Gas 2023 Issue

Hydrogen Roundtable 2023

W ith the increase in hydrogen demand for refinery hydroprocessing operations, ammonia production, and as a future fuel for the transportation industry, industry experts were asked to weigh in on the most attrac- tive options for hydrogen production. Worldwide interest in green hydrogen is an important segment of many industry forums on hydrogen. However, its commercial production is still insignificant. For now, the focus is to continue improving the main source of hydrogen production. That is, from steam methane reforming (SMR) and the technology needed to significantly reduce CO 2 emissions from SMR furnaces. PTQ asked industry hydrogen experts: what are the most attractive long-term options for incorporating autothermal reforming (ATR) and/or partial oxidation (POX) to produce blue hydrogen at near-zero CO 2 emissions? Or can CO 2 emissions from SMR units be further reduced? Scott Miller, Principal Engineer, Gas Processing, Honeywell UOP/Ortloff Engineers, scott.a.miller@honeywell.com Current SMR units can reduce CO 2 emissions from on-site hydrogen production by approximately 60% through the addition of pre-combustion carbon capture to an existing SMR unit and by over 90% by adding post-combustion car- bon capture to an existing unit, which significantly reduces the process Scope 1 emissions. When designing a new unit and leveraging ATR or POX technology with carbon capture to produce hydrogen, over 98% of the CO 2 emissions from the process can be cap- tured. These technologies are, therefore, very attractive when minimising Scope 1 emissions is critical, which will be driven by policies focused on reducing the carbon intensity of hydrogen production. ATR and POX also typically benefit from economies of scale, making them the most economical way to produce lower-carbon hydrogen in large quantities as demand for hydrogen grows. Ken Chlapik, Global Market Manager, and Dominic Winch, Market Analyst, Low Carbon Solutions, Johnson Matthey, Ken.Chlapik@matthey.com and Dominic.Winch@mat- they.com The answer to this question depends on the end user’s pace, amount of Scope 1 and 2 CO 2 emissions to be addressed, capital applied, risk appetite, and CCS avail- ability of their facility. Established technologies are ready now to produce low carbon intensity syngas production on existing syngas plants as well as new grassroots produc- tion. Johnson Matthey (JM) has a portfolio of technologies that can provide low carbon intensity syngas production to different levels of quality and scale, as well as utilising CO 2- laden streams and captured CO 2 to produce chemical intermediates and other value-added fuels and products. With many operators, there is a desire to increase produc- tion along with reducing CO 2 emissions. JM’s proprietary

CleanPace solutions focus on existing SMR units. By apply- ing established JM Advanced Reforming technologies such as ATR and gas heated reforming (GHR), we can provide reductions in CO 2 emissions and create increased produc- tion in a low carbon intensity retrofit that applies estab - lished precombustion carbon capture technologies, which enable high levels (>95% removal). Over 0.5 million t/y of CO 2 emissions can be captured on typical large-scale hydrogen plants with a reduced site footprint to post-com- bustion technology solutions. The SMR-based hydrogen plant is the largest point source of CO 2 emissions on the downstream refinery, but there are a few other sources as well, in particular fired heaters. Some operators are looking beyond the SMR to address a larger portion of their CO 2 emissions by replacing existing fossil-based fuels with hydrogen. This is a much more sub- stantial CO 2 emission project requiring more capital and a new grassroots low-carbon hydrogen plant with CCS. This will be a much larger hydrogen plant than what exists for hydroprocessing of clean fuels within the refin - ery. JM’s LCH technology, which also utilises JM’s Advanced Reforming, provides a magnitude lower carbon intensity and less energy to produce this hydrogen fuel application. An example of this is the HyNET project in the UK, which, at a demo level of hydrogen energy production, is a world- scale-sized hydrogen plant in today’s market. The LCH plant is the source of the process hydrogen and hydrogen fuel in one of the largest hydrogen hubs being funded in the globe that includes a refinery, steel, and ammonia produc - tion facility to utilise the hydrogen. Future phases of this project will be at a hydrogen production scale of three times the current world scale. Other operators are focusing on monetising CO 2 -laden streams that exist within the refinery or near the facility to provide value-added chemical intermediates and fuels within and outside the refinery. JM’s low carbon inten - sity technologies, such as Precision Methanol technology, which utilises JM’s Advanced Reforming ATR technology and HyCOgen reverse water gas shift technology, can convert these streams to chemical intermediates and fuels such as SAF. All these technologies and applications can provide attractive solutions to reducing a facility’s Scope 1 and 2 CO 2 emissions. Andrew Layton, Principal Consultant, KBC, andew.lay- ton@kbc.global CO 2 emissions from SMRs can be reduced by maximising design efficiency. Compared to units from the 1980s, mod - ern units are typically at least 10% more efficient because they use a PSA to purify hydrogen instead of CO 2 scrub- bing. In addition, enhancing the design and, to a lesser extent, the catalysts has also improved SMR efficiency. While the efficiency of an existing SMR can be improved to

Gas 2023