Comparative Evaluation of PSA, PVSA, and Twin PSA Processes for Biogas Upgrading: The Purity, Recovery, and Energy Consumption Dilemma
Author:
Golmakani Ayub1, Wadi Basil2ORCID, Manović Vasilije1, Nabavi Seyed Ali1ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Centre for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy, Cranfield University, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK 2. Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
Abstract
The current challenges of commercial cyclic adsorption processes for biogas upgrading are associated with either high energy consumption or low recovery. To address these challenges, this work evaluates the performance of a range of configurations for biogas separations, including pressure swing adsorption (PSA), pressure vacuum swing adsorption (PVSA), and twin double-bed PSA, by dynamic modelling. Moreover, a sensitivity analysis was performed to explore the effect of various operating conditions, including adsorption time, purge-to-feed ratio, biogas feed temperature, and vacuum level, on recovery and energy consumption. It was found that the required energy for a twin double-bed PSA to produce biomethane with 87% purity is 903 kJ/kg CH4 with 90% recovery, compared to 961 kJ/kg CH4 and 76% recovery for a PVSA process. With respect to minimum purity requirements, increasing product purity from 95.35 to 99.96% resulted in a 32% increase in energy demand and a 23% drop in recovery, illustrating the degree of loss in process efficiency and the costly trade-off to produce ultra-high-purity biomethane. It was concluded that in processes with moderate vacuum requirements (>0.5 bar), a PVSA should be utilised when a high purity biomethane product is desirable. On the other hand, to minimise CH4 loss and enhance recovery, a twin double-bed PSA should be employed.
Subject
Energy (miscellaneous),Energy Engineering and Power Technology,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment,Electrical and Electronic Engineering,Control and Optimization,Engineering (miscellaneous),Building and Construction
Reference41 articles.
1. EurObserv’ER Consortium (2020). The State of Renewable Energies in Europe, European Commission. [2019 ed.]. 2. (2022, April 20). Biomethane: An Easy Answer to the Complex Equation of Transport Decarbonization. Available online: https://www.ngva.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/NGVA-Europe_Biomethane_May2020.pdf. 3. Sulewski, P., Ignaciuk, W., Szymańska, M., and Wąs, A. (2023). Development of the Biomethane Market in Europe. Energies, 16. 4. Advances, challenges, and perspectives of biogas cleaning, upgrading, and utilisation;Golmakani;Fuel,2022 5. Selection of appropriate biogas upgrading technology—A review of biogas cleaning, upgrading and utilisation;Sun;Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.,2015
|
|