The Role of Hydrogen Production in Landfill Gas

Utilization

The Role of Hydrogen Production in Landfill Gas

Utilization

Prepared ByKurt Kornbluth, Dr. Paul Erickson, Zach Mccafferty

Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering

and Rob Williams,Biological and Agricultural Engineering

Project ActivitiesProject Activities

– 1st Stakeholders workshopDefine Research Focus

– 2nd Stakeholders workshopPresent Draft Report

– Final Report

Report FocusReport Focus• California LFG Potential

• Producing Vehicle-grade hydrogen from LFG – Methods/Economics

• Hydrogen enrichment of LFG to reduce NOx emissions – Methods/Economics

California LFG PotentialCalifornia LFG Potential

Puente Hills

Spadra

Mission Canyon

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Me

tha

ne

(B

CF

/ye

ar)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Total Methane Production Recoverable Methane

LFG Methane Model ResultLFG Methane Model Result

85 billion cubic feet per year (BCF/y) methane produced and ~ 55 BCF/y recoverable in 2005

* Updated from California Biomass Collaborative Resource Reports

0

100

200

300

400

500

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Po

ten

tia

l H

yd

rog

en

(mil

lio

n g

all

on

s g

as

oli

ne

eq

uiv

ale

nt)

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

2.0

Po

ten

tia

l N

o.

of

Fu

el

Ce

ll V

eh

icle

s

(mil

lio

ns

)

All Recoverable LFG for H2

300 MW LFG-to- electricity w/ remaining Recoverable LFG for H2

Hydrogen Potential From LFG in CAHydrogen Potential From LFG in CA

Assumes fuel cell vehicle efficiency

is equivalent to 60 mpg gasoline

LFG to Hydrogen for Vehicle Fuel

LFG to Hydrogen for Vehicle Fuel

Scenarios ConsideredScenarios Considered

Case 4: LFG Capture-LFGTE

ResultsResults

Case Technology Scale

COE1 ($/kW-h)

LCH2 ($/kgH2)

FFCO2 offset (gCO2/KJ

LFG) 2

H2 Yield (g H2/KJ

LFG)

1 Flare n/a n/a n/a 0 0 2 SMR 480

(kgH2/day) .055 2.31 51 4.22

3 Electrolysis 480 (kgH2/day)

.055 5.76 24 2.0

4 LFGTE 800 kWe .055 n/a 30 0

1 For this analysis the cost of electricity (COE) was taken to be the cost of electricity produced from a typical LFGTE pro ject incorporating conventional lean burn IC engine technology, estimated by SBS engineers study to be to 0.055 $/kW-h. 2 Fossil-Fuel based CO2 was calculated from figures based on from National Academy of Sciences report “The Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities, Costs, Barriers, and R&D Needs ”.

Hydrogen Enrichment of Landfill Gas

(HLFG)

Hydrogen Enrichment of Landfill Gas

(HLFG)LFG

Engine

HydrogenHydrogen

LFG

AIR

Landfill

Clean -up

NOx ReductionScenarios

NOx ReductionScenarios

ResultsResultsScenario Engine Operation Capital

cost

($/kWh)

O&M costs

($/kWh)

LCE

($/kWh)

Estimated NOx (g/bhp-hr)

1 Lean burn 0.024 0.022 0.055 ~2.0

2 Lean burn with SCR 0.042 0.023 0.086 0.05 to 0.15

3 Microturbine 0.034 0.018 0.086 ~0.02

4 Lean burn with Onsite H2 storage

0.076 0.022 0.106 0.032 to 0.10

5 Lean burn with SM reformer 0.048 0.032 0.088 0.032 to 0.10

6 Lean burn with Electrolysis .052 0.039 0.100 0.032 to 0.10

7 Lean burn with in-stream reformer

0.028 0.022 0.058 0.032 to 0.10

Results SummaryResults Summary• H2 potential from LFG is 2% of California’s gasoline

usage • H2 from LFG may be cost-competitive but technical

hurdles exist in pre and post-process clean up

• Early H2 fueling stations will be demonstration-scale only

• HLFG has potential for lowering NOx emissions but is only viable If Hydrogen is produced via the LFG fuel-stream

RecommendationsRecommendations

– Proof-of-concept HLFG in an IC engine

– Demonstration-scale project for LFG-to-hydrogen for vehicle fuel

Questions?Questions?

LFG and Hydrogen

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

0.520.570.620.670.720.77

Equivalence Ratio

Bra

ke S

pecif

ic N

Ox (

10^

-3g

/kW

-hr)

0% H2

10% H2

20% H2

30% H2

40% H2

50% H2

Hydrogen cost vs Biomethane production costs

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Biomethane production costs ($/mmbtu)

hy

dro

ge

n g

ate

co

st

$/k

g H

2)

LFG-SMR

LFG-electrolysis (COE=.055 $/kw-h)

LFG-electrolysis (COE=.07 $/kw-h)

SCS Engineers Estimate

Estimating Hydrogen Potential from California Landfill Gas

Estimating Hydrogen Potential from California Landfill Gas

• Predicted LFG production from California landfills (2005-2025)

• Then estimate Hydrogen potential from LFG using assuming basic steam-methane-reforming (SMR) of natural gas

Landfill Gas Potential from California Landfills (2005-2025)

Landfill Gas Potential from California Landfills (2005-2025)

• Based on waste-in-place (WIP) since 1970 and projected future disposal– WIP since 1970 is approximately 1.1 billion tons

20

30

40

50

60

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Am

ou

nt

Lan

dfi

lled

(m

illio

n t

on

s)

Disposal growth from 42 to 53 million tons per year (2005-2025)

Landfill Gas Potential from California Landfills (2005-2025)

Landfill Gas Potential from California Landfills (2005-2025)

• Model similar to LandGEM (USEPA) first order decay model for LFG estimate

• Assumes waste has ultimate methane yield of 3,200 ft3/ton

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0 25 50 75 100Years since disposal

An

nu

al

Me

tha

ne

(f

t^3

/to

n/y

r)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Cu

mu

lati

ve

Me

tha

ne

(f

t^3

)

Model output for 1 ton of waste buried in year 0

ScopeScope

H2 Production Clean-up

Fuel Cell H2 Enrichment

Power GenerationElectricity Transportation

Landfill

LFG (CH4, CO2)

Vent FlareEnergy Recovery

CO2

removal/purification

High Purity CH4

CO2 recovery/sequestration