 201811018965, Dated: May 21, 2018.
Water Scrubbing based BioCH4 and BioCO2 Production System at IIT Delhi
WS1 (BioCH4 WS2 (BioCO2
Production) Production)
Capacity 10Nm3/h 5 Nm3/h
Gas Flow Rate
WS1
Quality of Gas 95% BioCH4 99.9% BioCO2
Obtained
Recovery of 91% 88.5%
WS2 Gas
Upgraded Biogas Dispensing System at IIT Delhi
• Algae Cultivation
• Grain Fumigation
• Greenhouses
• Chemical Manufacturing
Mobile Biogas Upgradation System developed at IIT Delhi
THANK YOU
Biogas
Biogas as Upgrading:
an AlternateThe Gas Separation
to Natural Gas! Problem
Properties Natural Gas Raw Biogas Upgraded Biogas(Biomethane)
Composition% (v/v) CH4 – 89.14% CH4 – 50- 65% CH4 Min - 90%
CO2 – 4.38% CO2 – 35-45% CO2 Max (v/v) – 4%
H2 – 0.01% N2 – 1-25% CO2 + N2 + O2 Max (v/v) – 10%
N2 – 0.11% O2 – 0.1-5 % O2 Max (v/v) – 0.5 %
C2H6 – 4.05% H2S – 10- 3000 ppm H2S mg/m3 Max – 30.3
C3H8 – 0.83% Moisture mg/m3Max -16
Iso-C4H10 – 0.28%
Neo-C4H10 – 0.66%
Iso-C5H12 – 0.09%
Neo-C5H12 – 0.28%
C6H14 -0.17%
Lower Heating Value 44.39 MJ/kg 20.5 MJ/kg 42.62 MJ/kg
Low Pressure
Physical Gas – Liquid
Scrubbing separation
Chemical
Scrubbing
The established technologies for the removal of CO2 from biogas are based on the differences in molecular,
thermodynamic and transport properties of the gaseous components in biogas.
Parameter Basis of Gas Pre Workin Methane Solvent/ Fate of Heat % Purity N2, O2 Invest Ease of
Operation Cleaning g Loss Adsorben Split Requir of CH4 in separatio Cost operation
Requireme Pressu t Biogas ement Upgrade n €/Nm3
Method nt re during d Gas biogas
(bar) Upgradati
In view of the above, the need of the hour is on
Water Scrubbing Physical Not required, 6-10 < 2%, Water No 95-98 No Cheapest, Simplest
Water
Absorption scrubbing
H S removed
2
technology
Medium is one of the most widely implemented with
0.13 -15 over
Optimize 135 the plants
along out
water of 400 biogas
with CO2
scrubbing upgrading
technology to plants
produce installed worldwide
high quality (IEA, 2013).
biomethane along
Physical Physical Not required 4-7 < 4%, Organic Medium, > 96, < 93- No 0.25 Difficult in
with, Absorption
Absorption High solvents, 70-80C 98% operation
Membranes– release of
biogas upgrading
No pressure.
90-92%,
setup
Partly Cheap,
needed
Easy
Separation Gas Recommended 20-36 0.22
Gas - • No heat requirement
1 High during absorption or regeneration
96% process.
make the complete process carbon negative.
Liquid
• No complicated and complex equipment required.
Cryogenic
Separation
•
Multistage
Compression
Easy operation
Recommended 40 and maintenance.
Lowest Not required CH4 rich
(above 98%)
No 99 No 0.40 -
0.44,
Complex,
multifaceted
and • No
condensation
use of chemicals. biomethane
gas stream
Most
expensiv
• Cheap, Investment cost is less. and solid CO2
rich (99%) off
e
Water Scrubbing Process
Methane Loss during Water Scrubbing Process
• Key parameter defining the economic and environmental performance of the process.
• CH4 is approximately 21 times stronger greenhouse gas than CO2 and high CH4 losses
negate the plant economy.
• CH4 losses are an integral part of the upgrading process, because a high CH4 level in the
upgraded gas stands in contradiction to low CH4 losses.
• Dependent on operating parameters (pressure, water flow rate, flash pressure, etc) and
conditions.
• CH4 losses cannot be avoided during the upgradation process but they can only be
minimised by maximum recovery of CH4 from off gas stream.
Treatment Methods for Off Gas (Methane Loss Minimization) from
Biogas Upgrading Plant
Treatment Methods Conclusion
Combustion in Lean Off gas is captured and mixed with Natural Gas or Complex and separate gas treatment
Burner / Torch Biogas facilities
Flared as a torch/ Used for combustion in the boiler Requires another energy source for
Thermal Oxidation Oxidation at high temperatures combustion/ treatment
Natural gas/biogas used for attaining high Requires sophisticated design and
temperatures careful sizing of the system
Thermal Catalytic Platinum, palladium or cobalt as catalyst Costly
Oxidation Catalytically oxidize CH4 to CO2 and water vapour at the Unfeasible
surface of the catalyst Oxidize CH4
Catalyst lowers the energy required for oxidation Does not recover CH4
Regenerative Thermal Heat transfer bed filled with porous ceramic media
Oxidation Oxidation takes place over the heated media
Flash Tank Off gas is depressurized in a flash tank at 2-4 bar and Simple equipment
CH4 is recovered and recirculated back into the raw gas CH4 recovery is dependent on pressure
inlet. and retention time of water in the
flash tank
Most preferable method of CH4 loss
minimization and recovery
CO2 Recovery and Utilisation from Off Gas Stream
••Conventionally,
Literature and data related
Carbon to CO
capture 2 recovery
and from biogas
storage (CCS) is oftenupgrading
associatedplants is rare
with flue gas
mixtures, it can also be combined with bio-energy conversion.
• This important area is yet to be explored.
• Off gas stream of the water scrubbing process can also be processed to recover CO2 as
•bioCO
Need2totodevelop
be used sophisticated
in different applications
method forlike
CO2manufacturing
separation andand synthesis
recovery of the
from salicyclic
off gas
acid, methanol,
stream of watercarbonates, polycarbonates etc. or can be used for algae production, in
scrubbing plant.
greenhouses and anaerobic digesters to provide CO2 rich environment and in warehouses
as a fumigant.
• The main feature of upgradation process is that separation of CO2 is already an intrinsic
step.
Factors Affecting CO2 Removal in Packed Bed Scrubber
Pressure
Temp⁰ 1 2.75 5
C
25 2.0*10-3 -
H2S
30 1.55*10-3 - 7.92*10-3 • At STP, the solubility for H2S is
25 0.609*10-3 3.02*10-3 approximately 2.5 and 73 times
CO2 higher than CO2 and CH4.
30 0.531*10-3 - 2.66*10-3
25 0.277*10-4 -
CH4
30 0.6*10-4 1.15*10-4
Effects of Operating and Design Factors on CO2 removal from
a Gas Mixture in Water Scrubbing Column
Packing
•Gas TheFlow
size of Rate
packing used influences the height and diameter of a column, the pressure drop and cost of
Pressure
packing.
• The solubility of a gas in water increases with increases in pressure. High pressures also decrease the quantity of
•• Sizing
As the packing size is increased, the cost per unit volume of packing and the pressure drop per unit height
solventParameter
required.
of packing
• Too low the are driving
reducedforce
which reduces
inside the mass
the tower is nottransfer efficiency.
high enough This efficient
to cause results inmass
a requirement
transfer. of taller
column height to achieve the required purity and separation.
Temperature
• As the gas flow rates are increased it causes better spreading capacity and enhanced mixing of the gas and
• Lowerwater causing mass in
temperature transfer
the to increase.
absorption tower is beneficial for the enhancement of CO2 absorption (solubility
Column Diameter
•• To increases
Very
avoid gas
with decrease
highchannelling
pressureindrop
in the temperature).
increases
column packed rapidly
with and water
random starts accumulating
packings, the diameter in of
thethe
upper part ofpacking
individual the column
preventing the flow of gas flooding condition.
pieces should be smaller than at least 1/8th the tower diameter.
• Too high
Water Flow Rate
gas flow rates can cause flooding in the column, however with high liquid flow rates flooding can occur
•Columneven- at lower
areagas
forflow
massrates.
Low Height
less transfer for gas molecules.
•• High - increase
Determines theineffectiveness
absorption ofofgasgasdue to the continuous
separation renewal
and the level of theofgas
of purity gasliquid boundary increase in the
required.
• concentration
Conventionally,ofawater molecules reacting
height-to-diameter with- 20:1
of 10:1 carbon dioxide
is used formolecules.
water scrubbing plants.
•• Too high -column
A higher reducedcancross sectional
separate area
more COavailable for flow of gas gas pressure drop increases flooding
2 from biogas with lower incoming biogas flow rates, whereas a
wider column can treat a larger volume of biogas.
Designing the Packed Bed Scrubber for CO2 removal from Biogas