Production of Hydrogen from Aqueous Phase Reforming of Glycerol: Economic Evaluation

Rodolfo Salazar Pérez, Mariana M. V. M. Souza, Neyda C. Om Tapanes, Gisel Chenard Diaz, Donato A. G. Aranda

Chemical School, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
State University of Western of Rio de Janeiro (UEZO), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

DOI: 10.4236/eng.2014.61003                

Abstract

Glycerol is the main byproduct from the production of biodiesel by transesterification of vegetable oils, and approximately 10% of total biodiesel production volume corresponds to glycerol. The profitability of various chemical processes depends, in part, on the sale of byproducts, which enables a reduction in the production costs and consequently, in the product’s final price. Thus, it is necessary to look for alternatives to solve the problem of glycerol buildup, in order to avoid future environmental impacts and make biodiesel competitive in the growing market of biofuels. In this context, this study’s objective is the development of a low cost and environmental clean technology that allows the conversion of glycerin into a greater value product. In this paper, an economic evaluation of production hydrogen using Aqueous Phase Reforming (APR) was conducted. Firstly, we detailed the technical assumptions in the study. Reactions were performed in batch reformer of 10 liters of capacity, at the temperature of 250℃ and pressure of 38 atm. Finally, a sensitivity analysis was performed. The results from economic evaluation show that APR of glycerol, using nickel catalysts supported on alumina or zirconium oxide, is a promising and competitive technology for hydrogen production.

Keywords

Glycerol; Hydrogen; Aqueous Phase Reforming; Economic Analysis

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	R. H. Perry, D. W. Green and J. O. Maloney, “Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook,” McGraw-Hill, New York, 1997.
[2]	R. Aguilar, J. A. Ramirez, G. Garrote and M. Vazquez, “Kinetic Study of the Acid Hydrolysis of Sugar Cane Bagasse,” Journal of Food Engineering, Vol. 55, No. 4, 2002, pp. 309-318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(02)00106-1
[3]	N. N. Nichio, M. L. Casella, G. F. Santori, E. N. PonzI and O. A. Ferretti, “Stability Promotion of Ni/γ-Al2O3 Catalysts by Tin Added via Surface Organometallic Chemistry on Metals, Application in Methane Reforming Processes,” Catalysis Today, Vol. 62, No. 2-3, 2000, pp. 231-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0920-5861(00)00424-7
[4]	S. Adhikari, S. D. Fernando and A. Haryanto, “Hydrogen Production from Glycerin by Steam Reforming over Nickel Catalysts,” Renew Energy, Vol. 33, No. 5, 2008, pp. 1097-1100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2007.09.005
[5]	J. D. A. Bellido and E. M. Asaf, “Nickel Catalysts Supported on ZrO2, Y2O3-Stabilized ZrO2 and CaO-Stabilized ZrO2 for the Steam Reforming of Ethanol: Effect of the Support and Nickel Load”, Journal of Power Sources, Vol. 177, No. 1, 2008, pp. 24-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2007.11.006
[6]	Y. Li, B. Zhang, X. Tang, Y. Xu and W. Shen, “Hydrogen Production from Methane Decomposition over Ni/CeO2 Catalysts,” Catalysis Communications, Vol. 7, No. 6, 2006, pp. 380-386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.catcom.2005.12.002
[7]	R. L. Manfro, “Produ??o de Hidrogênio a partir da Reformaemfaseliquida do Glicerol e do Hidrolisado de Baga?o de Cana de A?úcar,” Master Dissertation, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 2009.
[8]	R. R. Davda, J. W. Shabaker, G. W. Huber, R. D. Cortright and J. A. Dumesic, “A Review of Catalytic Issues and Process Conditions for Renewable Hydrogen and Alkanes by Aqueous-Phase Reforming of Oxygenated Hydrocarbons over Supported Metal Catalysts,” Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, Vol. 56, No. 1-2, 2005, pp. 171-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2004.04.027
[9]	R. L. Manfro, A. F. Costa, N. F. P. Ribeiro and M. M. V. M. Souza, “Hydrogen Production by Aqueous-Phase Reforming of Glycerol over Nickel Catalysts Supported on CeO2,” Fuel Processing Technology, Vol. 92, No. 3, 2011, pp. 330-335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2010.09.024
[10]	Sigma Aldrich, “Reagent Grade,” 2009. www.sigmaaldrich.com
[11]	US Department of Energy, “Cost and Performance Comparison of Stationary Hydrogen Fueling Appliances,” The Hydrogen Program Office of Power Technologies, 2002. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/32405b2.pdf
[12]	B. Muthen and D. Kaplan, “A Comparison of Some Methodologies for the Factor Analysis of Non-Normal Likert Variables,” British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, Vol. 38, 1985, pp. 171-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x