Abstract
Methanol production using reactive distillation (RD) is compared with the conventional process that uses a packed bed reactor and the three phase process involving a slurry reactor (SR). The RD column design was developed using a new methodology to remove the exothermic heat of reaction and overcome the equilibrium limitations. Both the conventional and RD-based processes are comparable in terms of the reactant conversions and production (~ 487 TPD and ~ 491 TPD, respectively), though the conventional process offers better methanol productivity (25.5 mol/(kg.h) vs. 14.8 mol/(kg.h) in case of RD). The SR based process has the lowest conversions of reactants and methanol production (~ 483 TPD) among the three processes, though its productivity is comparable to the RD based process. Though all the processes were self-sufficient in their energy requirements, the process involving the SR had the highest surplus power production of ~ 1.6 MW. The energy efficiency of both the processes was ~ 80% (syngas to methanol). In terms of the economics, the SR-based process has the lowest NPV and IRR due to higher production costs and low methanol production. The RD-based process has higher capital and operating costs leading to a lower net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), and greater payback period compared to the conventional PBR process. The RD-based process offered economic feasibility over a limited range in comparison with the conventional process, which exhibited economic viability over a wider range of raw material (syngas) costs and product (methanol) prices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Most of the data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this article and its supplementary information files. It can also be made available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Abbreviations
- CAGR:
-
Compounded annual growth rate
- CI:
-
Capital investment
- DPP:
-
Discounted payback period
- IRR:
-
Internal rate of return
- NPV:
-
Net present value
- PBR:
-
Packed bed reactor
- PC:
-
Production cost
- RD:
-
Reactive distillation
- RR:
-
Refluxed rectifier
- RS:
-
Reboiled stripper
- SR:
-
Slurry reactor
- r-WGS:
-
Reverse water gas shift
References
Alvarado M (2016) The changing face of the global methanol industry. IHS Chem Bull 10–11
Arora A, Iyer SS, Bajaj I, Hasan MMF (2018) Optimal methanol production via sorption-enhanced reaction process. Ind Eng Chem Res 57:14143–14161. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.8b02543
Bayat M, Hamidi M, Dehghani Z, Rahimpour MR, Shariati A (2014) Hydrogen/methanol production in a novel multifunctional reactor with in situ adsorption: modeling and optimization. Int J Energy Res 38:978–994. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.3092
Bozzano G, Manenti F (2016) Efficient methanol synthesis: perspectives, technologies and optimization strategies. Prog Energy Combust Sci 56:71–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2016.06.001
Bussche KMV, Froment GF (1996) A steady-state kinetic model for methanol synthesis and the water gas shift reaction on a commercial Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalyst. J Catal 10:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcat.1996.0156
Chen L, Jiang Q, Song Z, Posarac D (2011) Optimization of methanol yield from a lurgi reactor. Chem Eng Technol 34:817–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201000282
Chemical Engineering (2020) Chemical engineering plant cost index [WWW document]. URL https://www.chemengonline.com/pci. Accessed 10.6.20
Espino RL, Pletzke TS (1975) Methanol production. United States Patent 3 888-896
Gallucci F, Paturzo L, Basile A (2004) An experimental study of CO2 hydrogenation into methanol involving a zeolite membrane reactor. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 43:1029–1036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2003.10.005
Ghosh S (2021) Methanol synthesis using reactive distillation: modeling and simulation. PhD Thesis, IIT Bombay
Ghosh S, Seethamraju S (2019) Feasibility of reactive distillation for methanol synthesis. Chem Eng Process - Process Intensif 145:107673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2019.107673
Ghosh S, Seethamraju S (2020) Reactive distillation for methanol synthesis: parametric studies and optimization using a non-polar solvent. Process Integr Optim Sustain 4:325–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-020-00122-x
Ghosh S, Seethamraju S (2021) Process intensification with a polar solvent in liquid phase methanol synthesis. Process Integr Optim Sustain 5:827–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-021-00180-9
Graaf GH, Smit HJ, Stamhuis EJ, Beenackers AACM (1992) Gas-liquid solubilities of the methanol synthesis components in various solvents. J Chem Eng Data 37:146–158. https://doi.org/10.1021/je00006a004
Kobl K, Thomas S, Zimmermann Y, Parkhomenko K, Roger AC (2016) Power-law kinetics of methanol synthesis from carbon dioxide and hydrogen on copper-zinc oxide catalysts with alumina or zirconia supports. Catal Today 270:31–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2015.11.020
Luyben WL (2010) Design and control of a methanol reactor/column process. Ind Eng Chem Res 49:6150–6163. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie100323d
Makertiharta IGBN, Dharmawijaya PT, Wenten IG (2017) Current progress on zeolite membrane reactor for CO2 hydrogenation. AIP Conf Proc 1788:040001. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4968389
Methanex (2021) Methanex posts regional contract methanol prices for Europe, North America, Asia and China. [WWW Document]. URL: https://www.methanex.com/ourbusiness/pricing (accessed 12.18.21)
Methanol Institute (2020) Methanol price and supply/demand [WWW Document]. Methanol Inst. URL https://www.methanol.org/methanol-price-supply-demand/ (accessed 10.10.20).
Nemphos SP, Groten WA, Adams JR (1999) Process for production of methanol. United States Patent 5886055
Nieminen H, Givirovskiy G, Laari A, Koiranen T (2018) Alcohol promoted methanol synthesis enhanced by adsorption of water and dual catalysts. J CO2 Util 24 180–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2018.01.002
Olah GA, Goeppert A, Surya Prakash GK (2006) Beyond oil and gas: the methanol economy. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany
Pei P, Korom SF, Ling K, Nasah J (2016) Cost comparison of syngas production from natural gas conversion and underground coal gasification. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 21:629–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-014-9588-x
Peters MS, Timmerhaus KD (1991) Plant design and economics for chemical engineers, 4th ed. McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Pharmacompass (2021) Squalane [WWW Document]. URL https://www.pharmacompass.com/price/squalane (accessed 3.28.21).
Rahimpour MR, Ghader S (2003) Theoretical investigation of a pd-membrane reactor for methanol synthesis. Chem Eng Technol 26:902–907. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.200301717
Schühle P, Reichenberger S, Marzun G, Albert J (2020) Slurry phase hydrogenation of CO2 to methanol using supported In2O3 catalysts as promising approach for chemical energy storage. Chemie Ing Tech 93:585–593. https://doi.org/10.1002/cite.202000109
Struis RPWJ, Stucki S, Wiedorn M (1996) A membrane reactor for methanol synthesis. J Memb Sci 113:93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-7388(95)00222-7
Taylor R, Krishna R (2000) Modelling reactive distillation. Chem Eng Sci 55:5183–5229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2509(00)00120-2
van der Laan GP, Beenackers AACM, Ding B, Strikwerda JC (1999) Liquid-phase methanol synthesis in apolar (squalane) and polar (tetraethylene glycol dimethylether) solvents. Catal Today 48:93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-5861(98)00362-9
Westerterp KR, Kuczynski M (1987) A model for a countercurrent gas—solid—solid trickle flow reactor for equilibrium reactions. The Methanol Synthesis Chem Eng Sci 42:1871–1885. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(87)80134-3
Zhang C, Jun K-W, Gao R, Kwak G, Park H-G (2017) Carbon dioxide utilization in a gas-to-methanol process combined with CO2 /steam-mixed reforming: Techno-economic analysis. Fuel 190:303–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.11.008
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Industrial Research and Consultancy Centre, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay and Ministry of Human Resource Development, India, for providing the scholarship to SG during his graduate studentship. We also gratefully acknowledge Aspen Tech for providing the software used in this work. We also thank the anonymous reviewers whose comments have helped us in improving the presentation of this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
41660_2022_228_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Supplementary file1 Following information is available in the supporting information: method of optimizing the pressure of the low pressure separator (F-2), figures of PBR profiles, breakup of purchased equipment costs, effect of discount rate on NPV and DPP, and sensitivity of IRR to change in parameters. (DOCX 227 KB)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ghosh, S., Srinivas, S. Energy and Economic Analysis of Methanol Synthesis Using Reactive Distillation. Process Integr Optim Sustain 6, 527–541 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-022-00228-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-022-00228-4