Shuanshi Fan

Intensification of methane and hydrogen storage in clathrate hydrate and future prospect

Gas hydrate is a new technology for energy gas (methane/hydrogen) storage due to its large capacity of gas storage and safe. But industrial application of hydrate storage process was hindered by some problems. For methane, the main problems are low formation rate and storage capacity, which can be solved by strengthening mass and heat transfer, such as adding additives, stirring, bubbling, etc. One kind of additives can change the equilibrium curve to reduce the formation pressure of methane hydrate, and the other kind of additives is surfactant, which can form micelle with water and increase the interface of water-gas. Dry water has the similar effects on the methane hydrate as surfactant. Additionally, stirring, bubbling, and spraying can increase formation rate and storage capacity due to mass transfer strengthened. Inserting internal or external heat exchange also can improve formation rate because of good heat transfer. For hydrogen, the main difficulties are very high pressure for hydrate formed. Tetrahydrofuran (THF), tetrabutylammonium bromide (TBAB) and tetrabutylammonium fluoride (TBAF) have been proved to be able to decrease the hydrogen hydrate formation pressure significantly.

Clathrate Hydrate Capture of CO2 from Simulated Flue Gas with Cyclopentane/Water Emulsion

Abstract Capture of CO 2 by hydrate is one of the attractive technologies for reducing greenhouse effect. The primary challenges are the large energy consumption, low hydrate formation rate and separation efficiency. This work presents a new method for capture of CO 2 from simulated flue gas [CO 2 (16.60%, by mole)/N 2 binary mixture] by formation of cyclopentane (CP) hydrates at initial temperature of 8.1 °C with the feed pressures from 2.49 to 3.95 MPa. The effect of cyclopentane and cyclopentane/water emulsion on the hydrate formation rate and CO 2 separation efficiency was studied in a 1000 ml stirred reactor. The results showed the hydrate formation rate could be increased remarkably with cyclopentane/water emulsion. CO 2 could be enriched to 43.97% (by mole) and 35.29% (by mole) from simulated flue gas with cyclopentane and cyclopentane/water (O/W) emulsion, respectively, by one stage hydrate separation under low feed pressure. CO 2 separation factor with cyclopentane was 6.18, higher than that with cyclopentane/water emulsion (4.01), in the range of the feed pressure. The results demonstrated that cyclopentane/water emulsion is a good additive for efficient hydrate capture of CO 2 .

Economic Comparison of Three Gas Separation Technologies for CO2 Capture from Power Plant Flue Gas

Abstract Three gas separation technologies, chemical absorption, membrane separation and pressure swing adsorption, are usually applied for CO 2 capture from flue gas in coal-fired power plants. In this work, the costs of the three technologies are analyzed and compared. The cost for chemical absorption is mainly from

Experimental investigation of methane hydrate decomposition by depressurizing in porous media with 3-Dimension device

30 to

Kinetic hydrate inhibitor performance of new copolymer poly（N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone-co-2-vinyl pyridine）s with TBAB

60 per ton (based on CO 2 avoided), while the minimum value is

Accelerated nucleation of tetrahydrofuran (THF) hydrate in presence of ZIF-61

10 per ton (based on CO 2 avoided). As for membrane separation and pressure swing adsorption, the costs are

A model for estimating flow assurance of hydrate slurry in pipelines

50 to

Promoting effect of super absorbent polymer on hydrate formation

78 and

Experimental study on flow characteristics of tetrahydrofuran hydrate slurry in pipelines

40 to

CO 2 removal from natural gas by hydrate formation

63 per ton (based on CO 2 avoided), respectively. Measures are proposed to reduce the cost of the three technologies. For CO 2 capture and storage process, the CO 2 recovery and purity should be greater than 90%. Based on the cost, recovery, and purity, it seems that chemical absorption is currently the most cost-effective technology for CO 2 capture from flue gas from power plants. However, membrane gas separation is the most promising alternative approach in the future, provided that membrane performance is further improved.