A comparative study based on performance and techno-economic analysis of different strategies for PV-Electrolyzer (green) hydrogen fueling incinerator system

Majeed Butt O 1 , Shakeel Ahmad M 2 , Kai Lun T 3 , Seng Che H 3 , Fayaz H 4 , Abd Rahim N 3 Show all authors , Koziol KKK 5 , Radwan N 6 , Amir Khan M 7 , Khan NA 8 , Singh L 9

Affiliations 

  • 1 UM Power Energy Dedicated Advanced Center (UMPEDAC), University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Institute of Electrical Electronics & Computer Engineering, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan
  • 2 UM Power Energy Dedicated Advanced Center (UMPEDAC), University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Electronic address: shakeelalpha@gmail.com
  • 3 UM Power Energy Dedicated Advanced Center (UMPEDAC), University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 4 Modeling Evolutionary Algorithms Simulation and Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam. Electronic address: fayaz@tdtu.edu.vn
  • 5 School of Aerospace, Transport and Manufacturing, Building 61 (Office: C61.1.3), College Road, Cranfield, Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, United Kingdom
  • 6 Faculty of Economics & Administration, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Mechanical Department, Faculty of Engineering, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt
  • 7 Department of Civil Engineering, Galgotia College of Engineering, Knowledge Park I, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201310, India
  • 8 Department of Civil Engineering, Mewat Engineering College, Nuh Haryana, 122107, India
  • 9 Department of Chemistry, Sardar Patel University, Mandi 175001, Himachal Pradesh, India. Electronic address: lakhveer@spumandi.ac.in
Waste Manag, 2023 Feb 01;156:1-11.
PMID: 36424243 DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2022.11.016

Abstract

The integration of hydrogen in the primary energy mix requires a major technological shift in virtually every energy-related application. This study has attempted to investigate the techno-economic solar photovoltaic (PV) integrated water electrolysis and waste incineration system. Three different strategies, i.e., (i) PV + Battery(Hybrid mode with required batteries); (ii) auto-ignition (Direct coupling); and (iii) PV + Secondary-Electrolyzer(Direct coupling assisted with secondary electrolyzer), have been envisioned. The 'PV + Battery' consume 42.42 % and 15.07 % less energy than the auto-ignition and 'PV + Secondary-Electrolyzer' methods. However, the capital cost of 'PV + Battery' has been calculated to be 15.4 % and 11.8 % more than auto-ignition and 'PV + Secondary-Electrolyzer, respectively.The energy consumption relative to waste input, the 'PV + Battery' method used 80 % less energy, while auto-ignition and 'PV + Secondary-Electrolyzer' showed 70.5 % and 77.5 % less energy, respectively. Furthermore, these approaches showed a vast difference in cost-benefit for the longer run. 'PV + Battery' was forecasted to be 73.3 % and 23.3 % more expensive than auto-ignition and 'PV + Secondary-Electrolyzer' methods, respectively, for 30 years. Overall, this study can benefit from using either of these methods depending on the application, usage scale, and climatic conditions.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

MeSH terms
Similar publications