Energy consumption, environmental performance, and techno-economic feasibility analysis of the biomass-to-hydrogen process with and without carbon capture and storage.

Owing to the negative environmental impact and safety problems of fossil fuel resources, chemical processes based on renewable energy have been extensively studied for further development. In this study, the thermodynamic, economic, and environmental performances of biomass-to-hydrogen (BTH) conversion were assessed using corn straw as a raw material. Further, the process used to achieve BTH conversion with/without carbon capture and storage (CCS) was evaluated and analyzed in this study. According to the simulation results, the economic and environmental properties of BTH processes using different CO 2 capture rates were evaluated via thermodynamics and life cycle assessment. Compared with the biomass hydrogen production process without CCS, the EC of the BTH process with CCS decreased by 17%. However, the total investment and production cost of biomass hydrogen production with CCS increased by 1.3% and 14.6–19.4%, respectively. The energy efficiency of BTH conversion with CCS was 17% lower than that of BTH conversion without CCS. Further, the payback period of the BTH process performed with CCS was approximately 5–6 years. According to the energy consumption and the economic and environmental performances, BTH conversion with a CO 2 capture rate of 80% is a appropriate CCS system for CO 2 capture. The life cycle assessment of BTH conversion demonstrates that the BTH system with CCS can result in negative greenhouse gas emissions. The development of the BTH process using CCS is thus of great significance for achieving carbon neutralization. [Display omitted] • Cradle-to-grave life cycle analysis is carried out for BTH with or without CCS. • Techno-economic performances of the BTH processes with different carbon capture rates are compared. • BTH process with CCS can realize negative emissions of greenhouse gases. • BTH with a carbon capture rate of 80% is a more appropriate CCS system for CO 2 capture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]