Comparing green hydrogen and green ammonia as energy carriers in utility-scale transport and subsurface storage

IF 5.8 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS
Anne H. Menefee , Brandon A. Schwartz
{"title":"Comparing green hydrogen and green ammonia as energy carriers in utility-scale transport and subsurface storage","authors":"Anne H. Menefee ,&nbsp;Brandon A. Schwartz","doi":"10.1016/j.egycc.2024.100163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many of the challenges associated with utility-scale hydrogen transport and storage relate to its low density, high diffusivity, and the risk of hydrogen embrittlement, motivating consideration to integrating ammonia as an energy carrier. Compared to hydrogen, ammonia is more compatible with pipeline materials and delivers energy at higher density. Ammonia is also a mature industry with a greater extent of established pipeline networks and regulations that may accelerate hydrogen transitions and penetration in energy grids. However, converting hydrogen produced by renewable-driven electrolysis into ammonia (and back to hydrogen, depending on end use) complicates logistics, and associated energy and resource demands may offset the green hydrogen's carbon neutrality. This work outlines core considerations for the use of hydrogen vs. ammonia during transport and storage operations, with an emphasis on green hydrogen or green ammonia pathways coupled to pipeline transport and underground storage. We compare tradeoffs in pipeline infrastructure and operations; subsurface storage options; and project economics. We also evaluate round-trip efficiencies (RTE) for both pathways, which indicate that hydrogen is more attractive from an energy efficiency perspective for hydrogen end-use applications due to the efficiency penalties of initial ammonia synthesis and subsequent cracking, but RTE's for ammonia transport and storage are comparable to hydrogen for direct use or ammonia-to-power systems. The tradeoffs presented in this work would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis, but indicate that selective use of ammonia as an energy-dense hydrogen carrier could support decarbonization goals in industry and hydrogen economies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72914,"journal":{"name":"Energy and climate change","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100163"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy and climate change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666278724000394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many of the challenges associated with utility-scale hydrogen transport and storage relate to its low density, high diffusivity, and the risk of hydrogen embrittlement, motivating consideration to integrating ammonia as an energy carrier. Compared to hydrogen, ammonia is more compatible with pipeline materials and delivers energy at higher density. Ammonia is also a mature industry with a greater extent of established pipeline networks and regulations that may accelerate hydrogen transitions and penetration in energy grids. However, converting hydrogen produced by renewable-driven electrolysis into ammonia (and back to hydrogen, depending on end use) complicates logistics, and associated energy and resource demands may offset the green hydrogen's carbon neutrality. This work outlines core considerations for the use of hydrogen vs. ammonia during transport and storage operations, with an emphasis on green hydrogen or green ammonia pathways coupled to pipeline transport and underground storage. We compare tradeoffs in pipeline infrastructure and operations; subsurface storage options; and project economics. We also evaluate round-trip efficiencies (RTE) for both pathways, which indicate that hydrogen is more attractive from an energy efficiency perspective for hydrogen end-use applications due to the efficiency penalties of initial ammonia synthesis and subsequent cracking, but RTE's for ammonia transport and storage are comparable to hydrogen for direct use or ammonia-to-power systems. The tradeoffs presented in this work would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis, but indicate that selective use of ammonia as an energy-dense hydrogen carrier could support decarbonization goals in industry and hydrogen economies.
比较绿色氢气和绿色氨气作为能源载体在公用事业规模运输和地下储存中的应用
公用事业规模的氢气运输和储存所面临的许多挑战与氢气的低密度、高扩散性和氢脆风险有关,这促使人们考虑将氨作为一种能源载体。与氢气相比,氨气与管道材料的兼容性更强,可提供更高密度的能量。氨也是一个成熟的行业,拥有更广泛的成熟管道网络和法规,可以加速氢在能源网中的过渡和渗透。然而,将可再生电解产生的氢转化为氨(根据最终用途再转化为氢)会使物流变得复杂,而且相关的能源和资源需求可能会抵消绿色氢气的碳中性。这项工作概述了在运输和储存过程中使用氢气与氨气的核心考虑因素,重点是与管道运输和地下储存相结合的绿色氢气或绿色氨气途径。我们比较了管道基础设施和运营、地下储存选项以及项目经济性方面的权衡。我们还对两种途径的往返效率(RTE)进行了评估,结果表明,由于初始氨合成和后续裂解的效率损失,从能源效率的角度来看,氢气对氢气终端应用更具吸引力,但氨气运输和储存的往返效率与直接使用氢气或氨气发电系统相当。这项工作中提出的权衡问题需要根据具体情况进行考虑,但表明有选择地使用氨作为高能量氢载体可支持工业和氢经济的脱碳目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy and climate change
Energy and climate change Global and Planetary Change, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信