Module configurations of membrane process substantially affect the biogas separation performances. In this article, the characteristics according to module configurations were investigated in terms of purity and recovery efficiency to improve the biogas availability through simultaneous utilization of carbon dioxide and methane. First, a single-stage permeation was tested, and methane having >97% purity was recovered, but the recovery efficiency dropped to below 40%; the simultaneous recovery of methane and carbon dioxide was impossible due to a trade-off. In carbon dioxide recovery experiment, high-purity carbon dioxide was recovered as well as almost all the methane in the biogas at >99% efficiency. In methane recovery experiment, high-purity methane (>97%) was produced, but recovery efficiency decreased to <71%. To improve methane recovery efficiency, low-quality gases (permeate gas of the second module, and retentate gas of the third module) were recycled to the feed; methane recovery efficiency subsequently improved, and high-purity carbon dioxide could be recovered at a high recovery efficiency. Finally, we discussed methods for effective biogas utilization according to module configurations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbatzoglouN., and BoivinS. (2009). A review of biogas purification processes. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefin., 3, 42.
2.
AgrawalR., and XuJ. (1996). Gas separation membrane cascades II. Two-compressor cascades. J. Membr. Sci., 112, 129.
3.
AhmadF., LauK.K., ShariffA.M., and MurshidG. (2012). Process simulation and optimal design of membrane separation system for CO2 capture from natural gas. Comput. Chem. Eng., 36, 119.
4.
AmiriS., HenningD., and KarlssonB.G. (2013). Simulation and introduction of a CHP plant in a Swedish biogas system. Renew Energy, 49, 242.
5.
BrunettiA., DrioliE., LeeY.M., and BarbieriG. (2014). Engineering evaluation of CO2 separation by membrane gas separation systems. J. Membr. Sci., 454, 305.
6.
BrunettiA., ScuraF., BarbieriG., and DrioliE. (2010). Membrane technologies for CO2 separation. J. Membr. Sci., 359, 115.
7.
ChenarM.P., SoltaniehM., MatsuuraT., Tabe-MohammadiA., and FengC. (2006). Gas permeation properties of commercial polyphenylene oxide and Cardo-type polyimide hollow fiber membranes. Sep. Purif. Technol., 51, 359.
8.
DattaA.K., and SenP.K. (2006). Optimization of membrane unit for removing carbon dioxide from natural gas. J. Membr. Sci., 283, 291.
9.
DengL., and HäggM.B. (2010). Techno-economic evaluation of biogas upgrading process using CO2 facilitated transport membrane. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control, 4, 638.
10.
FigueroaJ.D., FoutT., PlasynskiS., McIlvriedH., and SrivastavaR.D. (2008). Advances in CO2 capture technology—The U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Sequestration Program. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control, 2, 9.
11.
FreemanB.D. (1999). Basis of permeability/selectivity tradeoff relations in polymeric gas separation membranes. Macromolecules, 32, 375.
12.
HaoJ., RiceP.A., and SternS.A. (2008). Upgrading low-quality natural gas with H2S-and CO2-selective polymer membranes. Part II. Process design, economics, and sensitivity study of membrane stages with recycle streams. J. Membr. Sci., 320, 108.
13.
IovaneP., NannaF., DingY., BiksonB., and MolinoA. (2014). Experimental test with polymeric membrane for the biogas purification from CO2 and H2S. Fuel, 135, 352.
14.
KazamaS., and HarayaK. (2013). Optimization of CO2 concentration captured by membrane technology—Possibility of reduction in CO2 capture energy and cost. In Energy Procedia. 37, pp. 969–975.
15.
KohH.C., HaS.Y., WooS.M., NamS.Y., LeeB.S., LeeC.S., and ChoiW.M. (2011). Separation and purification of bio gas by hollow fiber gas separation membrane module. Korean Membr. J., 21, 177.
16.
LuisP., Van GervenT., and Van der BruggenB. (2012). Recent developments in membrane-based technologies for CO2 capture. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 38, 419.
17.
MakarukA., MiltnerM., and HarasekM. (2010). Membrane biogas upgrading processes for the production of natural gas substitute. Sep. Purif. Technol., 74, 83.
18.
MolinoA., MiglioriM., DingY., BiksonB., GiordanoG., and BraccioG. (2013a). Biogas upgrading via membrane process: Modelling of pilot plant scale and the end uses for the grid injection. Fuel, 107, 585.
19.
MolinoA., NannaF., DingY., BiksonB., and BraccioG. (2013b). Biomethane production by anaerobic digestion of organic waste. Fuel, 103, 1003.
20.
MolinoA., NannaF., and IovaneP. (2015). Low pressure biomethane production by anaerobic digestion (AD) for the smart grid injection. Fuel, 154, 319.
21.
MolinoA., NannaF., MiglioriM., IovaneP., DingY., and BiksonB. (2013c). Experimental and simulation results for biomethane production using peek hollow fiber membrane. Fuel, 112, 489.
22.
OstwalM., LauJ.M., OrmeC.J., StewartF.F., and WayJ.D. (2009). The influence of temperature on the sorption and permeability of CO2 in poly(fluoroalkoxyphosphazene) membranes. J. Membr. Sci., 344, 199.
23.
PeterssonA., and WellingerA. (2009). Biogas upgrading technologies-developments and innovations. Task 37. IEA Bioenergy.
24.
Pourafshari ChenarM., SoltaniehM., MatsuuraT., Tabe-MohammadiA., and SadeghiM. (2008). Application of Cardo-type polyimide (PI) and polyphenylene oxide (PPO) hollow fiber membranes in two-stage membrane systems for CO2/CH4 separation. J. Membr. Sci., 324, 85.
25.
RobesonL.M. (1991). Correlation of separation factor versus permeability for polymeric membranes. J. Membr. Sci., 62, 165.
26.
RobesonL.M. (2008). The upper bound revisited. J. Membr. Sci., 320, 390.
27.
RyckeboschE., DrouillonM., and VervaerenH. (2011). Techniques for transformation of biogas to biomethane. Biomass Bioenergy, 35, 1633.
28.
ScholesC.A., ChenG.Q., StevensG.W., and KentishS.E. (2010). Plasticization of ultra-thin polysulfone membranes by carbon dioxide. J. Membr. Sci., 346, 208.
29.
ScholzM., MelinT., and WesslingM. (2013). Transforming biogas into biomethane using membrane technology. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev., 17, 199.
30.
SongC. (2006). Global challenges and strategies for control, conversion and utilization of CO2 for sustainable development involving energy, catalysis, adsorption and chemical processing. Catal. Today, 115, 2.
31.
SongI., AhnH., JeonH., JeongH.K., LeeY., ChoiS.H., KimJ.H., and LeeS.B. (2008). Optimal design of multiple stage membrane process for carbon dioxide separation. Desalination, 234, 307.
32.
ThränD., BillingE., PerssonT., SvenssonM., Daniel-GromkeJ., PonitkaJ., SeiffertM., BaldwinJ., KranzlL., SchipferF., MatzenbergerJ., DevriendtN., DumontM., DahlJ., and BochmannG. (2014). Biomethane—Status and factors affecting market development and trade. IEA Bioenergy.
33.
WangX., ChenH., ZhangL., YuR., QuR., and YangL. (2014). Effects of coexistent gaseous components and fine particles in the flue gas on CO2 separation by flat-sheet polysulfone membranes. J. Membr. Sci., 470, 237.
34.
WardA.J., HobbsP.J., HollimanP.J., and JonesD.L. (2008). Optimisation of the anaerobic digestion of agricultural resources. Bioresour. Technol., 99, 7928.
35.
WeilandP. (2010). Biogas production: Current state and perspectives. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 85, 849.
36.
XuJ., and AgrawalR. (1996). Gas separation membrane cascades I. One-compressor cascades with minimal exergy losses due to mixing. J. Membr. Sci., 112, 115.
37.
YadvikaSantosh, SreekrishnanT.R., KohliS., and RanaV. (2004). Enhancement of biogas production from solid substrates using different techniques—A review. Bioresour. Technol., 95, 1.
38.
ZhangX., HeX., and GundersenT. (2013a). Post-combustion carbon capture with a gas separation membrane: Parametric study, capture cost, and exergy analysis. Energy Fuels, 27, 4137.
39.
ZhangY., SunarsoJ., LiuS., and WangR. (2013b). Current status and development of membranes for CO2/CH4 separation: A review. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control, 12, 84.
40.
ZhaoL., RienscheE., BlumL., and StoltenD. (2010). Multi-stage gas separation membrane processes used in post-combustion capture: Energetic and economic analyses. J. Membr. Sci., 359, 160.
41.
ZhaoL., RienscheE., WeberM., and StoltenD. (2012). Cascaded membrane processes for post-combustion CO2 capture. Chem. Eng. Technol., 35, 489.
