PTQ Q4 2023 Issue

Q What is your opinion on technology considered for low-carbon hydrogen and ammonia production and car- bon capture? A Mike Annon, Manager Energy Transition, Becht, man- non@becht.com The basic technologies related to low-carbon hydrogen and ammonia production have been in use for many years, while improvements in those technologies or newer technologies are continually evolving. The general categories of tech- nologies involved in low-carbon hydrogen and ammonia production include wind, solar, hydro, or nuclear power. A recent life-cycle assessment of the carbon footprint (mea- sured in gCO₂/KWh) of these four technologies results in an approximate 5:1 ratio. However, many more factors should be considered in determining the appropriate technology for a specific appli - cation, including (but not limited to): • Economics (cost to end user, incentives for the company, R&D required prior to proceeding, market available or needs to be developed) • Infrastructure (energy sources available, adequate water sources, delivery options) • Governmental issues (codes/standards and regulations in place or under development, government support or barrier) • People related (public awareness/support, workforce available and appropriately trained, safety concerns). Several examples where innovations being developed may impact these bespoke issues include (but are not lim- ited to) the following technologies: use of seawater, storage via ‘solid hydrogen’ (H₂-storing salts), use of a mechano - chemical process that can store gases safely in powders, and the use of rock caverns for green H₂ storage. In conclusion, it is our opinion that:  In the near term, technologies that generate blue hydro- gen/ammonia provide a technically and economically viable opportunity to begin the energy transition  In the longer term, technologies that generate green/ pink/turquoise hydrogen/ammonia must achieve scalable operation to help attain net zero initiatives. Note: This response does not specifically address the impacts of carbon pric - ing policies and tax incentives, which can vary significantly among various countries and regions. These carbon pricing policies and tax incentives can be powerful tools producing low-carbon hydrogen/ammonia. A Ken Chlapik, Global Market Manager, Johnson Matthey, ken.chlapik@matthey.com Johnson Matthey has a lot of experience with reforming and steam methane reforming (SMR) technology as an integral part of the methanol production process. SMR as a tech- nology has changed very little over the decades that it has been used in industry. However, the end use for the syngas produced has produced significant variation in how SMRs are run in different industries, such as methanol, hydrogen, ammonia, or steel production. In existing plants for established hydrogen and syngas applications, conventional SMR technology has been the predominant choice of technology.

However, as the world moves towards net zero, creat- ing large volumes of low-carbon-intensity hydrogen has become increasingly important to replace conventional fossil fuels like natural gas. To achieve the scale of hydrogen pro- duction needed, reforming technology combined with car- bon capture utilisation and storage (CCUS) is a key solution. A conventional SMR is a large refractory-lined box con- taining pressurised tubes that convert hydrocarbon feeds into syngas, a mix of H₂, CO, and CO₂. This technology also uses a fired heater to produce the energy that enables the reaction to take place. This fired heater combusts natu - ral gas and creates a low-concentration stream of CO₂ at atmospheric pressure. Although this can be captured, it requires large and expensive equipment and is harder to capture than CO₂ at process pressure. In comparison, autothermal reformer (ATR) technolo - gies use oxygen to drive the reforming reaction instead of burning natural gas in a fired heater. This means that in an ATR, there is no separate low concentration and pressure CO₂ stream from natural gas combustion, and CO₂ can be removed from the process side at relatively high pressure and purity. This removal can be done with well-established CO₂ separation technologies and requires significantly smaller and, therefore, cheaper equipment. Process side To achieve the scale of hydrogen production needed, reforming technology combined with carbon capture utilisation and storage is a key solution removal can be done in a conventional SMR but would only provide CO₂ reductions of around 50-60% as it misses the additional combustion CO₂. In an ATR-based flowsheet, this technique can enable CO₂ reductions of up to 99%. This means to produce CCS-enabled ‘blue’ hydrogen (low- carbon hydrogen), where reducing the maximum amount of CO₂ will be key to meeting stringent carbon intensity stan - dards, ATR-based flowsheets are a better fit than SMR. Johnson Matthey’s proprietary Advanced Reforming technologies include ATR and gas heated reforming (GHR), which are optimal for low-carbon hydrogen production. JM’s proprietary LCH GHR-ATR flowsheet is adept at producing hydrogen with very low CO₂ emissions (low-carbon hydro - gen). The exceptional efficiency of this flowsheet means it uses 10% less natural gas per unit of hydrogen compared to an SMR and, therefore, produces less CO₂ to be stored, which also enables a lower levelised cost of hydrogen. The high efficiency of the LCH technology originates from the use of a GHR, which reduces the amount of combustion needed for the conversion of hydrocarbons. It also minimises the size of thermal gradients in the flowsheet by transferring heat back into endothermic reforming reactions in the GHR rather than eroding high-grade energy by using it for steam production. By doing this, the fundamental energy efficiency of the flowsheet is maximised.

PTQ Q4 2023