Breadcrumb
- Home
- Publications
- Proceedings
- 2025 AIChE Annual Meeting
- Process Development Division
- Renewable Thermal Processes
- (296c) Solar-Driven Methane Reforming: Design and Analysis of Fluidized Bed Receiver-Reactor Concept
To validate our receiver-reactor concept, we simulated the solar reactor model using a 2-m high tubular-SiC receiver-reactor with Ni-impregnated alumina-silica particles for ranges of mean incident solar fluxes (dp = 320 mm; 700 ºC; 5 bar). The model solves vertically discretized continuity, species, momentum and energy balances, as well as radially discretized dusty gas transport [3], and catalytic surface chemistry [4]. Such a model allows identifying optimal temperatures and feed compositions to avoid side reactions that deactivate the catalysts and lead to lower hydrogen yields (e.g., exothermic coking and endothermic reverse-water gas shift); inlet composition of steam-to-methane (nH2O/nCH4) and carbon dioxide-to-methane ratio (nCO2/nCH4) dictates the methane conversion (XCH4) and syngas product ratio (nH2/nCO). Downstream synthetic fuel production usually requires nH2/nCO ≈ 2.0, while XCH4 needs to be as high as possible to minimize separation costs. With this requirement, our model results show that at inlet compositions of nCO2/nCH4 ≈ 1.0 or nH2O/nCH4 ≈ 1.5, the reactor can operate at a solar efficiency higher than 80% at XCH4 ~70%. The developed model will be further validated at a lab-scale solar reactor with infrared lamp using Ni-based catalysts. The result from this study indicates that fluidized porous particles receiver-reactor design can accommodate solar-driven methane reforming as a near-term viable solution for solar fuel or chemical production at significant scales.
References
[1] S. Sharma and S. K. Ghoshal, vol. 43, 1151-1158, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.11.09.
[2] K. J. Brewster et al., Solar Energy, vol. 289, p. 113322, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2025.113322
[3] J. Solsvik and H. A. Jakobsen, Chemical Engineering Science, vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 1986–2000, May 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2011.01.060.
[4] K. Delgado, L. Maier, S. Tischer, A. Zellner, H. Stotz, and O. Deutschmann, Catalysts, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 871–904, May 2015, doi: 10.3390/catal5020871.