Next Article in Journal
A Cable Defect Assessment Method Based on a Mixed-Domain Multi-Feature Set of Overall Harmonic Signals
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Simulation on Pore Size Multiphase Flow Law Based on Phase Field Method
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Thermodynamic and Techno-Economic Performance Comparison of Methanol Aqueous Phase Reforming and Steam Reforming for Hydrogen Production

1
School of Chemical Engineering and Light Industry, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China
2
School of Environmental Science and Technology, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2025, 18(1), 81; https://doi.org/10.3390/en18010081
Submission received: 11 December 2024 / Revised: 21 December 2024 / Accepted: 26 December 2024 / Published: 28 December 2024

Abstract

Methanol, which can be derived from sustainable energy sources such as biomass, solar power, and wind power, is widely considered an ideal hydrogen carrier for distributed and mobile hydrogen production. In this study, a comprehensive comparison of the thermodynamic and techno-economic performance of the aqueous phase reforming (APR) and steam reforming (SR) of methanol was conducted using Aspen Plus and CAPCOST software to evaluate the commercial feasibility of the APR process. Thermodynamic analysis, based on the Gibbs free energy minimization method, reveals that while APR and SR have similar energy demands, APR achieves higher energy efficiency by avoiding losses from evaporation and compression. APR typically operates at higher pressures and lower temperatures compared to SR, suppressing CO formation and increasing hydrogen fraction but reducing methanol single-pass conversion. A techno-economic comparison of APR and SR for a distributed hydrogen production system with a 50 kg/h hydrogen output shows that although APR requires higher fixed operating costs and annual capital charges, it benefits from lower variable operating costs. The minimum hydrogen selling price for APR was calculated to be 7.07 USD/kg, compared to 7.20 USD/kg for SR. These results suggest that APR is a more economically viable alternative to SR for hydrogen production.
Keywords: methanol; hydrogen; aqueous phase reforming; steam reforming; thermodynamic analysis; techno-economic analysis methanol; hydrogen; aqueous phase reforming; steam reforming; thermodynamic analysis; techno-economic analysis

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hu, C.; Xu, C.; Xi, X.; He, Y.; Wang, T. Thermodynamic and Techno-Economic Performance Comparison of Methanol Aqueous Phase Reforming and Steam Reforming for Hydrogen Production. Energies 2025, 18, 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18010081

AMA Style

Hu C, Xu C, Xi X, He Y, Wang T. Thermodynamic and Techno-Economic Performance Comparison of Methanol Aqueous Phase Reforming and Steam Reforming for Hydrogen Production. Energies. 2025; 18(1):81. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18010081

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hu, Changsong, Chao Xu, Xiaojun Xi, Yao He, and Tiejun Wang. 2025. "Thermodynamic and Techno-Economic Performance Comparison of Methanol Aqueous Phase Reforming and Steam Reforming for Hydrogen Production" Energies 18, no. 1: 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18010081

APA Style

Hu, C., Xu, C., Xi, X., He, Y., & Wang, T. (2025). Thermodynamic and Techno-Economic Performance Comparison of Methanol Aqueous Phase Reforming and Steam Reforming for Hydrogen Production. Energies, 18(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18010081

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop