What question did this study set out to answer?

The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of hydrogen production through co-gasification while considering economic and environmental factors.

February 12, 2026Energies0 citationsOpen Access

Techno-Economic and Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production from Biomass–Plastic Co-Gasification with Carbon Capture and Storage

MKMahmoud Karimi HŞHalis Şimşek

Key Points

The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of hydrogen production through co-gasification while considering economic and environmental factors.
Analyzed four scenarios of biomass and polyethylene gasification using Aspen Plus V12.1.
Performed techno-economic analysis with NREL’s H2A model.
Conducted cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment using OpenLCA and TRACI 2.1.
Processed 1500 dry tons per day of feedstock for hydrogen production.
Co-gasification without CCS achieved the lowest LCOH at 2.18 USD/kg.
CCS increased LCOH by 30–36%, but CO2 credits reduced it to 1.74–1.81 USD/kg.
Co-gasification reduced GWP impacts by 5–10%, while CCS enabled net-negative GWP.
Scenario 4 effectively balances economic viability and climate mitigation.

Abstract

This study evaluates the techno-economic and environmental feasibility of hydrogen (H2) production via co-gasification of woody biomass and polyethylene (PE) plastic waste, with and without carbon capture and storage (CCS), using an integrated modeling framework. Four scenarios were analyzed: (1) biomass gasification without CCS, (2) biomass with CCS, (3) co-gasification (90:10 biomass:PE) without CCS, and (4) co-gasification with CCS. Process simulations were conducted in Aspen Plus V12.1, techno-economic analysis (TEA) via NREL’s H2A model, and cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) in OpenLCA with TRACI 2.1 and the Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) methods. The plant processes 1500 dry ton/day feedstock, yielding ~136–140 tons/day pure H2. TEA results show co-gasification without CCS achieves the lowest levelized cost of H2 (LCOH) at 2.18 USD/kg, 7% below biomass-only (2.34 USD/kg), due to reduced feedstock demand and improved efficiency. CCS increases LCOH by 30–36% (2.98–3.18 USD/kg), but 70 USD/t CO2 credits reduce it to 1.74–1.81 USD/kg, competitive with gray H2. Sensitivity and Monte Carlo analyses highlight capacity factor and feedstock as key drivers, with co-gasification narrowing uncertainties. LCA reveals co-gasification lowers most impacts by 5–10%, while CCS enables net-negative GWP (−12.3 to −14.7 kg CO2 eq/kg H2) but raises CED by 15%. Scenario 4 balances economic viability and climate mitigation, supporting circular economy principles through waste valorization. Findings affirm co-gasification with CCS as a promising pathway for low-carbon H2, with policy incentives critical for deployment. Future optimizations, like higher PE ratios, could further reduce costs below 2 USD/kg, advancing net-zero transitions.

AI से पूछें

Bookmark

View Full Paper