Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/104167
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering-
dc.creatorYang, Sen_US
dc.creatorXiao, Zen_US
dc.creatorDeng, Cen_US
dc.creatorLiu, Zen_US
dc.creatorZhou, Hen_US
dc.creatorRen, Jen_US
dc.creatorZhou, Ten_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-05T08:46:52Z-
dc.date.available2024-02-05T08:46:52Z-
dc.identifier.issn0959-6526en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/104167-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier BVen_US
dc.rights© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.rights© 2020. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Yang, S., Xiao, Z., Deng, C., Liu, Z., Zhou, H., Ren, J., & Zhou, T. (2020). Techno-economic analysis of coal-to-liquid processes with different gasifier alternatives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 120006 is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120006.en_US
dc.subjectLurgi gasifieren_US
dc.subjectShell gasifieren_US
dc.subjectTechno-economic analysisen_US
dc.subjectTexaco gasifieren_US
dc.titleTechno-economic analysis of coal-to-liquid processes with different gasifier alternativesen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume253en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120006en_US
dcterms.abstractConsidering the current national conditions of China, developing coal-to-liquid process is an attractive way to alleviate the domestic oil crisis. Coal-to-liquid process mainly includes six subsystems and the most essential unit of the system is the gasification unit. This paper aims to provide suggestions for the cleaner production and sustainable development of coal-to-liquid technology. Lurgi, Texaco, and Shell coal-to-liquid process are modelled and simulated. The techno-economic analysis is conducted to investigate their performance using simulation-based results. Results showed that the greenhouse gas emissions of Lurgi, Texaco, and Shell coal-to-liquid process are 5.26 t/t fuel, 4.86 t/t fuel, and 3.49 t/t fuel. Lurgi coal-to-liquid has better performance on reducing oxygen cost and total investment; Texaco coal-to-liquid is advantageous in saving steam cost and production cost; Shell coal-to-liquid shows better performance in terms of energy efficiency, reducing the consumption of coal and water, and greenhouse gas emission. Shell gasifier is recommended in water-deficient areas. Texaco gasifier is recommended when access to water and coal is sufficient. Lurgi gasifier is recommended in pilot-scale projects. In the view of sustainable development, Shell gasifier is prior to Texaco gasifier and Lurgi gasifier because of the low greenhouse gas emission and well resistance to high coal price and high carbon taxes. Gasification unit occupies the largest proportion of total capital investment of coal-to-liquid processes and significantly affects the syngas composition. Coal gasification technology is potentially limiting the overall acceptance and practice of coal-to-liquid process in the future.-
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationJournal of cleaner production, 20 Apr. 2020, v. 253, 120006en_US
dcterms.isPartOfJournal of cleaner productionen_US
dcterms.issued2020-04-20-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85077770207-
dc.identifier.artn120006en_US
dc.description.validate202402 bcch-
dc.description.oaAccepted Manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberISE-0323-
dc.description.fundingSourceRGCen_US
dc.description.fundingSourceOthersen_US
dc.description.fundingTextThe National Natural Science Foundation of Chinaen_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.identifier.OPUS24761052-
dc.description.oaCategoryGreen (AAM)en_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Ren_Techno-economic_Analysis_Processes.pdfPre-Published version1.58 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Final Accepted Manuscript
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

93
Last Week
8
Last month
Citations as of Nov 30, 2025

Downloads

202
Citations as of Nov 30, 2025

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

49
Citations as of Dec 19, 2025

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

42
Citations as of Dec 18, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.