Engineering topics
Li, Wenqin
Publications and source records attributed to Li, Wenqin.
The cost of CO2 transport by truck and rail in the United States
Not Available
Electrolyzer energy dominates separation costs in state-of-the-art CO 2 electrolyzers: Implications for single-pass CO 2 utilization
In low-temperature CO 2 electrolysis, a fundamental trade-off exists between maximizing electrolyzer performance and minimizing downstream CO 2 recovery. Here, by coupling a down-the-gas-channel electrolyzer model with a techno-economic analysis, we find that the optimal single-pass CO 2 conversion for ethylene production is typically low—on the order of 5%–10%—although larger optima are found if the H 2 faradic efficiency is very low. Similarly, strategies for eliminating carbonate crossover require more energy than downstream gas separation if they increase the cell potential by ~0.2 V; however, when CAPEX are accounted for, this “break-even” voltage increases to ~ 0.4 to 0.8 V for electricity prices varying from 6c/kWh to 1.5c/kWh. These findings are a consequence of the low energy requirements of industrial gas separation relative to electrochemical CO 2 reduction. Under most circumstances, maintaining near-optimal electrolyzer performance is more important than reducing or eliminating downstream gas separations.
Cost and Life Cycle Emissions of Ethanol Produced with an Oxyfuel Boiler and Carbon Capture and Storage
Not Available
Comparative Techno-Economic and Life Cycle Analysis of Water Oxidation and Hydrogen Oxidation at the Anode in a CO 2 Electrolysis to Ethylene System
We compare the economic viability of employing hydrogen oxidation versus water oxidation at the anode of a commercial-scale electrolysis plant that converts CO 2 to ethylene. We vary the electrolyzer capital cost, membrane lifetime, and renewable electricity price to represent a current and future market scenario. We find that anodic hydrogen oxidation with membraneless reactor design can reduce the electrolyzer capital cost by up to 48% and reduce electricity demand by at least 50% with the current underdeveloped electrolyzer market. These capital and operating cost savings could further lead to a lower ethylene production cost from anodic hydrogen oxidation than the anodic water oxidation system with hydrogen supplied at less than $\$6$ kg. In the future scenario with a fully developed electrolyzer market and cheap renewable electricity, we find that the anodic hydrogen oxidation system requires hydrogen cheaper than $0.7/kg to compete with the anodic water oxidation system. Moreover, hydrogen oxidation at the anode enables extremely low cradle-to-gate emission ethylene by utilizing negative emission hydrogen such as biomass gasification with carbon capture and sequestration, ~240% lower than ethylene produced from the wind/solar electricity-driven water oxidation system. Furthermore, this low carbon footprint ethylene can further boost the economic competitiveness for anodic hydrogen oxidation with a future carbon credit market.
Transport Cost for Carbon Removal Projects With Biomass and CO2 Storage
Strategies to remove carbon from the atmosphere are needed to meet global climate goals. Promising strategies include the conversion of waste biomass to hydrogen, methane, liquid fuels, or electricity coupled with CO 2 capture and storage (CCS). A key challenge for these projects is the need to connect geographically dispersed biomass supplies with geologic storage sites by either transporting biomass or CO 2 . We assess the cost of transport for biomass conversion projects with CCS using publicly available cost data for trucking, rail, and CO 2 pipelines in the United States. We find that for large projects (order of 1 Mt/yr CO 2 or greater), CO 2 by pipeline is the lowest cost option. However, for projects that send most of the biomass carbon to storage, such as gasification to hydrogen or electricity production, biomass by rail is a competitive option. For smaller projects and lower fractions of carbon sent to storage, such as for pyrolysis to liquid fuels, CO 2 by rail is the lowest cost option. Assessing three plausible example projects in the United States, we estimate that total transport costs range from $24/t-CO 2 stored for a gasification to hydrogen project traversing 670 km to $\$ 36$/t for a gasification to renewable natural gas project traversing 530 km. In general, if developers have flexibility in choosing transport mode and project type, biomass sources and storage sites can be connected across hundreds of kilometers for transport costs in the range of $20-40/t-CO 2 stored. Truck and rail are often viable modes when pipelines cannot be constructed. Distances of 1,000 km or more can be connected in the same cost range when shared CO 2 pipelines are employed.