Comparative techno-economic analysis of biohydrogen production via bio-oil gasification and bio-oil reforming

This paper evaluates the economic feasibility of biohydrogen production via two bio-oil processing pathways: bio-oil gasification and bio-oil reforming. Both pathways employ fast pyrolysis to produce bio-oil from biomass stock. The two pathways are modeled using Aspen Plus® for a 2000 t d−1 facility. Equipment sizing and cost calculations are based on Aspen Economic Evaluation® software. Biohydrogen production capacity at the facility is 147 t d−1 for the bio-oil gasification pathway and 160 t d−1 for the bio-oil reforming pathway. The biomass-to-fuel energy efficiencies are 47% and 84% for the bio-oil gasification and bio-oil reforming pathways, respectively. Total capital investment (TCI) is 435 million dollars for the bio-oil gasification pathway and is 333 million dollars for the bio-oil reforming pathway. Internal rates of return (IRR) are 8.4% and 18.6% for facilities employing the bio-oil gasification and bio-oil reforming pathways, respectively. Sensitivity analysis demonstrates that biohydrogen price, biohydrogen yield, fixed capital investment (FCI), bio-oil yield, and biomass cost have the greatest impacts on facility IRR. Monte-Carlo analysis shows that bio-oil reforming is more economically attractive than bio-oil gasification for biohydrogen production.

► Biohydrogen production via bio-oil reforming has higher energy efficiency compared to gasification.
► Hydrogen price, fixed capital cost, and feedstock cost most strongly affect IRR.
► Lower risk investment is biohydrogen production via bio-oil reforming.