Techno-Econometric Analysis of Membrane Technology for Biogas Upgrading

S. O. Masebinu; E. T. Akinlabi; Edison Muzenda; Charles Mbohwa; A. O. Aboyade

doi:10.1007/978-981-10-2717-8_34

Techno-Econometric Analysis of Membrane Technology for Biogas Upgrading

S. O. Masebinu, E. T. Akinlabi, Edison Muzenda, Charles Mbohwa, A. O. Aboyade

Chemical, Materials & Metallurgical Engineering

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

Abstract

Parametric study was conducted to investigate the effect of variation of process conditions for single stage without recycle (SSWR) and double stage with permeate recycle (DSPR) on product purity, CH4 recovery and compression power requirement. In the study, achieving high CH4 recovery and product purity simultaneously could not be attained in SSWR configuration. The performance of DSPR yielded a better result but with higher membrane area and compression power. In the economic studies, increase in CO2 and feed pressure increased the gas processing cost (GPC) while increase in flow rate decrease GPC based on economies of scale. At optimized condition, the calculated GPC was $0.46/m3 of biomethane . The NPV, IRR and BCR for producing biomethane were R15,240,343, 22.41 % and 2.05 respectively with a break-even in the 5th year. Using CBG over gasoline, the end user saves 34 % of annual fuel cost.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	WCECS 2015
Subtitle of host publication	Transactions on Engineering Technologies
Editors	S. I. Ao, H. Kim, M. Amouzegar
Publisher	Springer Singapore
Pages	481-497
ISBN (Electronic)	978-981-10-2717-8
ISBN (Print)	978-981-10-2716-1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2717-8_34
Publication status	Published - 2015

Access to Document

10.1007/978-981-10-2717-8_34

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Techno-Econometric Analysis of Membrane Technology for Biogas Upgrading'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Masebinu, S. O., Akinlabi, E. T., Muzenda, E., Mbohwa, C., & Aboyade, A. O. (2015). Techno-Econometric Analysis of Membrane Technology for Biogas Upgrading. In S. I. Ao, H. Kim, & M. Amouzegar (Eds.), WCECS 2015: Transactions on Engineering Technologies (pp. 481-497). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2717-8_34

@inproceedings{0f80e37df00f4798a0e312f4d4a7c4e6,

title = "Techno-Econometric Analysis of Membrane Technology for Biogas Upgrading",

abstract = "Parametric study was conducted to investigate the effect of variation of process conditions for single stage without recycle (SSWR) and double stage with permeate recycle (DSPR) on product purity, CH4 recovery and compression power requirement. In the study, achieving high CH4 recovery and product purity simultaneously could not be attained in SSWR configuration. The performance of DSPR yielded a better result but with higher membrane area and compression power. In the economic studies, increase in CO2 and feed pressure increased the gas processing cost (GPC) while increase in flow rate decrease GPC based on economies of scale. At optimized condition, the calculated GPC was $0.46/m3 of biomethane . The NPV, IRR and BCR for producing biomethane were R15,240,343, 22.41 % and 2.05 respectively with a break-even in the 5th year. Using CBG over gasoline, the end user saves 34 % of annual fuel cost.",

author = "Masebinu, {S. O.} and Akinlabi, {E. T.} and Edison Muzenda and Charles Mbohwa and Aboyade, {A. O.}",

year = "2015",

doi = "10.1007/978-981-10-2717-8_34",

language = "English",

isbn = "978-981-10-2716-1",

pages = "481--497",

editor = "Ao, {S. I.} and H. Kim and M. Amouzegar",

booktitle = "WCECS 2015",

publisher = "Springer Singapore",

address = "Singapore",

}

Techno-Econometric Analysis of Membrane Technology for Biogas Upgrading. / Masebinu, S. O.; Akinlabi, E. T.; Muzenda, Edison; Mbohwa, Charles; Aboyade, A. O.

WCECS 2015: Transactions on Engineering Technologies. ed. / S. I. Ao; H. Kim; M. Amouzegar. Springer Singapore, 2015. p. 481-497.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

TY - GEN

T1 - Techno-Econometric Analysis of Membrane Technology for Biogas Upgrading

AU - Masebinu, S. O.

AU - Akinlabi, E. T.

AU - Muzenda, Edison

AU - Mbohwa, Charles

AU - Aboyade, A. O.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Parametric study was conducted to investigate the effect of variation of process conditions for single stage without recycle (SSWR) and double stage with permeate recycle (DSPR) on product purity, CH4 recovery and compression power requirement. In the study, achieving high CH4 recovery and product purity simultaneously could not be attained in SSWR configuration. The performance of DSPR yielded a better result but with higher membrane area and compression power. In the economic studies, increase in CO2 and feed pressure increased the gas processing cost (GPC) while increase in flow rate decrease GPC based on economies of scale. At optimized condition, the calculated GPC was $0.46/m3 of biomethane . The NPV, IRR and BCR for producing biomethane were R15,240,343, 22.41 % and 2.05 respectively with a break-even in the 5th year. Using CBG over gasoline, the end user saves 34 % of annual fuel cost.

AB - Parametric study was conducted to investigate the effect of variation of process conditions for single stage without recycle (SSWR) and double stage with permeate recycle (DSPR) on product purity, CH4 recovery and compression power requirement. In the study, achieving high CH4 recovery and product purity simultaneously could not be attained in SSWR configuration. The performance of DSPR yielded a better result but with higher membrane area and compression power. In the economic studies, increase in CO2 and feed pressure increased the gas processing cost (GPC) while increase in flow rate decrease GPC based on economies of scale. At optimized condition, the calculated GPC was $0.46/m3 of biomethane . The NPV, IRR and BCR for producing biomethane were R15,240,343, 22.41 % and 2.05 respectively with a break-even in the 5th year. Using CBG over gasoline, the end user saves 34 % of annual fuel cost.

U2 - 10.1007/978-981-10-2717-8_34

DO - 10.1007/978-981-10-2717-8_34

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 978-981-10-2716-1

SP - 481

EP - 497

BT - WCECS 2015

A2 - Ao, S. I.

A2 - Kim, H.

A2 - Amouzegar, M.

PB - Springer Singapore

ER -