Analysis of Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier Systems

The LOHC technology could be an attractive solution for storing and transporting green hydrogen, facilitating the transition to the hydrogen economy (116). To better assess the implementation potential of the technology, it is necessary to review the most promising LOHC candidates, catalysts and system operating conditions in further detail.

Early investigations into the LOHC technology were conducted in the 1980s and were focused around using benzene/cyclohexane or toluene/methylcyclohexane systems (2, 1720). Such systems were chosen for their high energy storage capacities and thus were predicted to allow the development of an efficient technology (10). Interestingly, even at the very outset of these experiments, the efficiency of the technology was evaluated in a combined scheme with water electrolysis (17). In terms of toxicity, a toluene/methylcyclohexane system was considered preferable, but the benzene/cyclohexane system was also studied further; in 2000 it was reported that 100% conversion of cyclohexane to benzene could be achieved at 175°C if a palladium membrane reactor was used (17). In the time since, numerous LOHC molecules have been investigated and assessed in terms of their technoeconomic and environmental impacts, with several carriers being noted to have a great potential for the LOHC technology.

Once established that a benzene/cyclohexane system facilitated the storage of hydrogen, substitutes to the known carcinogen, benzene, have been sought to reduce the hazards associated with the technology and facilitate its deployment (Table I). In addition, alternative systems which reduce the thermodynamic limitations associated with benzene (i.e. high temperature requirement for cyclohexane dehydrogenation) have been studied (21). This is important, given high temperatures increase the energy intensity, and thus the total costs of the LOHC technology.

Table I

Comparison of the Properties for Selected Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier Candidates (1, 6)

LOHC candidatea NEC H0/H12 DBT H0/H18 NAP H0/H10 TOL H0/H6 AB H0/H6
Hydrogen, wt% 5.8b 6.2 7.3c 6.2 7.1
Energy density, kWh l–1 2.5 1.9 2.2d 1.6 2.4
Cost, € kg–1 40 4 0.6 0.3 n.d.
Liquid range, °C 68–270 / 20–280 –39–390 / –45–354 80–218 / –43–185 –95–111 / –127–101 –45–87/ 63–87
Dehydrogenation temperature, °C 180–270 270–310 210–300 250–450 80
Hydrogenation temperature, °C 80–180 150–200 80–160 90–150 80
Reaction enthalpy, kJ molH2–1 –53.2 –65.4 –66.3 –68.3 –35.9
Hazard information H305 H228, H302, H351, H400, H410 H225, H304, H315, H361d, H336, H373, H412 n.d.
Flash point, °C 186 212 78 4 22

A very common alternative to benzene is N -ethylcarbazole (NEC) and more generally, N -containing aromatic heterocycles (2). This class of compounds is recognised for their lower dehydrogenation enthalpy when compared against other LOHCs. For example, the dehydrogenation enthalpy of perhydro-NEC (53.2 kJ mol–1 hydrogen) is significantly lower than that of methylcyclohexane (68.3 kJ mol–1 hydrogen), and hence hydrogen release from perhydro-NEC is possible at lower temperatures (22). This reduces energy costs and increases system efficiency. However, NEC is significantly more expensive than toluene (€40.00 kg–1 and €0.30 kg–1, respectively), which could hinder the large-scale commercial implementation of this particular LOHC (1, 2). Additionally, the solid state of the fully dehydrogenated NEC at room temperature complicates its handling and transport and can thus require dilution, which significantly reduces the efficiency of the system (1). Solidification of a carrier also diminishes the key liquid-nature advantage of using LOHCs as storage materials. As a result, several subsequent studies have since concentrated on seeking alternatives with higher boiling points and lower melting points, ensuring the carrier remains a liquid at ambient conditions throughout the cycle. A higher boiling point of the storage or transport medium also reduces the likelihood of atmospheric pollution via evaporation and inhalatory exposure to potentially hazardous vapours, as well as lowering LOHC flammability (23).

The heterocycle quinaldine (with a lower melting point than NEC) has recently gained research interest. Decahydroquinaldine (H10-QLD) is reported to require a lower minimum temperature to achieve a dehydrogenation equilibrium corresponding to 99.99% hydrogen recovery when compared to alternative LOHC candidates, such as methylcyclohexane and dibenzyltoluene (DBT) (24). Although a quinaldine system has an ecotoxicity approximately equivalent to diesel oil, it is less biodegradable (23). Of a series of quinaldine compounds tested, only 2-methylquinoline was noted to be biodegradable: thus, a spillage of an alternative, non-biodegradable quinaldine (as is occasionally reported for fossil fuels) could persist for several years (23). In this regard, traditional fossil fuels could be considered superior over LOHCs: diesel oils primarily consist of chains of linear hydrocarbons of which the majority can decompose. Yet, for the diesel fraction of more complex structures this is not the case (23).

The potential of many more carriers has been assessed and reported in the literature, each focusing on a favourable property which would be beneficial for LOHC technology. For instance, amine boranes have been reported to have high gravimetric storage densities and comparable overall efficiencies to other LOHC candidates, although regeneration of such a carrier presents a challenge (21). Nevertheless, amine boranes have previously been employed as a disposable hydrogen source in fuel cell-based applications (25).

Nevertheless, it is evident that some LOHC systems are emerging as favourites (1, 2, 26). One of the most well-studied LOHC candidates is the DBT/perhydro-DBT system. A well-known and commercially available heat transfer oil, DBT has a much lower melting point than NEC and can thus be considered like a more traditional liquid fuel (such as gasoline) with the advantage of low flammability. Yet, important differences between gasoline and DBT are the higher viscosity and lower volatility of DBT. The cost of DBT (€4 kg–1) is also significantly lower than NEC (€40 kg–1) (1). Moreover, DBT is commonly regarded to have a good thermal stability, low toxicity and reasonable hydrogen storage capacity (6.2 wt%), highlighting the potential of this compound for the LOHC technology (27, 28). However, possible factors impeding commercial implementation of the LOHC technology with DBT as a carrier could comprise the relatively high dehydrogenation temperature and high cost (for example, compared to toluene) (23).

The evaluation of each LOHC medium also requires the implicit assessment of hydrogenation and dehydrogenation catalysts. The studies of the hydrogenation and dehydrogenation steps of a LOHC cycle are typically performed independently, employing different catalysts. Where the dehydrogenation and hydrogenation plants are found at different locations, this allows for optimisation of the separate reactions and catalysts. However, if the LOHC technology were to be focused more around the onsite hydrogen storage function, rather than transportation ability, a catalyst which is suitable for both reactions would be most favourable, with the interchanging of hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions driven by a change in pressure and a moderate change in temperature in the same reactor (2931). Clearly, the requirement for only one catalyst and one reactor for both hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reduces the costs associated with this application (10).

As the dehydrogenation process is an endothermic reaction, this part of the LOHC cycle presents greater challenges than that of hydrogenation. Thus, a great proportion of studies has focused their efforts towards evaluating effective catalysts for the dehydrogenation process. Several literature sources state that the dehydrogenation process contributes significantly to the overall cost of the LOHC technology (32, 33). In particular, it has been suggested that improvements to catalytic performance could lower the cost of the dehydrogenation reaction by almost 40% (32).

Catalysts based on pgm are commonly used for hydrogenation and dehydrogenation processes of the LOHC technology (10, 34). Nevertheless, nickel-based catalysts have shown promise for the use within the LOHC technology, but further catalyst development is required to address the selectivity issues. Monometallic nickel catalysts are so active in hydrogenation reactions that unwanted reactions, such as C–C cleavage, can occur (35). Additionally, it has been reported that nickel-based catalysts could be problematic if employed for feedstocks comprising oxygen or nitrogen functionalities. This is because nickel catalysts are also very active in hydrogenolysis side-reactions (35). For example, it has been reported that aryl ethers can be converted into arenes and alcohols without any ring hydrogenation (36). This would be an extremely unfavourable reaction for the LOHC technology, as no hydrogen storage is facilitated. Such issues might be overcome by the development of bimetallic nickel-based catalytic systems. In addition to their high activity, the addition of a second metal to a nickel-based catalyst, such as nickel-copper on activated carbon cloth, has been suggested to suppress unfavourable side reactions (for example, hydrogenolysis) by electronic modification of nickel. This improves selectivity and overall efficiency of the LOHC technology (37). Another example of improved selectivity for the ring hydrogenation when using nickel-based catalysts, is an addition of zinc which blocks sites for C–C dissociation (38, 39). The comparatively high reducibility of several bimetallic catalysts (including nickel-copper and nickel-cobalt), further highlights their potential for implementation within the LOHC technology (40).

Although the development of novel catalysts (pgm-free or with reduced pgm content) might lower the costs associated with the LOHC technology, as well as risks associated with reliance on highly fluctuating costs of pgms, the key to this technology is catalyst performance (space-time yield, selectivity, lifetime). This is essential to reduce energy intensity during loading and particularly unloading of the LOHCs (32, 33). Catalyst stability is a particular issue in the dehydrogenation step of the LOHC cycle, where reaction temperatures are typically higher than those required for the hydrogenation step (41). It is expected that over time, catalyst degradation from carbonisation will occur, although the exact identity of such residues remains largely unknown (42). Catalyst reactivation could be achieved by implementing a regular cleaning procedure, which for noble metal catalysts often involves thermal treatment with oxidative substances (for example, air, oxygen) (42). However, this process is highly dependent on the catalyst and reactor used. For 0.5 wt% platinum on alumina core shell pellets exposed to dynamic DBT experiments for three months (dehydrogenation temperatures between 280°C and 320°C), major regeneration was achieved between 200°C and 300°C, although complete regeneration could not be attained. Oxygenates and carbon dioxide were also produced during catalyst regeneration, which were suggested to contribute to catalyst restructuring (42). The study of Oh et al. highlighted that a palladium catalyst supported on carbon-coated alumina was more stable than palladium on alumina or palladium on carbon catalysts as the carbon-coated alumina support prevented the sintering of palladium nanoparticles into larger particles (43). Here, perhydro-2-(n -methylbenzyl)pyridine was deployed as the LOHC (43). However, most literature studies discuss the stability of the catalyst over only a limited number of hydrogenation/dehydrogenation cycles. Thus, further work is required to assess catalyst stability over longer time periods.

2.1 Benzene/Cyclohexane

Although benzene, which is the hydrogen-lean form of the benzene/cyclohexane LOHC system (Figure 1), is a known carcinogen (the most significant drawback of this specific system), several studies have been conducted into the properties of effective hydrogenation/dehydrogenation catalysts for this model feedstock.

Fig. 1.

Benzene/cyclohexane LOHC system

Benzene/cyclohexane LOHC system

Hydrogenation is generally accepted to occur via associative adsorption of benzene onto the catalytic surface. During the hydrogenation step, it is believed the carrier molecules are arranged as ï-complexes and are hydrogenated in a stepwise fashion, through a series of cycloolefins (Figure 2) (44). This is supported with the detection of cyclohexene (44).

Fig. 2.

The stepwise hydrogenation of benzene (44)

The stepwise hydrogenation of benzene (44)

Early research concluded that monometallic iron-catalysts with body-centred structures were essentially inactive for the hydrogenation of benzene, while the activity of a mixed iron‐cobalt catalyst decreased with increasing iron content (45). Since cobalt and nickel, both with face-centred cubic structures, were found to be active for the reaction, it was assumed the body-centred structure of iron was responsible for its inactivity (45). However, a monometallic, face-centred copper catalyst was deemed to be completely inactive unless in the presence of a suitable promoter, such as nickel (45). The inactivity of the copper catalyst has since been attributed to difficulties in obtaining a suitably high dispersion on the catalyst support, while the mechanism of the promotional effect observed with the addition of nickel remains a topic for debate (35). Several hypotheses for this have arisen, including a changing in copper crystal structure, or an alteration in surface concentration as a consequence of nickel collection (45). Interestingly, even in the very early studies, it was clear that palladium has a high activity for the reaction, but only on the condition that the surface area was sufficiently high, while the conversion is also reported to be catalysed by rhodium(I) complexes (45, 46).

Nickel-based catalysts are frequently considered for ring-hydrogenation reactions, with several detailed studies revealing key information for future catalyst development. For example, the hydrogenation of benzene using nickel catalysts has been suggested to be a structure insensitive reaction, while an unexpectedly low activity at low nickel loadings (less than 5 wt%) is the result of a nickel aluminate spinel formation, when an alumina support is used (47). More commonly however, this spinel structure is formed at high reaction temperatures. Although expected, these findings are important, signifying not only the choice of metal, but also the properties of the support (such as acidity, interaction with the metal) and reaction conditions play a role in determining catalytic performance. The move from pgm-based catalysts to base metal catalysts could also lower the cost associated with the LOHC technology as well as reliance on highly fluctuating costs of pgms (48, 49). This is provided that comparable or even improved catalytic performance can be achieved.

Nickel is also widely referenced for its activity in catalysing the dehydrogenation reaction of cyclohexane. Given the low boiling point of cyclohexane (81°C), this reaction is often performed in the gaseous phase. The studies have shown that when using a cyclohexane feedstock, a bimetallic nickel/platinum combination (20 wt% nickel and 0.5 wt% platinum) can improve catalytic dehydrogenation activity 60-fold when compared to using a monometallic platinum catalyst (0.5 wt% platinum on activated carbon cloth), or 1.5-fold when compared to a monometallic nickel catalyst (20 wt% nickel on activated carbon cloth) (34). In addition, selectivity in the dehydrogenation reaction was improved using various monometallic nickel catalysts with the addition of platinum (50). For these cyclohexane dehydrogenation studies, a spray-pulsed reactor was used at a temperature of 300°C (34).

The concept of improved catalytic performance through the use of bimetallic combinations has also been reported for silver-based catalysts, employed for the benzene hydrogenation reaction (34). Here, the same spray-pulse reactor and reaction temperature (300°C) as discussed for the platinum catalyst above was used. For the most significant catalytic enhancement, it was concluded that the secondary promoter must be classified as a pgm (34). As an example, the hydrogen production rate was doubled when using a platinum-promoted silver catalyst on activated carbon cloth (1 wt% platinum + 10 wt% silver) compared to the non‐promoted 10 wt% silver equivalent (34). This was suggested to be the result of a synergistic effect between the two metals for breaking C–H bonds, high hydrogen reverse-spillover, or hydrogen recombination abilities of the catalyst (51). The improvement in catalytic activity of the silver catalysts promoted with 1 wt% of a pgm were found to follow the trend: platinum > rhodium > palladium, although catalyst stability improved in the order platinum > palladium > rhodium (51). The study did not comment on expected lifetime of the catalysts, highlighting the need for further research regarding key performance indicators (activity, selectivity, lifetime).

2.2 Toluene/Methylcyclohexane

To catalyse the hydrogenation of toluene to methylcyclohexane, palladium-based catalysts have been reported to be effective. For example, in 1 h a 10 wt% palladium/carbon catalyst can achieve a 90% toluene conversion at 80°C and 15 bar hydrogen pressure, when the hydrogenation reaction is performed in a batch reactor (52). Interestingly, when this palladium on carbon catalyst was coated with a liquid coordination complex (LCC), the conversion of toluene increased to 99.9%, under otherwise identical reaction conditions (52). LCCs are described as ‘ionic liquid-like’ Lewis acid species, with their equilibrium composition containing cations, anions and neutral components (52). In this experiment, the LCC was synthesised from aluminium chloride and urea (52). It was concluded that only a thin film of the liquid (ionic liquid coating at 13 wt%) was required to improve the catalytic performance; when larger quantities were applied to the catalyst a decrease in activity was observed as a result of pore blocking and mass diffusion limitations (52).

As for benzene hydrogenation, platinum-based catalysts have also been found to be successful in catalysing the hydrogenation of toluene to methylcyclohexane. For example, a 0.3 wt% platinum catalyst supported on zeolite CBV‐780 (silicon:aluminium ratio of 40) is capable of achieving full hydrogenation at just 120°C, with a hydrogen pressure of 30 bar (53). The activity of the catalyst notably decreased when alloyed with palladium. A trimetallic combination of nickel, cobalt and molybdenum on a zeolite support was also found to effectively catalyse this hydrogenation reaction (54). In a batch reactor, with a reaction temperature of 200°C and a hydrogen pressure of 20 bar, it was found that a HY support (silicon:aluminium ratio of 5.1) allowed for superior catalytic activity after 30 min on-stream, when compared to using mordenite, HY (silicon:aluminium ratio of 80) or ZSM-5 alternatives. In explanation, the authors propose the larger pore volume and pore diameter of the HY support (silicon:aluminium ratio of 5.1) reduces pore diffusion limitations (54).

Moreover, monometallic nickel-based catalysts are effective for toluene hydrogenation (55). For example, one study highlighted the increase in catalytic activity observed for a 20 wt% nickel catalyst, compared to a 5 wt% nickel catalyst, both supported on gamma-alumina (55). Since it is generally accepted that an increase in the number of metallic active sites increases catalytic activity, this result is unsurprising (55). However, it was also found that employing supports of different alumina phases (γ-Al2O3 or κ-Al2O3) has different effects on catalytic activity when different nickel loadings are used. For instance, a significantly higher catalytic activity was reported for a 5 wt% Ni/κ-Al2O3 catalyst than for a 5 wt% Ni/γ-Al2O3 (toluene conversions of 98% and 28%, respectively), under the same reaction conditions (55). Yet at higher nickel loadings an opposite trend was observed: a 20 wt% Ni/κ-Al2O3 catalyst resulted in a lower toluene conversion than that of a 20 wt% Ni/γ-Al2O3 catalyst, although the difference in activities between the catalysts is smaller at this higher nickel loading (55). In explanation, it was concluded that changes in reducibility of the surface nickel sites has a larger effect on the observed activity than simply the number of active sites present (55). These reactions were performed in a plug-flow reactor, using 0.1 g of catalyst (55).

Nickel on kaolinite catalysts have also been considered for the hydrogenation of toluene (56). Using a flow-type system at ambient pressures, it was found that modification of the catalyst with a small amount (2 wt%) of either potassium or zinc (using KNO3 or Zn(NO3)2) increased catalytic activity, which was attributed to a decrease in interaction strength between the nickel and kaolinite. Yet, a larger modification (3–7 wt%) resulted in a significant decrease in activity (56). This was proposed to be a result of potassium covering the nickel active sites, or an unfavourable zinc-nickel interaction (56).

The dehydrogenation reaction (methylcyclohexane to toluene, Figure 3) typically employs a platinum or nickel-based catalyst, supported on alumina (1). Reaction temperatures for such catalysts often vary between 350°C and 450°C (with a general increase in temperature increasing the conversion of methylcyclohexane to toluene before equilibrium is reached) (57, 58). Another study highlighted the influence of process conditions on increasing conversion of methylcyclohexane and lowering operating temperatures by using efficient palladium or palladium-alloy membranes in catalytic membrane reactors. Such reactors combine the catalytic dehydrogenation reaction with the extraction of hydrogen in a single unit (58).

Fig. 3.

Toluene/methylcyclohexane LOHC system

Toluene/methylcyclohexane LOHC system

Interestingly, a potassium-platinum on alumina catalyst was reported to achieve a hydrogen yield of 95%, when employed at 320°C in a fixed-bed reactor, which is slightly above the typical yield range given above (1). Moreover, an excellent selectivity (>99.9%) was reported for this reaction (1). A Raney-nickel catalyst has also been reported to achieve a 65% yield after 30 min on-stream, under multiphase reaction conditions (59). Although this reaction was performed at the lower reaction temperature of 250°C, the Raney-nickel catalyst is not a suitable candidate to catalyse the reactions of the LOHC technology (1). This is in view of the accompanying isomerisation and disproportionation reactions which would ultimately necessitate the need for more frequent LOHC replacement (1). It should be noted that from a thermodynamic viewpoint, the dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane, like all LOHC candidates, should be performed at the lowest possible pressure as this facilitates the use of the lowest possible temperature for full conversion to toluene (34). However, in practice, it has been found that such conditions may not be compatible with the catalyst, potentially resulting in side reactions and catalyst deactivation (34).

As has already been stated, the catalyst support materials can be modified to increase catalytic performance (34). For the toluene/methylcyclohexane system, it was concluded that the hybrid composite support alumina-titania was responsible for a huge increase in catalytic dehydrogenation activity, when compared to alumina (99% and 16.5% methylcyclohexane conversion, respectively, where nickel is the active site) (34). In addition, properties of the perovskite La0.7Y0.3NiO3, and metal oxides including La2O3, CeO2 and MnO2 have been evaluated in terms of their suitability as catalyst supports for the dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane (34, 60). Most notably, it was found the hydrogen production rate more than doubled when comparing the Pt/La2O3 and Pt/La0.7Y0.3NiO3 catalysts (21.1 mmol gmet–1 min–1 and 45 mmol gmet–1 min–1, respectively) (60). These reactions were conducted in a spray-pulsed reactor.

This particular LOHC system has also been studied alongside a palladium membrane reactor, which allows for purification of the hydrogen released from the LOHC (34). Contaminants of the hydrogen can include carbon monoxide, CO2, methane and cyclic hydrocarbons and have been reported to be present in quantities between 100 ppm and 1000 ppm, depending upon the operating conditions of the LOHC system (61). The exact origins of the impurities remain unknown, but it is believed a combination of atmospheric oxygen and residual moisture in the LOHC is responsible for the formation of carbon monoxide and CO2, while partial decomposition of the LOHC at high reaction temperatures, or contaminants from the production of the LOHC, can explain the hydrocarbon presence (61). The quality of the hydrogen released depends upon the intended application: for example, several fuel cells have specific regulations on compatible hydrogen purity (61). Despite this, only a few examples of hydrogen purification processes exist in the literature, most of which employ palladium membranes. This is not surprising, considering palladium has a high hydrogen solubility, permitting effective separation of hydrogen and contaminants at high temperatures (typically above 300°C) (61).

A palladium membrane reactor has been reported to have a dual functionality, acting both as a dehydrogenation reactor and a hydrogen purification system (34). The dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane using such a reactor and a 1 wt% platinum on alumina catalyst, permitted the use of a 20°C decrease in temperature than would otherwise be required to achieve the same conversion (70%) without employing the membrane (225°C and 245°C, respectively) (34). In addition, the platinum catalyst demonstrated good stability and selectivity within the temperature range 150–325°C, with no significant deactivation for approximately 600 h time on-stream (62). A 5 μm palladium-silver membrane, coupled with a microstructured system, has also been reported to effectively purify the hydrogen released (61).

2.3 Naphthalene/Decalin

Boasting a high theoretical hydrogen storage capacity of up to 7.4 wt%, a naphthalene/decalin LOHC system has been considered (Figure 4). However, in practice, dilution with a solvent such as toluene is necessary to keep the LOHC cycle within the liquid phase (melting point of naphthalene: 80°C). This lowers the overall hydrogen capacity to 3.8 wt% (1). For this reason, the naphthalene/decalin system is less widely studied than other possible carriers, although important learnings have been gained, which can be transferred to other LOHC systems. It is worth noting that decalin exists as structural isomers, and thus an approximately equimolar mixture of the cis- and trans- isomers are produced upon hydrogenation of naphthalene, despite the thermodynamic favourability of the trans- isomer (1). The exact cis :trans ratio is naturally dependent on reaction conditions, in addition to the catalyst itself (1).

Fig. 4.

Naphthalene/decalin LOHC system

Naphthalene/decalin LOHC system

Much like other LOHC systems, platinum-based catalysts have also been the focus of most studies on the hydrogenation of naphthalene (1, 63). Yet, in contrast to other systems discussed, an aluminium Mobil Composition of Matter No. 41 (Al-MCM-41) support was investigated (63). Harsher reaction conditions (temperatures of 300°C and pressures of 69 bar) than employed for alternative systems were required to achieve full hydrogenation to decalin in 150 min, in a batch reactor (1). It was found that the reaction temperature could be lowered to 200°C under the same reaction pressure, but this imposed the requirement of a drastically increased reaction time (480 min) (1). Generally, conclusions from this study are similar to those of other systems: hydrogenation activity and selectivity are both strongly dependent on support properties (63).

Although the hydrogenation process presents its relative challenges, it is the dehydrogenation step which confirms the incompatibility of this system with the LOHC technology. For instance, this step is likely to produce intermediates including tetralin (Figure 5). Although tetralin itself can be dehydrogenated and become part of the LOHC process, it is unlikely that no tetralin molecules will remain following the dehydrogenation reaction. As tetralin is still partially hydrogenated, the hydrogen storage capacity of the LOHC is lowered in subsequent cycles. Thus, regular replacement of the carrier material would be required to ensure a constant hydrogen storage capacity (34). This would increase the operating expenditure of the technology (more LOHC required) in the case of naphthalene. In light of these challenges, a pilot scale demonstration is yet to be achieved (1).

Fig. 5.

Structure of tetralin, a probable naphthalene dehydrogenation intermediate

Structure of tetralin, a probable naphthalene dehydrogenation intermediate

Research into the dehydrogenation reaction of naphthalene has, however, produced some interesting results. Typically, when employing a platinum catalyst supported on carbon at conditions slightly milder than those used for the hydrogenation reaction (280°C for 150 min at atmospheric pressure), almost full conversion of decalin to naphthalene can be achieved in a batch reactor system. Furthermore, adding rhenium to the catalyst (platinum-rhenium on carbon) can decrease the reaction time from 150 min to 120 min under otherwise identical conditions (1, 64).

A 3 wt% platinum on carbon catalyst was also used to investigate the effect of varying the catalyst preparation method on catalytic performance for the dehydrogenation of decalin (34). It was found that advanced methods of preparation, including ion-exchange and polyol-assisted synthesis (in which ethylene glycol was used as a solvent and reducing agent), resulted in a greater dispersion of platinum (19.6% and 14%, respectively) than the more conventional precipitation and impregnation methods (10% and 5.4% platinum dispersion, respectively) (34, 65). Increasing the platinum dispersion increases the surface area of the metal over which the reaction can occur, consequently resulting in a greater rate of hydrogen release from decalin (34, 65). Again, optimisation of the support must also be considered. Several carbon-based possibilities including nanofibers, carbon black, carbon xerogel and ordered mesoporous carbon have been evaluated, with the high surface area of ordered mesoporous carbon believed to be responsible for demonstrating the highest activity for the dehydrogenation of decalin (34). Yet, over longer operation times catalyst deactivation was observed as a result of pore blockages with the bulky LOHC feedstock (34). Thus, it can be argued that as carbon black has wider pores than the ordered mesoporous carbon, this would be the most suitable support, despite a lower activity. These experiments were performed at 260°C, in a batch reactor (34).

Catalytic activity, in addition to selectivity, has also been reported to be improved with the addition of tin to platinum on activated carbon (66). The effect is two-fold: (a) the electronic modification of platinum by tin prevents the cleavage of C–C bonds on the catalyst surface, facilitating the adsorption and desorption of reactant and product molecules; (b) the addition of tin as a catalytic promoter improves catalyst stability by preventing the sintering and agglomeration of platinum at high temperatures (34).

2.4 N -Ethylcarbazole/Perhydro-N -Ethylcarbazole

The most significant advantage of the NEC/perhydro-NEC LOHC system (Figure 6) is the relatively low energy required for dehydrogenation (53.2 kJ mol–1 hydrogen, Table I) (1). This lower reaction enthalpy facilitates a lower temperature for the dehydrogenation reaction and consequently improves the overall efficiency of the system. As such, interest into the potential applications of NEC has significantly grown in recent years, culminating in its use as a feedstock for the LOHC technology. However, like other LOHC candidates discussed thus far, NEC also possesses unfavourable properties for its employment within LOHC technology. Arguably the most significant of these is the solid nature of NEC at ambient temperatures. To ensure the key liquid property of the LOHC technology is not lost, employing NEC would thus require NEC dilution (1). This reduces the efficiency of the LOHC technology (1). Moreover, NEC is significantly more expensive than alternative LOHCs, such as toluene (€40.00 kg–1 and €0.30 kg–1, respectively) (1).

Fig. 6.

NEC/perhydro-NEC LOHC system

NEC/perhydro-NEC LOHC system

The dehydrogenation reaction is again most commonly performed with pgm-based catalysts, particularly palladium on alumina or platinum on alumina at metal loadings of around 5 wt%. These catalysts have been reported to have the highest catalytic activities, when compared to ruthenium and rhodium equivalents (67). Specifically, catalyst dehydrogenation activity follows the trend palladium > platinum > ruthenium > rhodium under atmospheric pressure and at 180°C (67). Full dehydrogenation to NEC was observed for palladium and platinum catalysts, after reaction times of 240 min and 300 min, respectively, while employment of a ruthenium catalyst over the same time frame produced a mixture of both the fully dehydrogenated NEC (71.28%) and the partially hydrogenated species, 4H-NEC (28.54%) (67). Using the catalyst with the lowest dehydrogenation activity (rhodium on alumina), even less of the fully dehydrogenated NEC is obtained (10.64%) (67). Important to note, all reactions are carried out below 270°C. Beyond this temperature, NEC becomes susceptible to dealkylation reactions, producing the byproduct carbazole (1, 68).

Like the dehydrogenation reaction, the hydrogenation of NEC is frequently catalysed by a pgm. However, given the comparative ease of the hydrogenation reaction (in comparison to the dehydrogenation reaction), a palladium or ruthenium-based catalyst is more frequently employed than for the dehydrogenation reaction. For example, full hydrogen loading onto NEC has been achieved in 3 h at 150°C and 50 bar hydrogen pressure using a 5 wt% ruthenium on alumina catalyst in a batch reactor (68). The molar ratio of LOHC to ruthenium used in these experiments was 400:1 (68). The catalyst Pd2Ru on silicon carbonitride has also been reported to successfully catalyse the hydrogenation of NEC (69). In comparison to the 5 wt% ruthenium on alumina catalyst discussed previously, a milder reaction temperature (110°C) and hydrogen pressure (20 bar) can be employed (69). However, a significantly longer reaction time (36 h) is required for full hydrogenation of NEC to perhydro-NEC, and a greater amount of active metal is also required, compared to the ruthenium on alumina catalyst described above (0.52 mol% and 0.25 mol%, respectively) (68, 69). The same Pd2Ru@SiCN catalyst has also been reported to successfully catalyse the dehydrogenation of perhydro-NEC at 180°C in a reaction time of 7 h, in a batch reactor (69).

More recently, full hydrogenation has also been attained using ruthenium supported on a rare earth hydride catalyst, Ru/YH3 (70). Reporting both the mildest conditions (100°C, 10 bar) and the highest catalytic activity for the hydrogenation of NEC to date, it is clear that such rare earth supported catalysts have potential for LOHC applications (70). This was highlighted by concluding the high stereoselectivity of the Ru/YH3 catalyst for the all-cis product would be advantageous for any subsequent dehydrogenation reactions, since the cis product is more easily dehydrogenated than the trans equivalent. In explanation, the authors propose the cis product is less sterically hindered on the catalyst surface (70). However, despite an excellent catalytic performance and satisfactory stability, a high hydrogen pressure is required to achieve high selectivity (70). Manufacturing costs, handling and scale-up considerations were not discussed and may present challenges for such a material.

The Ru/YH3 catalyst has also been reported to effectively catalyse the hydrogenation of another N-heterocycle: 2-methylindole, which has been suggested as a suitable LOHC candidate (70, 71). However, much like NEC, 2-methylindole is a solid at ambient temperatures and possesses a slightly lower hydrogen storage capacity than NEC (5.7 wt% and 5.8 wt%, respectively) (71).

2.5 Dibenzyltoluene/Perhydro-dibenzyltoluene

To achieve an effective and efficient hydrogen storage and transportation system, the choice of LOHC is of critical importance. For commercial implementation of the LOHC technology, DBT can be seen as the most suitable candidate, considering its key advantages: relatively low-cost, low toxicity and high hydrogen storage capacity (6.2 wt%, Table I). In addition, DBT is already mass produced as it is used as a heat transfer agent. As a result, there is a vast exploration of DBT as a potential carrier molecule in the literature.

Several catalysts have been evaluated for the hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions of the DBT/perhydro-DBT system (Figure 7). Much like NEC, DBT hydrogenation is also typically catalysed with an alumina-supported pgm, namely platinum or ruthenium (1). As an example, in a batch reaction, a ruthenium on alumina catalyst can achieve full hydrogen loading of DBT in 4 h at 150°C with a 50 bar hydrogen pressure, which is longer than that of NEC (3 h) under the same conditions (68).

Fig. 7.

DBT/Perhydro-DBT LOHC system

DBT/Perhydro-DBT LOHC system

The more in-depth studies on this feedstock have also revealed that the catalytic hydrogen-loading does not have to be performed with pure hydrogen. As DBT hydrogenation is selective, and provided the catalyst is not negatively affected by the presence of other components, a mixed gas stream (for example, including methane, CO2) can be used (34). From an industrial perspective this is very attractive, enabling otherwise low-value hydrogen present in waste gas streams, from processes including reforming and gasification reactions, to be stored and transported. The first example of such a process was reported in 2017 by Dürr et al., in which a mixture of hydrogen and methane from the decomposition of methane (obtained from offshore drilling) was fed directly to the hydrogenation unit containing the DBT feedstock (72). Separation of the loaded (hydrogenated) LOHC and gaseous methane can then be facilitated. It has also been reported that the presence of methane does not negatively affect the hydrogenation or dehydrogenation of DBT/perhydro-DBT (30). In contrast, methane was remarkably found to slightly improve the hydrogenation rate, postulated to be a result of a lower DBT viscosity and thus improved hydrogen mass transport (34).

In a similar vein, hydrogenation of DBT has been investigated using a hydrogen/CO2 stream (up to 30% CO2) (73). However, with such a hydrogenating mixture, both methanation (CO2 to methane) and reverse water gas shift (CO2 to carbon monoxide) processes were found to occur, with the extent of such side-reactions being strongly dependent on the catalyst employed (34). Even with the most promising palladium on alumina and rhodium on alumina catalysts, the degree of hydrogenation in a batch reactor reached only 0.8 and required elevated temperatures (210°C and 270°C for the rhodium and palladium catalysts, respectively) when compared to using a pure hydrogen stream (34). For the rhodium catalyst, moderate methane formation (methane:CO2 ratio of less than 0.1) can be achieved at temperatures between 120°C and 150°C (rhodium on alumina), while the palladium catalyst showed a lower selectivity for methane formation, with a methane:CO2 ratio of less than 0.1 between 120°C and 270°C (palladium on alumina) (34, 73).

Despite the frequent employment of platinum and ruthenium catalysts with pure hydrogen streams, these catalysts were found to be ineffective for the selective hydrogenation of DBT using a hydrogen and CO2 stream (34). Their respective unsuitability was concluded to be a result of platinum catalyst poisoning from the reduction product carbon monoxide formed via reverse water gas shift of CO2 and facilitation of CO2 methanation by ruthenium.

Palladium-based catalysts have low activities for the dehydrogenation reaction of perhydro-DBT, and have thus been identified as catalysts to avoid (34). Under the same reaction conditions (270°C, 3.5 h, batch reactor), a stark difference in the degree of dehydrogenation between a palladium on carbon (5 wt%) catalyst and its platinum equivalent has been observed (16% and 55%, respectively) (68). In a different study, a lower metal loading has proven to be advantageous (lowering the metal content of the platinum on carbon catalyst to 1 wt% from 5 wt% increased the degree of dehydrogenation from 55% to 71%), while the support preference for this particular dehydrogenation reaction was found to follow carbon > alumina > silica (34, 68). In these experiments, the catalysts were used in batch reactions in quantities of 0.15 mol% with respect to perhydro-DBT (68).

Interestingly, the wider research around the use of DBT as a LOHC has included a study in which the same platinum on alumina (0.3 wt%) catalyst has been used for both hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions (34). Under the same reaction temperature (291°C), Jorschick et al. reported that the two reactions could be interchanged by varying the pressure between 1.05 bar (dehydrogenation) and 30 bar (hydrogenation) in a hot pressure swing reactor (30). However, the use of a non‐optimised catalyst for the dehydrogenation process resulted in a lengthy reaction time (20 h), when compared to the examples discussed previously. In addition, it must be noted that the productivity of the dehydrogenation (and thus catalyst activity) decreased significantly over the first cycle, before stabilising for the following three cycles. This was concluded to be a consequence of bulky, high boiling point byproduct formation via thermal cracking of DBT. Such molecules, including diphenylmethane and 2,6-dimethyldiphenylmethane, were found to increase per cycle and can be expected to block active sites of the catalyst (34, 74). It has also been suggested that some of the possible byproducts of the dehydrogenation reaction are unstable and thus undergo cracking during a subsequent hydrogenation reaction. Such an example would be the conversion of perhydromethylfluorene to perhydrobenzyltoluene (74).

DBT exists as structural isomers and consequently, more than 24 stable intermediates can be found in a partially hydrogenated solution. These can be categorised into four main groups: DBT (H0-DBT), hexahydro‐DBT (H6‐DBT), dodecahydro‐DBT (H12‐DBT) and octadecahydro‐DBT (H18-DBT) (75). Laboratory studies regarding selectivity would require advanced analytical detection methods. DBT conversion can be studied using ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy (i.e. the degree of ring hydrogenation, providing information about conversion levels only), but detailed studies probing catalyst selectivity would be challenging, requiring either a complex high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method or 1H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) analysis (29, 76, 77).

As such, alternative model carriers are often sought for fundamental academic studies aimed at deepening the chemical understanding of how to improve the performance of catalytic materials for the LOHC technology. In addition to being easily characterisable, the ideal carrier would have high boiling points and low melting points of both hydrogen-rich and hydrogen-lean molecules. This enables the whole cyclic process to be carried out in the liquid phase. A high melting point would result in the formation of a solid at ambient temperatures, with a dissolving process or incomplete hydrogen-unloading significantly lowering storage efficiency. Whereas a low boiling point would require extra economic expense in gas condensation equipment. Frequently, toluene is employed as such a model compound. Given its structural similarities to the central motif of DBT, this is a logical choice. Yet, the environmental health and safety hazards associated with its usage are quite significant, being noted for serious concern regarding both human and aquatic toxicity (23). Thus, to lower the hazards associated with the feedstock, other aromatic compounds similar in structure to toluene might be chosen.

In this study, the most prominent carriers for the LOHC technology are discussed in terms of their properties, typical reaction conditions, and catalytic materials employed in the respective hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions. The following LOHC systems are reviewed: benzene/cyclohexane, toluene/methylcyclohexane, naphthalene/ decalin, NEC/perhydro-NEC, DBT/perhydro-DBT. Each LOHC candidate has properties which are advantageous for use within the LOHC technology, but also has disadvantages associated with its use. Among these LOHC systems, NEC/perhydro‐NEC and DBT/perhydro-DBT were found to be the most attractive for commercial deployment, given their favourable physical properties and demands on process conditions. For example, employment of NEC lowers the dehydrogenation temperature, yet at ambient conditions the fully dehydrogenated NEC is a solid. DBT on the other hand, is a more cost-effective LOHC option than NEC, given its relatively moderate price, and has lower toxicity compared to toluene which results in fewer regulatory restrictions to its use. However, higher temperatures for the dehydrogenation process are required to release the hydrogen. Typically, to achieve such temperatures, a portion of the hydrogen released from the LOHC is burned, which clearly reduces the efficiency of the technology. Using the waste heat from fuel cells (for example, in a LOHC – fuel cell coupled system) to provide the heat for the dehydrogenation reaction, can diminish this effect and increase the overall efficiency of the technology. These competing advantages and disadvantages of each LOHC candidate arguably increase the complexity of the LOHC technology but provide an opportunity to develop bespoke hydrogen storage and transportation solutions.

According to the literature, pgm-based catalysts have been proven to catalyse both the hydrogenation and dehydrogenation steps for various LOHC systems, though base metal catalysts might have a potential for the LOHC technology. Given the lack of information currently available in the literature and understanding of key performance indicators, such as catalyst lifetime, selectivity and activity under truly industrial conditions (technology readiness level 6 and above), further research into the LOHC technology is still required. Specifically, developments should attempt to reduce the energy intensity associated with the hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions, while increasing catalyst lifetime and cycle efficiency. This might be achieved either through the catalyst or reactor technology development.

In summary, to improve economic viability and enable widespread commercial deployment of the LOHC technology, further work might be required, focusing on: development of novel cost-effective catalysts with improved space-time yield, activity, selectivity and lifetime; increased lifetime of the LOHC (i.e. number of cycles before a replacement is required); reduction of total costs for transporting the LOHC, including the cost of transporting the unloaded LOHC back to the hydrogenation plant; high purity of the hydrogen released in the dehydrogenation reaction; deployment and system integration of LOHCs with different industries. Furthermore, the selection of a suitable LOHC candidate must also be considered: it should remain a liquid throughout the LOHC cycle, have a low toxicity and low cost, and a high hydrogen loading capacity.

By |2022-06-16T12:54:36+00:00June 16th, 2022|Weld Engineering Services|Comments Off on Analysis of Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier Systems

Potential Deployment and Integration of Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier Technology within Different Industries

Johnson Matthey Technol. Rev., 2022, 66, (3), 259

1. Introduction

Energy-intensive industries as well as the transportation sector contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (1). To mitigate climate change and achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement (2), it is necessary that each sector develops pathways towards GHG emission reductions and accelerate the transition towards deep decarbonisation. The production and use of a low-carbon hydrogen is seen as a ground-breaking aspect of a low carbon future, especially for hard-to-decarbonise sectors (314). A significant amount of renewable electricity will be required to enable energy-intensive industries and the transportation sector to reduce their emissions and meet decarbonisation goals when deploying green hydrogen produced via water electrolysis using renewable energy sources (11). Given that capacities of renewables and electricity costs for the production of green hydrogen are extremely heterogeneous (1518), it is expected that the production of green hydrogen in all required locations at adequate costs will be challenging in the future. Similar to fossil fuels, which are imported and exported across the world, geographical locations with high renewable potential and low costs of electricity are expected to be focal points for the production of green hydrogen. Robust hydrogen storage and transportation systems are among the key components in the successful transition from fossil fuel-based energy systems towards hydrogen-based alternatives (1923). Storage and transportation of hydrogen at scale are yet to be addressed. An innovative method for long-distance transport and long-term high density hydrogen storage is to use LOHCs. This process is a two-step cycle, which is based on loading of hydrogen via catalytic hydrogenation into LOHCs, such as unsaturated organic compounds, followed by unloading of hydrogen via catalytic dehydrogenation after transport and storage (2427).

In our previous work we provided an overview and perspectives on the LOHC technology among different hydrogen storage and transportation technologies (27). This study describes the potential deployment and integration of LOHCs within different industries. These include: the transportation sector (automobiles, ships, trains); steel and cement industries; the use of stored hydrogen to produce fuels and chemicals from flue gases; a system integration of fuel cells and LOHCs for energy storage.

2. System Integration of Fuel Cells and Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers for Electrical Energy Storage

Renewable sources, typically wind or solar, provide the energy required for the electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen (26). For the electrolysis stage, polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolysis is the preferred method, due to the ability of the system to respond to the characteristic fluctuations in renewable energy power supplies (25). The hydrogen produced can then be stored in LOHCs (through the hydrogenation step, Figure 1).

Fig. 1.

Schematic representation of the integration of fuel cells into LOHC technology (25)

Schematic representation of the integration of fuel cells into LOHC technology (25)

Interestingly, it has been reported that when dibenzyltoluene is employed as the LOHC, the hydrogen produced via electrolysis does not need to be dried before the catalytic hydrogenation reaction (28). When a ruthenium-based catalyst was used in a pellet form rather than as a powder, the activity of the catalyst was found to be virtually unaffected by water, while only a small decrease in hydrogenation activity was recorded when employing platinum catalysts with wet hydrogen (28). Costs associated with energy-intensive hydrogen drying processes can therefore be avoided. To better understand this observation, the tolerance of the catalyst should be investigated with other LOHC candidates.

When required, the stored hydrogen can be released from the LOHC (through the dehydrogenation step) and converted back into electricity, again using fuel cells. In this step, either PEM fuel cells (PEMFCs) or solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) can be utilised. PEMFCs are better designed to produce variable quantities of energy and thus meet changes in energy demand (25). Thus, the SOFC technology is only advantageous when there is a constant electricity demand (25). Nonetheless, using the SOFC technology to convert green hydrogen back into electricity is widely believed to become a future conventional method for stationary, green electricity production (29).

Furthermore, the waste heat from SOFCs (operated at 600–1000°C) is of the correct level to allow its use in the dehydrogenation step of the LOHC process (25). The coupling of LOHC technology with SOFCs can therefore improve the overall efficiency of the LOHC technology. To emphasise this, scale-up calculations for a LOHC–SOFC integrated system predict that 1 kg h–1 of hydrogen is capable of producing around 18.04 kW of power, corresponding to a SOFC efficiency of 54.1% (29). Another study suggests that an overall electrical efficiency of 45% is achievable with a 10-year SOFC lifespan (30). Such a long lifespan can be maintained if LOHC vapour does not damage the SOFC (31).

In contrast, a combination of LOHC systems with PEMFCs would require heat from another source, such as burning a portion of the hydrogen produced, to facilitate the dehydrogenation reaction (25). This is because the waste heat of PEMFCs (below 180°C) is much lower than the heat required for the endothermic dehydrogenation process needed for hydrogen release. Hence an integrated LOHC–PEMFC system would not be as efficient as a LOHC–SOFC equivalent (31).

Interestingly, the SOFC technology has also shown promise when combined with a mixed LOHC feedstock (29). In a temperature cascade dehydrogenation process, a eutectic mixture of N-ethylcarbazole (NEC), N-phenylcarbazole, ammonia and biphenyl-diphenylmethane increases the energy generated per unit mass of the LOHC (kilowatt hour per kilogram LOHC) by 1.3–2 times, compared to an individual LOHC (29). The system integration of the LOHC technology, fuel cell technologies and green hydrogen produced via electrolysis using electricity from intermittent renewable sources, can thus enable the local storage of excess energy or renewable electricity. Such a process is entirely sustainable as no harmful emissions are produced.

The concept of system integration can be used as a safety device for the storage of electricity on a large-scale, such as the National Grid, UK. There are currently several reports detailing the problem of electricity fluctuation in the National Grid, due to the lowered electricity demand during the COVID-19 pandemic (32). Despite a rise in the percentage of people working from home, resulting in an increased demand for domestic electricity, an overall decrease in electricity demand was observed (32). This can be attributed to the closure of non-essential offices, schools, hospitality and leisure venues. As a consequence, measures such as temporarily shutting down flexible windfarms are expected to be taken, in order to lower the excess of energy in the National Grid (32). Too much electricity in the National Grid is equally as concerning as too little electricity, as the rise in frequency increases the potential to damage infrastructure (33). As the proportion of renewable energy in the National Grid will predictably increase in the future, the fluctuations in electricity are also expected to increase. An energy storage technology, such as LOHC combined with fuel cells, could therefore be extremely beneficial. Similar would apply to ammonia and methanol, where such hydrogen carriers can be deployed in combination with fuel cells.

The above-mentioned energy storage ability of the LOHC technology has been reported to have implementation potential in residential and commercial buildings (localised energy storage) (Figure 2) (34, 35).

Fig. 2.

Concept of integrating LOHC and fuel cell technologies to provide domestic energy. Republished with permission of The Royal Society of Chemistry, from (34); permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc

Concept of integrating LOHC and fuel cell technologies to provide domestic energy. Republished with permission of The Royal Society of Chemistry, from (34); permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc

For such an application, heterocyclic aromatic compounds, such as NEC, have been considered. Although the fully dehydrogenated form is a solid at room temperature, which limits dehydrogenation to 90% and reduces the efficiency of the overall system, NEC is a safer feedstock than other possibilities (for example a toxic toluene/methylcyclohexane system). Thus, the requirements for domestic implementation are better accommodated (34).

In contrast to an application in which the loaded-LOHC is not stored in the vicinity of intended use, a ‘decentralised energy storage’ system is proposed. This technology also uses fuel cells to meet the local demands for electrical energy but has the added economic advantage that any unused energy can be sold back to the National Grid, for example. Furthermore, provided the building has such a resource as solar panels fitted onto the roof, the potential for a completely self-sufficient system exists, while any waste heat generated from the fuel cells, electrolyser and exothermic hydrogenation process may be used to heat the building (34). Yet, with the requirement of fuel cells, electrolysers, hydrogenation and dehydrogenation units, in addition to LOHC storage tanks, the physical space requirement and initial economic investment are high (34). It has, however, been suggested that houses already possessing a crude-oil storage tank may avoid the requirement for a subsequent tank (34).

3. Green Hydrogen for Production of Sustainable Fuels and Chemicals

The transformation of green hydrogen back into electricity is just one example which demonstrates how the LOHC technology can facilitate energy storage. Green hydrogen, stored and transported in LOHCs, can also be used as a ‘green’ feedstock for the synthesis of fuels and chemicals. Moreover, green hydrogen production and storage is a vital part of most carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) technologies which are focused on capturing CO2 from either air or industrial flue gases and converting it into chemicals or fuels. For the moment, the hydrogen required for CCU technologies is considered to be generated from sustainable energy resources, however detailed integrated processes have often not yet been developed. The availability of green hydrogen for CCU processes is limited by competing demands such as hydrogen used in fuel cells for the transportation sector, and hydrogen used as domestic and industrial fuel supply.

Green hydrogen production is a key accelerator of CCU for production of chemicals and fuels at a commercial scale. Therefore, the production of hydrogen via electrolysis and its storage and transportation using LOHCs (or other hydrogen carriers such as ammonia or methanol) can be viewed as an integral part of sustainable chemicals and fuels manufacturing. One of such examples is methanol production, with a global production capacity of around 85 million metric tonnes in 2016, which is expected to rise in the coming years (36). Conventionally, methanol is synthesised using synthesis gas (syngas) produced from fossil fuels. However, a move towards the use of renewable hydrogen for sustainable methanol synthesis, using CO2 captured either from the air or from industrial flue gases, would enable a reduction of global GHG emissions.

Thus, a scenario under which low-cost green hydrogen (i.e. produced at locations with an abundant energy supply and so cheaper electricity) is transported using LOHCs to the industrial sites (for example, cement, steel, refinery industries) with high CO2 emissions to produce sustainable chemicals and fuels, might become viable in the future. Nevertheless, technoeconomic assessments and market penetration studies are required in order to understand under which circumstances this scenario can be realised.

4. Cement Industry

In the coming years, the proportion of electricity to be obtained from renewable sources is expected to increase. By 2024, it is predicted as much as 30% of the global electricity demand will be met with renewable energy sources: an increase of 4% in four years (37). The expected 15–30% decrease in the cost of solar power within the same time frame is also expected to accelerate the growth of renewable energy generation sites (37). However, the fluctuations in renewable electricity supply make it unreliable for direct industrial use. Integration of the LOHC technology within a cement plant has thus been studied as method of energy storage, which can be utilised to equalise the plant’s energy output (Figure 3) (38).

Fig. 3.

Schematic representation of the coupling of a cement plant to a LOHC system. Reproduced from (38), Copyright © 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Schematic representation of the coupling of a cement plant to a LOHC system. Reproduced from (38), Copyright © 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

The electricity for a cement plant can be supplied from renewable sources. During favourable conditions, the excess electricity is converted into hydrogen via electrolysis, followed by loading the hydrogen onto the LOHC and storing it. The dehydrogenation reaction is then performed at times of insufficient power supply from the renewable sources. The hydrogen released can be converted into electricity using fuel cell technology, a combustion engine or turbine (38). If an adequate power supply still cannot be achieved with the added electricity from the storage, the plant can be connected to the National Grid.

The higher temperatures required for the endothermic dehydrogenation reaction (i.e. hydrogen unloading) is a bottleneck of the LOHC technology, with the requirement of an external heating source resulting in a lowered system efficiency. In order to improve the efficiency of the LOHC system, the heat required for the dehydrogenation reaction can be coupled to the waste heat of a cement plant (Figure 3) (25). Arguably, this is a more suitable solution than the coupling of the dehydrogenation reaction to the waste heat from the exothermic hydrogenation reaction for heat recovery, as this is typically not of the same temperature level as is required for the dehydrogenation reaction. The waste heat from a cement plant, however, is more suitable (temperature level of up to 600°C) for the dehydrogenation process. Attractively, this avoids the need to reduce the efficiency of the process by burning a portion of the released hydrogen and there are no extra costs associated with employing an external heating source (25, 38).

Integrating a LOHC system with a cement plant allows an overall reduction in the working electricity cost of a cement plant. For a plant with an average power demand of 12.5 MW, it has been found that converting the hydrogen released in the dehydrogenation reaction to electricity and using this to power the plant would reduce electricity costs by around €1 million per annum (38). Although this saving has not been expressed as a percentage of the total electricity cost, it has been suggested that successful coupling of wind energy and the LOHC technology to a cement plant would achieve amortisation in fewer than 10 years. This is on the condition that investment costs are kept to a limit of €3.5 million. In addition, it should also be noted that the savings in electricity costs are calculated on the assumption that a thermal energy storage system is also installed, which ensures hydrogen can be released from the LOHC even in times of lower exhaust heat from the cement plant (38). In the absence of such a thermal storage system, fluctuations in the temperature of the waste heat must be provided for with the addition of a hydrogen burner (38).

5. Steel Industry

The iron and steel industry is responsible for an annual output of approximately 2.5–3.0 GtCO2 year–1, with up to 10% originating from within the European Union (EU). This represents 6% of total global CO2 emissions, and 16% of total industrial CO2 emissions. To reach the EU climate targets, the iron and steel industries must decrease their CO2 emissions by up to 90% by 2050. Several processes are being explored to reduce CO2 emissions from the steel industry. They can be broadly divided into two categories: carbon-based (coal- or natural gas-based) and hydrogen-based steel production (39). In carbon-based steel production, the residual gas emissions from the iron and steel industry can be transformed into valuable products, such as fuels or chemicals, or captured and stored or both. Hydrogen-based technologies, which use hydrogen as the reducing agent instead of carbon, avoid carbon emissions altogether, provided that hydrogen used in these processes is carbon-free hydrogen, produced by electrolysis of water using renewable electricity.

Numerous steel manufacturers have started to explore hydrogen-based technologies. As an example, voestalpine AG, Austria, has set up a goal of direct avoidance of CO2 emissions in their steel manufacturing over the coming years by moving towards the use of green hydrogen for steel production (i.e. direct reduction of iron (DRI)). To this end, voestalpine together with their project partners have commenced the production of green hydrogen at the voestalpine premises in Linz, Austria within the framework of the EU-funded project called H2FUTURE (40, 41). In this project, the proton exchange membrane electrolysis technology is demonstrated on an industrial scale (6 MW), simulating rapid load changes in electricity generated from renewable energy sources and from electric arc furnace steelmaking (grid balancing). Thyssenkrupp Steel Europe AG, Germany’s biggest steelmaker, is also looking into using hydrogen for steel manufacturing. RWE AG, a German multinational energy company, and Thyssenkrupp Steel Europe AG have agreed to collaborate towards a longer-term hydrogen partnership to supply green hydrogen for steel manufacturing (42, 43). RWE plans to build a 100 MW electrolyser which can produce 1.7 tonnes of hydrogen per hour for Thyssenkrupp Steel Europe AG. This could potentially cover 70% of the quantity required by the Thyssenkrupp steelmaker’s blast furnace in Duisburg, Germany.

Another example is a joint venture between SSAB, LKAB and Vattenfall, all in Sweden, within the framework of the Hydrogen Breakthrough Ironmaking Technology (HYBRIT) project. The aim is again to reduce CO2 emissions and decarbonise the steel industry by replacing coal with hydrogen in the steelmaking process to produce fossil-free steel at Sweden’s pioneering fossil-free steel production plant (Figure 4) (4446).

Fig. 4.

Steel manufacturing in the HYBRIT route using green hydrogen vs. blast furnace route. Reprinted from (46) under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Steel manufacturing in the HYBRIT route using green hydrogen vs. blast furnace route. Reprinted from (46) under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Interestingly, the HYBRIT project faces two major challenges: (a) to develop an effective process to use 100% hydrogen on an industrial scale; (b) to produce hydrogen in an energy efficient way that is economically justifiable and commercially viable (46). To this end, the HYBRIT project has recently invested SEK 200 million (£17.5 million) in a pilot plant for storage of green hydrogen in Lulea, Sweden near the SSAB steel manufacturing site (47). The implementation study for the HYBRIT initiative has recognised the need for large-scale storage of hydrogen. To ensure an even flow of green hydrogen produced from renewable energy for steel manufacturing at the SSAB site, a large-scale hydrogen gas storage facility is required to balance the electricity system with an increasing proportion of weather-dependent power generation. It is expected that the integration of large-scale storage of green hydrogen to a fossil-free value chain for steel manufacturing will allow the fossil-free steel to be price competitive.

In the HYBRIT project, the 100 m3 subterranean (25–35 m underground) pilot hydrogen gas storage facility is built in a bedrock cavern with a steel lining as a sealing layer to store pressurised hydrogen (47). In contrast to SSAB, other steel manufacturing companies might not have the facilities for the underground storage of green hydrogen. Furthermore, geographically some of the steel manufacturing sites might not have access to low-cost surplus renewable electricity. In addition, if they are located in energy demanding industrial districts, numerous sectors will compete for green hydrogen or renewable electricity to reduce their CO2 emissions in the near future. To ensure a competitive production cost for the fossil-free steel (i.e. DRI technology), an effective hydrogen storage and transportation technology, such as the LOHC technology, might thus be required to allow a reliable and on-demand supply of green hydrogen.

As large-scale storage of hydrogen is an important part for a fossil-free value chain for steel manufacturing, it should become an integral part of the DRI technology. For the deployment of the LOHC technology in the steel industry, two scenarios can be foreseen. One is an onsite hydrogen production and storage in LOHCs. Such a scenario can be realised when a steel manufacturing site has access to surplus renewable electricity from intermittent resources to produce hydrogen that should be stored to balance the electricity. Another one is using LOHCs to transport hydrogen, which is produced at geographical locations with high availability of renewable electricity, to a steel manufacturing site with low availability of renewable electricity but high demand for green hydrogen.

6. Mobility Application: Transport Industry

BMW AG, Germany, has been developing automobiles that employ hydrogen technology for around 40 years (48). The first model built using such a technology was named the BMW Hydrogen 7, and comprised the storage of liquid hydrogen in a cryogenic tank. However, during its early development serious technological challenges were realised (48). For instance, sufficient hydrogen storage space must be provided to enable longer-distance travel, but size and weight limitations for a practical motor vehicle must also be considered. In addition, the safety risks associated with burning hydrogen in the internal combustion engine must also be adequately minimised. As only 100 vehicles of the Hydrogen 7 model were ever released, it can be deduced that the disadvantages of the technology outweighed the advantages (48). More recently, BMW has announced a partnership with Toyota Motor Corporation, Japan, to develop a fuel cell-based system suitable for integration within its motor vehicles (49). It is predicted that the new model will be commercially available by 2022 (49).

As an alternative for onboard liquid hydrogen storage in mobility applications, the LOHC technology has been suggested (Figure 5) (50). Advantageously, onboard storage of hydrogen in the LOHC would resemble that of gasoline and diesel (liquid state of the LOHC at ambient pressures), which is widely understood, and the safety hazards of storing high-pressured hydrogen are removed (48). Moreover, a range of 500 km is reportedly achievable using 100 l of NEC loaded with hydrogen (equivalent to 5 kg of hydrogen) as the LOHC (48).

Fig. 5.

Schematic representation of the LOHC technology within a motor vehicle. Republished with permission of The Royal Society of Chemistry, from (50); permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc

Schematic representation of the LOHC technology within a motor vehicle. Republished with permission of The Royal Society of Chemistry, from (50); permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc

For motor vehicles, the loaded LOHC would be transported to the refuelling station, before a subsequent release of hydrogen from the carrier in a catalytic dehydrogenation reaction occurring onboard the vehicle (50). In contrast to diesel and gasoline fuels, the dehydrogenated LOHC would not be consumed, but stored within the vehicle until replaced with new hydrogen-loaded material at a designated station (48). The unloaded LOHC can then be transported back to a hydrogenation site and reloaded. Therefore, either two tanks, or a tank capable of separating the loaded and unloaded forms of the LOHC, is required. The hydrogen produced could then be used in an internal combustion engine or combined with fuel cell technologies. Despite the burning of a portion of hydrogen to meet the working temperature of a typical fuel cell, it has been predicted that the overall efficiency would still be higher than that of a combustion engine (48).

Highlighting the attractiveness of implementing the LOHC technology within the mobility sector, Hyundai Motor Company, South Korea, has recently announced plans to develop an onboard LOHC storage technology (51). This encompasses a partnership with Hydrogenious LOHC Technologies GmbH, Germany, who will supply dibenzyltoluene to be used as the LOHC. Initially, the technology will be introduced in South Korea, before being extended to the European market (51). It is expected that the development of LOHC compatible automobiles will raise the profile of the technology as an important tool in the transition to the hydrogen economy.

The use of hydrogen in maritime applications is also an active research area aimed at reducing the pollution from the maritime industry. One of the major challenges is the storage of hydrogen on board of ships (52). The LOHC technology is seen as one of the potential hydrogen storage solutions (5254). For instance, the use of a double chamber tank system has been proposed, which is capable of separating the loaded and unloaded carriers during the fuelling process into different sections of the tank (53). Nevertheless, providing a suitable level of heat to facilitate the dehydrogenation reaction remains problematic.

Similarly, the use of LOHCs in trains has also been considered (55). Since a significant portion of trains are currently operated using diesel, or a combination of electricity and diesel, future environmental-focused objectives are likely to concentrate heavily on finding alternatives to these fuels (55). Although trains can be powered electrically with renewable electricity to meet zero-emission transportation goals, building the infrastructure of overhead wiring is relatively expensive. Currently, 42% of the UK railway routes are electrified and can become zero-carbon when using renewable electricity (56). The remaining 58% still rely on diesel (56). An alternative approach to electrification is the use of hydrogen fuel cells to generate electricity onboard to power trains (57). Hydrogen powered trains have a potential to revolutionise railway operations in Europe (56).

Using LOHCs for onboard hydrogen storage, coupled with hydrogen fuel cells for electricity production to power trains would avoid the production of hazardous emissions (i.e. CO2, soot, nitrogen oxides), while still permitting long-distance travel, an essential criterion for trains. In a recent study, the LOHC technology (with dibenzyltoluene as the LOHC) was found to be a very promising option for hydrogen storage, transport and release and can be combined with electricity generation by hydrogen fuel cells to power trains (55). The choice of dibenzyltoluene as a LOHC was influenced by its favourable properties, such as low flammability, low toxicity and liquid-state within the range of hydrogenation and dehydrogenation temperatures, in addition to its commercial availability as a heat-transfer oil (55). Notably, this technology has been supposed to be favourable over alternatives, such as batteries, which are typically characterised by low energy densities (55). Furthermore, the hydrogen fuel cell technologies required for the integration with the LOHC technology for onboard hydrogen storage are expected to become a lower cost alternative to battery and diesel options in the second half of the decade.

Even though the studies into hydrogen-powered aviation are somewhat immature in comparison to trains and cars, it is anticipated that sustainable aviation will quickly become a central research focus in the coming years. Like other mobility sectors, hydrogen is again expected to be named as a primary energy source for propulsion in the aviation industry. This can be realised either through powering aircrafts with electricity generated through hydrogen fuel cells, direct burning of hydrogen in gas turbines or using hydrogen as a building block for production of sustainable synthetic aviation fuels (58). Notably, Airbus has already revealed three hydrogen-powered planes to lower aircraft emissions, which comprise the use of hydrogen gas-turbine engines (59, 60). In addition, Airbus SE, The Netherlands, has postulated the combined use of hydrogen fuel cells with a gas-turbine engine to create a ‘highly efficient hybrid-electric propulsion system’ (61). The urgency of this sustainable transition has also been emphasised by the Swedish government. A mandatory reduction in GHG emissions, originating from aviation fuels, will be introduced for fuel to be sold in the country from 2021 (62). This will start at a 0.8% reduction in 2021 and reach 27% by 2030, in preparation for reaching their national fossil-free target in 2045 (62).

In summary, the LOHC technology is an attractive solution for the storage and transportation of hydrogen to allow a reliable and on-demand hydrogen supply, enabling industrial decarbonisation. The potential deployment and integration of the LOHC technology within different industries, such as the transportation sector, steel and cement industries, the use of stored hydrogen to produce sustainable fuels and chemicals from flue gases, and a system integration of fuel cells and LOHCs for energy storage, is depicted in Figure 6.

Fig. 6.

Schematic representation of the potential deployment and integration of the LOHC technology within different industries

Schematic representation of the potential deployment and integration of the LOHC technology within different industries

7. Summary and Perspectives

The possibility of deployment and integration of LOHC systems within different industries is reviewed in this study. These include: the transportation sector, steel and cement industries, the use of stored hydrogen to produce fuels and chemicals from flue gases and system integration of fuel cells and LOHCs for storing renewable electricity. An effective system integration of the LOHC technology with different industries might help with the cost reduction of the LOHC technology, when for example, waste heat is used for dehydrogenation of LOHCs. Importantly, the deployment of the LOHCs for storage and transportation of hydrogen to allow a reliable and on-demand hydrogen supply might enable energy-intensive industries to reduce their emissions and meet decarbonisation goals.

Numerous possibilities for the deployment and integration of LOHCs within different industries might necessitate the use of different LOHC carriers in each instance. While a carrier choice offers a large amount of flexibility in the LOHC technology, the myriad of possible carriers and catalysts combined with reactor technologies might be considered as one of the factors impeding the integration and commercial deployment of the LOHC technology across different industries. Customer-tailored solutions and offerings might need to be developed to accommodate specific requirements. A review of the most prominent LOHC systems, focusing on properties of LOHCs and catalytic materials used for hydrogenation and dehydrogenation of LOHCs, is presented in our following work dedicated to the analysis of LOHC systems (63).

By |2022-06-16T08:58:16+00:00June 16th, 2022|Weld Engineering Services|Comments Off on Potential Deployment and Integration of Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier Technology within Different Industries

Hydrogen Storage and Transportation Technologies to Enable the Hydrogen Economy: Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers

Johnson Matthey Technol. Rev., 2022, 66, (3), 246

1. Introduction

In recent years there has been great interest in reducing fossil fuel reliance. This comes in an attempt for countries to deliver on pledges outlined in the Paris Agreement of 2016, which was compiled to tackle climate change by lowering greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) (1, 2). Individual nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are central to this agreement, detailing the collective efforts required to achieve longer-term global aims. Within these NDCs, several countries made specific references to the increased use of renewable energy resources, given their widely recognised environmental advantages over more traditional fossil fuel equivalents. Now, atmospheric CO2 levels are higher than any recorded in the previous 800,000 years, with a rise from 300 ppm to 400 ppm being recorded over the last 70 years (1950–2020) (3). These continually rising levels are commonly attributed to the increased consumption of fossil fuels, which are conveniently employed to satisfy ever-changing energy demands. Yet the consequences are serious: during the 20th century a 1°C increase in average global temperature accompanied the growth of CO2 emissions, causing drastic changes in weather patterns and rising sea-levels (4, 5).

Fossil fuels are extremely widely used because of convenience, availability and the economic advantage of a lower initial capital expenditure. Developing a ‘greener’ system with a comparable energy density and transport efficiency is a challenge (6). Despite several years of research into alternatives, there is still a significant way to go before achieving the goals proposed in the Paris Agreement by 2050. In 2016 just 19.5% of the global energy demand was fulfilled by renewable sources (7). Germany, however, has pledged that by 2050, 80% of its energy will be produced from renewable sources, whereas other countries have implemented strategies to increase collaborative research to achieve net-zero emissions (7, 8). As an example, Portugal and The Netherlands signed a memorandum of understanding to develop a strategic export-import value chain to ensure production and transport of green hydrogen from Portugal to The Netherlands and its hinterland via the ports of Sines and Rotterdam (9).

Hydrogen is a well-studied alternative to fossil fuels. With its combustion producing only water as a byproduct, the environmental advantages of employing hydrogen as an energy carrier are obvious. However, at present, around 96% of the annual global hydrogen production is generated from fossil fuels (grey or brown hydrogen) (Table I). This comprises steam reforming of methane (48%), reforming of oil/naphtha (30%) and coal gasification (18%) (11). Thus, in order to completely remove reliance on the non-renewable, finite, fossil fuel resources, an alternative method of hydrogen production is required. This can be achieved with the electrolysis of water. Provided the energy for this process is obtained from renewable sources, sustainable, greenhouse gas emission-free hydrogen production is possible. Hence, hydrogen produced in this manner is termed green hydrogen.

Table I

A Comparative Summary of Hydrogen Production Processes and Hydrogen Colour Codes (10)a

Brown Grey Blue Green
Feedstock Coal Natural gas Natural gas Renewable electricity
Carbon capture Gasification, no CCS Steam methane reforming, no CCS Advanced gas reforming + CCS Electrolysis
Emissions Highest GHG emissions (19 tCO2 tH2–1) High GHG emissions (11 tCO2 tH2–1) Low GHG emissions (0.2 tCO2 tH2–1) Potential for zero GHG emissions
Cost US$1.2–2.1 kgH2–1 US$1–2.1 kgH2–1 US$1.5–2.9 kgH2–1 US$3–7.5 kgH2–1

The European Union (EU) has pledged billions of Euros to develop the so-called European Green Deal in the coming years. Here, hydrogen is considered ‘a key’ to fulfilling the ambitious target of halving carbon emissions by 2030 (8). To achieve this, the European Green Deal acknowledges the need to increase green hydrogen production capacity, setting targets for around 10 million tonnes of hydrogen to be produced annually by 2030 (8). Currently, the hydrogen supplied from electrolysers stands at just 4% of demand (8).

A third colour-coded category of hydrogen refers to blue hydrogen (Table I). Blue hydrogen is often considered a vital tool in transitioning from grey to green hydrogen production and, like grey hydrogen, uses a fossil fuel feedstock. However, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies are also employed to capture CO2, reducing the greenhouse gas emissions (12). Given the increase in carbon-tax expected over the coming decades, blue hydrogen is an important improvement upon grey hydrogen, despite the currently higher initial capital expenditure (1214). Brown, grey, blue and green hydrogen (Table I) are the most discussed colour-coded categories of hydrogen within the energy industry. Nevertheless, countless other hydrogen colours (i.e. the hydrogen colour spectrum), such as yellow, pink and turquoise hydrogen, also exist with each colour code describing the different type of source or process used to produce hydrogen (15, 16). For instance: pink hydrogen is generated by electrolysis of water using electricity from a nuclear power plant; yellow hydrogen is produced via electrolysis using solar power; turquoise hydrogen is generated via methane pyrolysis through direct splitting of methane into hydrogen and solid carbon (15, 16).

Some countries are well-positioned to the transition to blue hydrogen production, with a potential access to large, offshore CCS facilities (17). In contrast, many landlocked countries in Europe have a greater focus on the transition to green, rather than blue, hydrogen due to their limited access to offshore facilities (18). In addition, with blue hydrogen still requiring a finite resource, the demand of one country may eventually be pushed onto another, where resources are more available (12, 19). For example, an exhaustion of natural gas supplies in one location would require a country to source this elsewhere, resulting in the production of hydrogen and its utilisation at different locations. This dependence (expected to be governed by maintaining amicable international relations) is another factor causing several countries to seriously consider the favourability of blue over green hydrogen, or vice versa (12).

Producing hydrogen from renewable sources and development of technologies for this purpose have huge environmental benefits and supports the implementation of the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) (20). It contributes to multiple SDGs, such as SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 13 (Climate Action) (20). According to SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy, a substantial increase in the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix is required by 2030 (i.e. Target 7.2 of SDG 7) (21). However, the energy output from renewable sources is intermittent and dependent on geographic, seasonal and temporal factors. Furthermore, sites of highest energy potential for renewable hydrogen production (such as a desert, offshore wind and tidal farms) are rarely located in areas of highest energy demand, such as densely populated cities in central and southern Europe (1, 22). When moving towards a global low carbon hydrogen economy with the aim of meeting net-zero climate goals, a reliable storage and transportation of hydrogen at scale is a challenge which needs to be tackled to achieve a widespread usage of renewable hydrogen. The possibility to store and transport hydrogen is essential for the integration of high shares of renewable energy source with positive effects on SDGs (23).

Numerous technologies and options are currently being explored for effective hydrogen storage and transportation to facilitate a smooth transition to the hydrogen economy (24). LOHC is one such technology which has gained considerable attention in recent years (1, 6, 7, 2527). In our work, which consists of the present paper and two accompanying papers (28, 29), we provide an overview and new perspectives on the LOHC technology among different hydrogen storage and transportation technologies. We analyse the advantages and disadvantages of the LOHC technology and future considerations for its optimisation which might accelerate its commercial deployment. Furthermore, in our following second paper we describe the potential deployment and integration of LOHCs within different industries: the transportation sector (automobiles, ships, trains); steel and cement industries; the use of stored hydrogen to produce fuels and chemicals from flue gases; and system integration of fuel cells and LOHCs for energy storage (28). Due to numerous possibilities for the commercial deployment and integration of LOHCs within different industries, the use of different LOHC systems might be considered to accommodate specific requirements. A review of the most prominent LOHC systems, focusing on properties of LOHCs and catalytic materials used for hydrogenation and dehydrogenation of LOHCs, is presented in our third paper dedicated to the analysis of LOHC systems (29).

2. Hydrogen Storage and Transportation Technologies

Despite the attractively high gravimetric energy density of hydrogen (120 MJ kg–1), the low volumetric energy density at ambient conditions necessitates the use of pressurised or liquified hydrogen to ensure economic viability (30). On a large-scale, the use of stored, highly pressurised hydrogen in transport systems presents serious safety concerns, such as an explosion. The technology is also costly, much like that of liquified hydrogen storage, which requires low temperatures (–252°C). In addition, such liquified hydrogen technologies can result in losses of between 0.3% and 3% of the hydrogen due to boil-off from the storage system (1).

Compressed hydrogen is typically transported through pipelines. As a result, long-distance transport is significantly more challenging when compared to the infrastructure, such as ships or railroads, currently available to transport liquid fossil fuels. Although attempts have been made to inject hydrogen into the natural gas grid and numerous countries are exploring blending hydrogen with natural gas, it can be argued that the intercontinental transport of hydrogen would require innovative solutions (3133). These solutions are predicted to resemble current methods, relying on tanker vessels, trucks and railroads.

To overcome the challenges raised with the transportation and storage of hydrogen as an energy vector, more sophisticated concepts have been developed (Figure 1) (24). One such concept involves the use of low- and high-temperature metal hydride systems, where reversible adsorption and desorption of hydrogen is permitted through formation and breakage of chemical bonds with the storage material (1, 11, 34). Here, the terms low- and high-temperature systems refer to the dehydrogenation reaction temperature. These methods of solid-state hydrogen storage, therefore, do not require the demanding pressures associated with storing compressed hydrogen.

Fig. 1.

Categorisation of hydrogen storage methods. Reprinted from (24) under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CCBY 4.0)

Categorisation of hydrogen storage methods. Reprinted from (24) under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CCBY 4.0)

Low temperature metal hydrides are capable of releasing hydrogen at ambient temperatures and pressures but are typically limited to a maximum hydrogen capacity of 2.15 wt% (for example, LaNi5H6) (35). On the contrary, high temperature hydrides are attractive for hydrogen storage because of their high hydrogen storage capacities (6.5 hydrogen atoms per cm3 (7.6 wt%) for the metal hydride MgH2, compared to a hydrogen storage density of 0.99 hydrogen atoms per cm3 for hydrogen gas and 4.2 hydrogen atoms per cm3 for liquified hydrogen). However, disadvantages of high temperature metal hydride systems include slow reaction kinetics of the adsorption-desorption process. Moreover, the high desorption enthalpies of these systems require high temperatures (300°C for MgH2) for hydrogen release at atmospheric pressure, raising questions around the economic viability of the technology (3436). The reversibility of the process is also limited by the decomposition of the metal hydride, making a regular replacement of this storage material necessary.

A different concept for solid-state hydrogen storage is the use of metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). Here, hydrogen is stored in the pores of the MOF framework, where the rate of hydrogen adsorption is dependent on its diffusivity in the particular MOF chosen (37). MOFs can be tailored to specific applications, including supercapacitors, fuel storage and batteries and have been noted for their short refuelling times (37). However, this technology typically requires low temperatures (ca. –196°C) and high pressures (100 bar) to achieve a reasonable energy density (7.2 MJ l–1, 4.5 wt%). To illustrate this, the MOF displaying the highest hydrogen storage capacity to date (MOF‐210: total hydrogen gravimetric uptake of 17.6 wt%) must be operated at 80 bar and –196°C (38). It is therefore possible that a low system efficiency in terms of energy consumption, and thus cost, will be observed. It has been predicted that the hydrogen storage capacity of MOFs can be improved by increasing MOF surface area, but there are experimental limitations in synthesising such structures (38). Moreover, as with using compressed hydrogen, the requirement of a higher-pressure system implicates explosion risks (37).

Borohydrides have also been considered for hydrogen storage applications, given their attractively high theoretical storage capacities. For example, LiBH4 has a gravimetric hydrogen storage capacity of up to 18.5 wt% (24). However, in practice this is rarely achievable as stable hydrides, such as LiH, can form during the hydrogen unloading process, for which high temperatures (typically greater than 300°C) are also required. Direct employment of borohydrides for hydrogen storage applications is therefore unfeasible. Yet, a technology combining both borohydrides and metal hydrides is now being considered. Such a system reduces the endothermicity of the dehydrogenation process, facilitating hydrogen release at lower temperatures, but the kinetics of both the hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions are slow and require suitable catalytic additives (24). This increases the complexity of the technology.

Chemical hydrides, both organic and inorganic, are another method available to store hydrogen, and rely on chemical reactions. Chemical hydrogen storage is used to describe storage technologies in which hydrogen is both released and restored through a chemical reaction. Like metal hydrides, chemical hydrides also form chemical bonds between the storage material and hydrogen. Yet, these two hydride classes have very different properties. Arguably the most significant of these is that chemical hydrides (such as methanol) are generally liquids at ambient conditions. This simplifies transportation and storage issues associated with either gaseous hydrogen or solid-state hydrides. Provided ammonia is in its liquid form, which can easily be achieved by applying a pressure of 10 bar at ambient temperature, ammonia can also be considered a chemical hydride, with a very attractive storage density (17.7 wt%) (24). In addition, given both methanol and ammonia are already synthesised on a large scale, there is the possibility of using existing infrastructure and production plants (24). Both chemicals have also been reported to have potential as hydrogen-alternative energy vectors (i.e. direct use as a fuel) rather than as hydrogen storage materials (24).

Ammonia is currently of industrial interest for hydrogen storage and transportation, given its high gravimetric hydrogen density (17.7 wt%) (24, 3942). Additionally, the high ignition temperature of ammonia increases the safety of the technology and is considered advantageous (41, 42). When green hydrogen is used for the production of ammonia, such ammonia is classified as green ammonia (4346). Green ammonia, when liquified, facilitates the transport and storage of hydrogen, allowing existing infrastructure to be used (42). With the potential for worldwide transport of the green ammonia, for example via ships, the distribution of green hydrogen to growing zero-emission markets will be facilitated (42). Once transported to the site of use, ammonia can be reconverted into carbon-free hydrogen which can be used at hydrogen refuelling stations, for example (42, 47).

Within the framework of the NEOM project it was recently announced that 650 tons of carbon-free hydrogen per day will be produced using 4 GW of renewable power from solar and wind in Saudi Arabia (48). To facilitate hydrogen storage and transportation, the hydrogen will be converted into 3500 tons of green ammonia per day (or 1.2 million tons per year) which will be transported around the world and then converted back into carbon-free hydrogen at hydrogen refuelling stations (48). By supplying the fuel cells currently used within the transport sector (specifically in buses and trucks) with this hydrogen, it is predicted that over 3 million tons per year of CO2 emission can be prevented: equivalent to all emissions from 700,000 cars (48).

Although ammonia is less flammable than hydrogen, concerns around its toxicity to both humans and the environment have been raised (49). A spillage of this feedstock (for example during transport) could therefore have serious consequences, and questions around its suitability have been raised. However, it is important to remember that suitable controls have been employed to mitigate the risks associated with fossil fuels (in the forms of gasoline and diesel), which are also very harmful substances. Moreover, as ammonia is already synthesised on an industrial scale (Haber-Bosch process) for example, in the fertiliser industry, it can be argued that the safety concerns are known and can be managed effectively. If the ammonia were not to be dehydrogenated at its destination, but instead used as a fuel itself, the ammonia would be classified as a renewable fuel (50). As an example, using ammonia as a transportation marine fuel is currently being explored within the shipping sector to cut fossil fuel use in ocean-going vessels (5155).

Liquid hydrocarbons and formic acid can also fall into the category of hydrogen carriers. Provided such carriers are produced using green hydrogen and atmospheric CO2, or CO2 from waste streams, the cycle can be labelled as carbon-neutral (11). However, as the carriers are used as liquid fuels, regeneration of the carrier material is not possible and thus new material must be purchased for every cycle, much like employing fossil fuels as energy vectors (11).

As previously discussed, renewable methanol can also be considered as a chemical hydride. Although the gravimetric energy density of methanol is lower than that of ammonia (12.5 wt% and 17.7 wt%, respectively), it is significantly higher than a typical metal hydride, such as MgH2 (7.6 wt%, Table II) (24, 37). Most commonly, methanol is synthesised via the hydrogenation of CO2 and carbon monoxide, whereas the release of hydrogen from methanol is done in the methanol steam reforming process, which involves the reaction of methanol with water (24). This process is generally preferred over methanol decomposition, permitting the release of three moles of hydrogen in comparison to the two moles from methanol decomposition, where the extra mole of hydrogen is provided by the water (24). Yet for the steam reforming reaction, temperatures of between 220°C and 330°C are often required to meet the thermodynamic demands of the endothermic reaction (24).

Table II

Overview of Hydrogen Storage Methodsa (24, 37)

Method of hydrogen storage Gravimetric energy density, wt% Volumetric energy density, MJ l–1
Compressed 5.7 4.9
Liquid 7.5 6.4
Chemical hydride
• liquid ammoniab 17.7 11.5
• methanol 12.5 15.8
MOF 4.5 7.2
MgH2 (metal hydride) 7.6 13.2
Metal borohydrides 14.9–18.5 9.8–17.6
LOHC 8.5 7.0

Although renewable methanol (produced via the hydrogenation of CO2 waste streams) is produced on a much smaller scale than its non-renewable equivalent (in which natural gas is used to produce a mixture of carbon monoxide, CO2 and hydrogen), similarities in the two processes exist (24). With an overlap in the technology, progress in renewable methanol production is better facilitated than other hydrogen storage technologies and as a result the first renewable methanol production plant was constructed in Iceland in 2011 by Carbon Recycling International (24). Interestingly, it has been reported that the separation of methanol and water (via distillation) is not required when using methanol as a hydrogen storage medium: the hydrogen can simply be released from the mixture in a steam-reforming reaction (24). This simplifies the process and eliminates costs associated with the energy intensive distillation step. However, CO2 is also stored within the methanol-water mixture and hence is also released upon steam reforming. If a pure hydrogen output stream is required, it has been predicted that CO2 could be separated from the hydrogen relatively easily, but this process would require additional separation technologies (24). Alternatively, the gaseous hydrogen and CO2 mixture could be used directly within proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells (56).

3. Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers

LOHCs, also categorised under chemical hydrides, are another option for the storage and transport of hydrogen. The first studies into this technology were completed in the 1980s by Japanese researchers, studying a benzene/cyclohexane system (1). The LOHC process comprises a two-step process, which is based on the loading of hydrogen onto the chosen LOHC in a catalytic hydrogenation reaction, followed by the unloading of hydrogen in a catalytic dehydrogenation reaction. This second step thus produces a stream of gaseous hydrogen alongside the unloaded form of the LOHC, which can then be reused in subsequent cycles (Figure 2). Between these two steps, the hydrogen-rich form of the LOHC can be easily stored and transported at ambient pressures, given its liquid state. The LOHC technology eliminates the expense associated with repeatedly purchasing a feedstock (i.e. the LOHC) and hence may be considered advantageous. Yet one must also consider the expense of returning the unloaded LOHC to the hydrogenation plant. In some cases, finding an alternative use for the unloaded LOHC may be most cost-effective.

Fig. 2.

Schematic representation of the LOHC concept, using ethylbenzene as a model LOHC molecule

Schematic representation of the LOHC concept, using ethylbenzene as a model LOHC molecule

Aromatic molecules are typically used as LOHCs due to their high hydrogen loading capacities (57). In addition, the cyclic compounds hydrogenated form of aromatic compounds have relatively good thermodynamic properties for the more challenging, endothermic dehydrogenation reaction. This can be explained by the stability gained on formation of the aromatic system (58). In contrast, dehydrogenation of bonds outside of such an aromatic system is difficult (even if the double bond formed can become conjugated with the system). For instance, dehydrogenation of ethylcyclohexane would form ethylbenzene not styrene as a result of thermodynamic limitations (58).

Importantly, the high hydrogen loading capacities of LOHCs enable high hydrogen storage and transport efficiencies, increasing the economic viability of the technology. This is highlighted by previous research that identified several potential carriers which meet the objectives for storage capacity and volumetric energy density, set by the United States Department of Energy (US DoE), as 6.5 wt% and 1.7 kWh l–1, respectively (7). However, it is important to consider that the respective hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions may not always go to 100% completion.

As noted above, catalysts are required to facilitate hydrogen loading and unloading via hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions. Despite some reports detailing advantages of homogeneous catalysts (including lower operating temperatures and improved dehydrogenation product specificity), heterogeneous catalysts are considered preferable for both reactions in large-scale applications (26, 59).

A great majority of current studies examine the hydrogenation and dehydrogenation steps individually, often employing different catalysts to complete the two transformations. Most commonly, platinum group metal (pgm) catalysts, namely platinum, palladium or ruthenium-based, are employed (7, 30, 60, 61).

The LOHC technology is also an attractive option for stationary on-site energy storage (on-grid and off-grid), enabling long-term storage of large amounts of energy, such as seasonal storage and energy production buffering (26). In this case, a catalyst which allows both hydrogenation and dehydrogenation to be carried out in the same reactor through altering process conditions (such as temperature and pressure) can be deployed. The development of such a bifunctional catalyst would be an attractive research objective and facilitate a lower capital expenditure since a set-up in which only a single reactor and its associated pipework is necessary. From a process safety perspective, the ambient hydrogen storage pressures facilitated with the use of LOHC technology are an improvement on using a pressurised hydrogen storage tank.

Since the catalytic hydrogenation and dehydrogenation processes are exothermic and endothermic reactions, respectively, the hydrogenation step is typically performed at lower temperatures (100–240°C) and higher pressures (10–50 bar) than the dehydrogenation step (150–400°C, atmospheric pressure) (62). Thus, a higher level of heat is needed for the dehydrogenation reaction, which is often provided by an external heating source (62). To improve efficiency, system integration and intensification can be achieved, with the heat produced in the hydrogenation step being used to drive the dehydrogenation reaction when using LOHCs for on-site hydrogen storage (63). This would not be possible when the hydrogen is produced in a different location to where it is needed.

4. Advantages and Disadvantages of Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier Technology

As discussed, a timely migration away from fossil fuel reliance is of the utmost environmental importance, and is achievable with a combination of renewable energy, production of green hydrogen via electrolysis and hydrogen storage and transportation technologies. However, implementation of a LOHC hydrogen storage and transportation system also has advantages over simply using compressed hydrogen, or direct employment of renewable electricity. On the contrary to storage and transportation of compressed hydrogen, the small quantity of gas present in a LOHC system minimises the risk of explosion and facilitates the safe handling of hydrogen. Importantly, this allows for the long-term storage of large amounts of loaded LOHCs at ambient conditions, without the loss of hydrogen or negative impact upon carrier storage density, which has been reported with the use of compressed hydrogen and alternative storage technologies such as metal hydrides (64).

The elimination of pressure-related hazards also makes LOHCs suitable for long-distance transport. The liquid state of the carriers enables existing infrastructure, originally built for crude-oil transportation such as pipeline networks, to be used (1). However, unlike liquified or compressed hydrogen, the term ‘infrastructure’ also includes the use of ships and trucks, which enables worldwide transport of hydrogen using LOHCs. This too is often considered as one of the main advantages of the LOHC technology, meaning the dehydrogenation plant required to release hydrogen from LOHCs does not need to be located within proximity of the hydrogen production site. Thus, the LOHC technology allows green hydrogen release (and indirect renewable energy use) in locations which are not best suited for renewable energy production. Moreover, as LOHCs are in the liquid state, they resemble current fossil fuel-based energy vectors, such as diesel and gasoline. Given societal familiarity with these systems, it is predicted that public acceptance of the LOHC technology will be increased in comparison to concepts such as metal hydrides, where public understanding is limited (7). This potential for greater acceptance of LOHC systems is considered advantageous (7).

In theory, the reversibility of the hydrogen loading and unloading processes allows LOHC to be used continually without replacement. Practically, however, this is unlikely due to LOHC material losses from side-reactions and incomplete unloading reactions (1). The choice of LOHC is also critical: for maximum efficiency, both the dehydrogenated and hydrogenated form must remain in their liquid state throughout the cycle. For instance, if the dehydrogenated form of the carrier material is a solid at ambient conditions, transport complications arise as it cannot be pumped through a pipe or into a truck or ship. To maintain the liquid state, incomplete hydrogen unloading or dilution of the LOHC would be required, reducing storage and transport efficiencies (7).

Moreover, the toxicity of the LOHCs themselves must be considered and evaluated in terms of projected applications; some LOHCs, such as benzene and toluene, have a toxicity so great that their use in practical applications is unfeasible, despite attractively high hydrogen storage capacities (65).

The choice of carrier can also influence the overall cost of the technology in other ways. Aside from the obvious cost associated with purchasing the LOHC feedstock, the released hydrogen from some carriers, like 1,2-dihydro-1,2-diazaborine, requires further hydrogen purification steps, while others (for example, dibenzyltoluene) have higher dehydrogenation heating demands (1). Both factors increase energy consumption. Moreover, the cost of transporting the unloaded LOHC via ships back to the site of hydrogenation (i.e. for hydrogen loading) should be taken into account. Mainly long-distance transportation of renewable hydrogen in LOHCs would be more economically viable than transportation of compressed hydrogen, which is more suited to transport over short distances using the existing pipeline infrastructure (25). Methanol has also been reported to be economical for long-distance transport, with some studies suggesting that methanol can be a more cost-effective option than LOHCs (66). The same applies to ammonia (41). The Committee on Climate Change has reported that using ammonia as a hydrogen carrier for long-distance transport could be economically viable (25, 67). One of the key disadvantages of the LOHC technology is additional costs required for transporting of the LOHC loaded with hydrogen to end users followed by a transport of the dehydrogenated LOHC back to a chemical plant for loading with hydrogen.

5. Considerations for Process Optimisation of the Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier Technology

To improve economic viability of the LOHC technology, additional developments into optimising the LOHC technology might be needed. Reducing energy intensity during loading and particularly unloading of the LOHCs with hydrogen and efficient system integration can contribute to the cost reduction of the LOHC technology. In our following work, we discuss efficient system integration and potential deployment of the LOHC technology within different industries (28) and provide a detailed analysis of the most promising LOHC candidates, catalysts used for hydrogenation as well as dehydrogenation of LOHCs along with operating conditions (29). Efficient system integration of the LOHC technology as well as selection of the most suitable LOHC system, optimisation of reaction conditions and catalysts might improve economic viability and facilitate widespread commercial deployment of the LOHC technology.

Reactor configuration can also contribute significantly to the overall efficiency of the LOHC technology. The particular challenge for the LOHC technology is the hydrogen release from hydrogen-rich LOHC systems during the endothermic dehydrogenation process which is combined with the reaction mixture volume expansion. As an example, 1 ml of fully hydrogenated dibenzyltoluene can release more than 650 ml of hydrogen (68). A range of reactor types have been proposed for dehydrogenation of LOHCs, such as fixed-bed, continuous stirred tank reactor batch-type, tubular, spray-pulsed, pressure-swing and three-dimensional (3D) structured monolith reactors, among others (Figure 3) (68).

Fig. 3.

Reactors used for dehydrogenation of LOHCs: (a) radial flow; (b) horizontal tubular; (c) fixed-bed; (d) 3D structured monolith (selective electron beam melting); and (e) spray-pulsed reactors. Reprinted (adapted) with permission from (68), Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society

Reactors used for dehydrogenation of LOHCs: (a) radial flow; (b) horizontal tubular; (c) fixed-bed; (d) 3D structured monolith (selective electron beam melting); and (e) spray-pulsed reactors. Reprinted (adapted) with permission from (68), Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society

Tubular-type reactors are often discussed for the LOHC technology. To optimise the process, different orientations of the tubular reactors have been evaluated (69). Tubular reactors can have either a horizontal or vertical orientation and have two possible operational modes: (a) LOHC flowing through the central tube and heat transfer fluid in the annulus; (b) heat transfer fluid in the central tube and the LOHC in the annulus (70). The heat transfer fluid enables external heating of the LOHC (69). In comparison to their horizontal equivalents, vertical tubular reactors have the advantage of a more even heat distribution, as a result of rising bubbles mixing the LOHC (70). Moreover, several vertical tubular reactors are suitable for both the hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reaction. Often, this is not the case for horizontal tubular reactors, where the interfacial region between the gaseous hydrogen and LOHC is often too small to achieve the mass transfer rates required for a hydrogenation process (69). Vertical dehydrogenation tubular reactors can also be constructed to produce either a co-flow or counter-flow between the LOHC and released hydrogen, offering more flexibility in a system design. In a study using N -ethylcarbazole as the carrier, different orientations of the reactor (horizontal/vertical) were studied, revealing that the maximum power densities are similar in both orientations, but radial heat transfer is improved compared to that in a horizontal orientation (69). Despite this, several examples of horizontal tubular reactors can be found, with advantages including convenient removal of hydrogen from the top of the reactor and prevention of a multi-phase flow (71).

Helical reactors are more complex and comprise the LOHC flow in the central tube, with the heat transfer fluid in the surrounding shell space (70). A more effective heat transfer can be achieved with a helical reactor than a tubular reactor, as a result of a ‘shear’ formation, while the rate of reaction (hydrogen release) is also increased. A double helical reactor is also discussed for the LOHC technology (70). While this enables a significant saving in terms of space, the construction and assembly is typically complex and expensive. The deployment of a hot pressure-swing reactor was demonstrated for stationary hydrogen storage in which hydrogenation and dehydrogenation were performed within the same reactor using the same catalyst with dibenzyltoluene as the LOHC (72). This demonstrates the benefit of potential capital expenditure and operational expenditure savings.

Structured reactors, such as monolithic, 3D printed or foam reactors, are an attractive research area within the LOHC technology as they provide high heat conductivity, allowing for a good heat input for the endothermic dehydrogenation reaction (73, 74). Furthermore, the high porosity of such reactor systems lowers pressure drop, on the contrary to fixed-bed reactors where catalyst pellets are typically used, and facilitates an efficient hydrogen removal. This is important for dehydrogenation of hydrogen-rich LOHCs, during which significant reaction mixture volume expansions take place upon hydrogen release (for example, 1 ml of fully hydrogenated dibenzyltoluene can release more than 650 ml of hydrogen) (68, 73).

Depending on the intended application, the hydrogen purity released from LOHCs during dehydrogenation should be considered. Given that high temperatures are required for dehydrogenation of LOHCs, side products might be formed during hydrogen release, contaminating the hydrogen stream. In such cases, separation systems are required to purify the hydrogen, which increases the cost of the LOHC technology. The use of membrane reactors, which combine the benefit of shifting the equilibrium of dehydrogenation to the product side with integrated purification of the released hydrogen, have been reported in the literature for the LOHC technology (71, 7580). Byun et al . performed the technoeconomic assessment of methylcyclohexane dehydrogenation in both a packed-bed reactor and a membrane reactor (78). This study demonstrates the cost effectiveness of an membrane reactor: the unit hydrogen production cost of a packed-bed reactor is US$11.76, US$9.50, US$8.50 and US$8.08 and that of an membrane reactor is US$9.37, US$7.43, US$6.58 and US$6.23 for hydrogen production capacities of 30 m3 h–1, 100 m3 h–1, 300 m3 h–1 and 700 m3 h–1, respectively (78).

A lower temperature of operation for the dehydrogenation reaction, deploying a reactive distillation column under reduced pressure, could also allow for an increase in the efficiency of the LOHC system (81). This was demonstrated for perhydrobenzyl toluene dehydrogenation. A lowering of reaction temperature reduces the energy intensity of the overall process and facilitates a simpler and more effective integration of heat with waste heat sources or from subsequent hydrogen utilisation steps (81). Another recent study demonstrated that an electrochemical hydrogen compression (EHC) unit, which is connected to the LOHC dehydrogenation unit, reduces hydrogen pressure and shifts the thermodynamic equilibrium towards dehydrogenation (82). This accelerates the hydrogen release for the perhydrodibenzyltoluene LOHC and lowers dehydrogenation temperatures to 240°C. In addition, the EHC unit produces high value compressed hydrogen and purifies hydrogen contaminated with impurities such as traces of methane (82).

6. Summary and Perspectives

Several approaches to effective hydrogen storage technologies must be explored in parallel to facilitate a smooth transition to the hydrogen economy. LOHCs for hydrogen storage and transportation are an attractive option for storing and transporting green hydrogen. Key advantages of the LOHC technology are: high storage capacity compared to alternative hydrogen storage technologies such as MOFs; no hydrogen losses during extended storage periods; ambient storage pressures and compatibility with existing fossil fuel infrastructure (pipes, ships, trucks). LOHCs ideally have high, reversible hydrogen-loading capacities, enabling large quantities of hydrogen to be stored in the liquid carrier. Importantly, LOHCs facilitate the storage and intercontinental transport of hydrogen and can capitalise on infrastructure originally constructed for fossil fuels. Thus, over long distances, the transport of hydrogen using the LOHC technology has the potential to be economically viable in comparison to other hydrogen storage and transportation technologies. Though costs required for transporting of the LOHC loaded with hydrogen to end users followed by a transport of the dehydrogenated LOHC back to a chemical plant for reloading with hydrogen should be considered. Furthermore, additional developments and research into optimising the technology might be needed to improve economic viability of the LOHC technology. Reducing energy intensity during loading and particularly unloading of the LOHCs and efficient system integration can contribute to cost reduction of the LOHC technology.

By |2022-06-16T08:38:37+00:00June 16th, 2022|Weld Engineering Services|Comments Off on Hydrogen Storage and Transportation Technologies to Enable the Hydrogen Economy: Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers

First Kenyan wins Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation for portable vaccine fridge

  • Portable, solar-powered fridge solution to store and transport medicines wins the Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation
  • The winner, Norah Magero, is the first Kenyan to win the award
  • Applications are now open for Africa Prize 2023 – the deadline for applications is 19 July 2022

Norah Magero has won the Royal Academy of Engineering’s 2022 Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation with Vaccibox, a small, mobile, solar-powered fridge that safely stores and transports medicines like vaccines, for use in field vaccinations and remote clinics. Magero is the first Kenyan to win the award in its eight-year history, and the second woman. 

Infrastructure and human resource challenges across Kenya continue to hamper vaccine distribution, with 3 in 10 children not adequately vaccinated. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the cold-chain challenges faced by healthcare practitioners and supply chains in distributing temperature-sensitive medicine were highlighted globally, and remain a problem for many types of vaccines. 

“VacciBox was designed with our local challenges in mind. It’s versatile, reliable and localised. We’re ensuring that it works the way healthcare workers need it to work for the conditions they face each day, so that they can save lives without worrying about technology,” said Magero. 

The 40 litre VacciBox is portable and lightweight. It can be wheeled or mounted on a bicycle, motorbike or boat, and has a telescopic handle for easy mobility. A built-in thermostat and digital thermometer maintain temperatures required for cold-chain medicines, a battery supply as well as mains and solar panel connectivity and a charge controller, ensure power stability. It can transport blood and tissue and can be monitored remotely to ensure reliability. 

“I’ve grown immensely and met such brilliant engineers and non-engineers doing amazing things through the Africa Prize,” said Magero. “This award will help us continue to develop Vaccibox to help get life saving vaccines to many more people.”

Magero wins the first prize of £25,000 (3,667,000 KES). At the virtual awards ceremony held on 15 June 2022, four finalists delivered presentations, before Africa Prize judges and a live audience voted for the most promising engineering innovation. 

“We’re delighted to award VacciBox the Africa Prize. The potential impact of improving the cold chain delivery of medicine – especially vaccines – to rural areas is immense,” said Alessandra Buonfino, Africa Prize judge. “Norah truly represents the idea that one innovator can change an entire community. We look forward to watching her and her team scale this innovation to reach even more people.”

The Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation, founded by the UK’s Royal Academy of Engineering in 2014, is Africa’s biggest prize dedicated to engineering innovation, and has a proven track record of identifying successful engineering entrepreneurs. Now in its eighth year, it supports talented sub-Saharan African entrepreneurs with engineering innovations that address crucial problems in their communities in a new way. 

The 16 shortlisted Africa Prize entrepreneurs from nine countries in sub-Saharan Africa received eight months of training and mentoring including support with developing business plans, recruitment, IP protection, financing and commercialisation. 

The Africa Prize also exposes and connects the shortlist to individuals and networks around the world who can accelerate their business and technology development – from fellow entrepreneurs and mentors to potential investors and suppliers. 

The three other finalists, who each receive £10,000, are: 

  • Crib A’glow, Virtue Oboro from Nigeria – Foldable photo-therapy cribs that treat jaundice in newborns. The crib can operate on solar or grid power and monitors the baby’s condition. 
  • HYENA POWER POD, Jack Fletcher from South Africa – A fuel-cell based hydrogen generator that converts LPG gas into usable electricity, all within one device. 
  • Solimi prepaid card, Gaël Egbidi from Togo – A prepaid, Visa-backed card and account that does not require users to be customers of a specific bank, providing unbanked individuals with greater access to the digital economy.

In addition to the main prizes awarded, the remaining 12 innovators from the 2022 shortlist presented their innovations to a live audience who voted for the pitch that showed the most promise and potential for impact. Femi Taiwo was selected as the winner of the Africa Prize’s One-to-Watch Award of £5,000. This Award recognises the potential of Taiwo’s innovation, an online platform that connects users to freelancers, so small business owners can find and safely outsource key skills such as coding and accounting. 

 

To date, the 102 Africa Prize alumni businesses have raised more than 14 million USD in grants and equity and created more than 1,500 new jobs, with over 50% of these going to women and a significant proportion to disabled people and youth. 

 

The next Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation is now open. Individuals and small teams living and working in sub-Saharan Africa, and who have an engineering innovation, are invited to apply for Africa Prize 2023 after reading further guidance notes. The deadline for entries is 19 July 2022.  

The other 12 candidates shortlisted for the 2022 Africa Prize were:  

  • A-Lite Vein Locator, Dr Julius Mubiru, Uganda—A device that maps patients’ veins out as shadows on their skin, helping medical staff insert a drip or draw blood more easily. 
  • Agelgil, Afomia Andualem, Ethiopia—A sustainable range of packaging and tableware made from agricultural by-products such as barley and wheat straw. 
  • Aquaponics Hub, Lawrencia Kwansah, Ghana—A kit for new users to set up their own aquaponics system, complete with smart sensors to monitor crops and fish, and an online marketplace to sell produce. 
  • Bleaglee, Juveline Ngum, Cameroon—A sustainable cooking system that includes a smokeless cookstove made from recycled metal scraps, bio-briquettes, and an off-grid bio-digester. 
  • Coldbox Store, Adekoyejo Kuye, Nigeria—An off-grid cold storage solution for farmers to store and sell fresh produce without relying on the electrical grid. 
  • Genesis Care, Catherine Wanjoya, Kenya—A system to dispense and later dispose of feminine hygiene products. The system is installed to give young girls access to affordable products. 
  • HoBeei, Mariam Eluma, Nigeria—An online free-cycle platform where users can upload unwanted or unused items in exchange for virtual currency with which to purchase other goods. 
  • Kukia, Divin Kouebatouka, The Republic of the Congo—A process that transforms the invasive water hyacinth plant into an absorptive fibre that can clean up oil spills and stop oil leaks on land or water. 
  • Peec REM, Philip Kyeswa, Uganda—A remote monitoring and metering system for off-grid solar installations. It also alerts utilities to blackouts or tampering. 
  • SolarPocha, Oluwatobi Oyinlola, Nigerian—An outdoor workstation, a solar-powered space where students can connect to WiFi and off-grid electricity. 
  • TelMi, Fabrice Tueche, Cameroon—A set of devices that help nurses monitor patients, respond to alarms, and collect data in order to improve workflow and response times.
  • TERAWORK, Femi Taiwo, Nigeria—An online platform that connects users to freelancers, so small business owners can find and safely outsource key skills such as coding and accounting. 

Notes for Editors

View an Interactive Showcase of the finalists and their innovations.

1. The Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation, founded by the Royal Academy of Engineering in 2014, is Africas biggest prize dedicated to developing African innovators, and assisting them to maximise their impact. It awards crucial commercialisation support to ambitious African innovators developing scalable engineering solutions to address local challenges, demonstrating the importance of engineering as an enabler of improved quality of life and economic development. 

An eight-month period of tailored training and mentoring culminates in a showcase event where a winner is selected to receive £25,000, along with three runners-up who are each awarded £10,000. The 12 remaining shortlisted candidates also compete for the publics vote for the One-to-Watch award of £5,000. 

Judges, mentors and expert reviewers for the Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation have provided over 2,460 hours of support to entrepreneurs since the prize was established – this equates to a value of over £1,156,000 in support. This year, the judges are: 

  • Malcolm Brinded CBE FREng (Chair), Chair of Engineering UK, Past President of the Energy Institute 
  • Dr Ibilola Amao, Principal Consultant of Lonadek Global Services 
  • Dr John Lazar CBE FREng, Chair of Enza Capital, What3Words and Raspberry Pi Foundation 
  • Rebecca Enonchong, Founder and CEO of AppsTech and I/O Spaces 
  • Alessandra Buonfino, Senior Adviser, Global Innovation Fund; Consultant; International Research Fellow, Said Business School, Oxford University 

The 2021 Africa Prize is generously supported by the UK Government’s Global Challenges Research Fund and The Shell Centenary Scholarship Fund. Further information can be found here:  

2. The Royal Academy of Engineering is harnessing the power of engineering to build a sustainable society and an inclusive economy that works for everyone.

In collaboration with our Fellows and partners, were growing talent and developing skills for the future, driving innovation and building global partnerships, and influencing policy and engaging the public.

Together were working to tackle the greatest challenges of our age.

For media enquiries, please contact:

Africa

Anzet du Plessis, Proof Africa on behalf of the Royal Academy of Engineering  

anzet@proofafrica.co.za / ben@proofafrica.co.za

+27 83 557 2322 / +27 64 742 0880 

UK and International

Rachel Ng, April Six on behalf of the Royal Academy of Engineering 

africaprize@aprilsix.com

+44 7485 317 148 

By |2022-06-15T13:57:00+00:00June 15th, 2022|Engineering News|Comments Off on First Kenyan wins Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation for portable vaccine fridge

Emerging leaders wanted as first members of new UK Young Academy

  • Launch of UK Young Academy announced today by UK and Ireland National Academies

The first UK-wide national Young Academy – a network of early career researchers and professionals – is being launched today. The UK Young Academy will bring together researchers, innovators, clinicians, professionals, academics and entrepreneurs to tap into their collective potential and expertise to tackle important issues in society.

The initiative, as part of an interdisciplinary collaboration with the Academy of Medical Sciences, British Academy, Learned Society of Wales, Royal Academy of Engineering, Royal Irish Academy, Royal Society of Edinburgh, and the Royal Society, aspires to connect emerging leaders with different knowledge and expertise, and include their voices in local and global policy discussions.

Professor Sir Jim McDonald FREng FRSE, President of the Royal Academy of Engineering said: “The UK Young Academy is a distinct and valuable opportunity for the progressive leaders of the future to work together in an interdisciplinary forum on the issues that matter to them. Like the other partners, we are deeply committed to building a truly diverse membership and inclusive community. I hope that early career innovators, professionals, researchers and entrepreneurs across the UK and from all backgrounds will be inspired to apply for membership. I look forward to hearing their voices, learning from them, being inspired by their passion and creativity, and seeing the difference that they will make to our society and our future.”

Dr Olga Kozlova, Director of Innovation and Industry Engagement at the University of Strathclyde and member of the UK Young Academy appointments committee said, “As a former member of the Young Academy of Scotland, I can speak from experience about the value of bringing people early on in their careers together to collaborate and learn from one another, in transforming the ways they look at the world.

“Successful innovators, entrepreneurs and inventors of the future need the space and support to explore challenges from all angles, including the ones they hadn’t even known existed. This is the goal of the UK Young Academy; to enable cohesion between different sectors to solve societal challenges by harnessing talent across the country.”

Professor Duncan Cameron, Professor of Plant and Soil Biology at the University of Sheffield and member of the UK Young Academy appointments committee said, “As a member of the LGBTQ+ community and a disability advocate, I know that finding solutions to global challenges requires contributions from different people with different life experiences. It is therefore central to the creation of the new UK Young Academy that members commit to establishing an inclusive and equal environment for all.

“We are committed to attracting a diverse membership and will be taking steps throughout the assessment process to ensure that all applicants have an equal chance to succeed. In addition, we will champion members of the UK Young Academy to be role models for other early career professionals aspiring to make positive change.”

Applications for membership to the UK Young Academy are now open; details of selection criteria and how to apply can be found on the UK Young Academy website. Applications will close on 8 September 2022.

ENDS

For more information about the launch of the UK Young Academy and to request interviews with spokespeople, please contact the Royal Society press office:

Lucy Lisanti
Press Officer
lucy.lisanti@royalsociety.org / press@royalsociety.org
+44 20 7451 2548 / +44 7931 423 323 (out of hours)

 

Notes to editors

  1. About the Young Academy

The UK Young Academy connects and develops talented individuals in the early years of their career from a wide range of sectors so they can collaborate to make a difference in the world.

It is part of a growing international initiative to give young, early-career innovators, professionals, academics and entrepreneurs a voice for the advancement of issues that are important to them. The UK Young Academy gives its members the chance to have their perspectives, knowledge and insights represented as part of the wider landscape of academic and professional bodies in the UK.

The UK Young Academy was initially established following an agreement by the seven UK Academies – the Academy of Medical Sciences, British Academy, Learned Society of Wales, Royal Academy of Engineering, Royal Irish Academy, Royal Society of Edinburgh, and the Royal Society. Working closely with the Global Young Academy and the Young Academy of Scotland, it was set up under the auspices of the Royal Society in 2022.

The strategy and programme of work to be undertaken will be determined by the members of the UK Young Academy but it is hoped that there will be collaborations with other Young Academies across the world or alongside the established UK Academies. https://ukyoungacademy.org/   

The UK Young Academy will be underpinned by a shared set of values including:

  • Excellence – members will be outstanding in their own field.
  • Transparency – there will be a clear leadership structure that is accountable and elected through transparent procedures.
  • Integrity – members will maintain high standards of ethics in order to make a credible contribution to global issues.
  • Equality, diversity and inclusion – a commitment towards attracting a diverse membership will be made, and members will commit to maintaining an inclusive and equal environment for all.

Initial funding to establish the UK Young Academy has been provided by the UK Government’s Department of Business, Education and Industrial Strategy as part of their R&D People and Culture Strategy.

  1. Quotes from spokespeople of other UK National Academies

Professor Dame Anne Johnson PMedSci, President of the Academy of Medical Sciences said, “The road to a healthier future will be built by researchers from diverse backgrounds connecting across disciplines and career stages to share ideas and hear from people with different lived experiences. The UK Young Academy will create an exciting and unique forum for great minds to tackle the challenges that face us all now, and in the future. I am delighted that the Academy of Medical Sciences is a founding partner.

“Many of the biggest societal challenges we face have a biomedical sciences element to them – from climate change and inequality to preparing for the next pandemic. The Academy of Medical Sciences encourages emerging leaders in our field to bring their skills, knowledge, experience and enthusiasm to the UK Young Academy and work to improve health in the UK and beyond. I look forward to seeing how the members of this new network will work together to influence beyond their current roles, bringing different perspectives together to innovate and promote change.”

Professor Julia Black PBA, President of the British Academy said: “We are delighted to be launching the UK Young Academy today alongside our academy colleagues. The UK Young Academy is a fantastic opportunity for participants to come together to tackle global challenges, particularly for those in the humanities and social sciences.

“The strength of this Young Academy will be in its interdisciplinarity, it will bring together people from across subjects from the SHAPE disciplines to the life sciences and engineering, and from diverse professions. In facing the challenges of tomorrow, there can be no greater attributes than the ability to collaborate and connect.”

Professor Hywel Thomas FLSW FREng FRS, President of the Learned Society of Wales said “The Learned Society of Wales is excited to be involved with the UK Young Academy.

“The launch last year of our own Early Career Research Network shows the Society’s commitment to the research talent emerging from Wales’ universities.

“We are proud of that work and know that a ‘Global Wales’ needs collaboration and strong networks across disciplines, institutions and nations.

“The UK Young Academy offers that opportunity and we pleased to support its development.”

Dr Mary Canning MRIA, President of the Royal Irish Academy said “The Royal Irish Academy is delighted to be part of this exciting and worthwhile initiative. Inspiring the next generation of talent, giving Young Academies a critical voice at a time when it is needed most, and raising awareness not just on topics central to early career researchers and innovators, but on significant and diverse global issues, from climate change and environmental challenges, sustainability, peace and conflict issues, to dealing with future pandemics is more than an essential endeavour.

We have seen how the global Young Academy movement is already having an impact; sharing and creating knowledge on scientific and policy questions, multi-disciplinarity, promoting and supporting the development of young entrepreneurs and encouraging individuals to take action. Undoubtedly, the benefits are far- reaching, for individuals at an early stage of their professional careers, and for communities and society as a whole.”

Professor Sir John Ball FRSE FRS, President of the Royal Society of Edinburgh said “The RSE is pleased to come together with the UK National Academies in supporting early career researchers and professionals through this new and exciting UK-wide initiative. As research in the arts and sciences continues to find innovative solutions to societal issues, it is more important than ever to draw from as deep a pool of knowledge as possible.

Alongside the continued work of the RSE’s Young Academy of Scotland, we look forward to collaborating across the shared values and principles of the UK Young Academy; creating new and wider opportunities to support future research and strengthen the next generation’s response to some of the biggest challenges of the day.””

Sir Adrian Smith PRS, President of the Royal Society said “We continue to face significant challenges as a society, so we need to galvanise the expertise, talent and motivation of those at early stages of their careers to find the solutions to the challenges they will face now and in the future.

“Global problems like pandemics, climate change, biodiversity loss and social inequality need solutions from many different sectors and individuals from diverse backgrounds to bring about meaningful change.

“There are limited formal opportunities in the UK for young professionals to collaborate across disciplines and we hope the UK Young Academy will give them a credible voice on the issues that matter.”

  1. About the UK National Academies

The Academy of Medical Sciences is the independent body in the UK representing the diversity of medical science. Our elected Fellows are the UK’s leading medical scientists from hospitals, academia, industry and the public service. Our mission is to advance biomedical and health research and its translation into benefits for society. We are working to secure a future in which:

  • UK and global health is improved by the best research.
  • The UK leads the world in biomedical and health research, and is renowned for the quality of its research outputs, talent and collaborations.
  • Independent, high quality medical science advice informs the decisions that affect society.
  • More people have a say in the future of health and research.

Our work focusses on four key objectives, promoting excellence, developing talented researchers, influencing research and policy and engaging patients, the public and professionals.
www.acmedsci.ac.uk

The British Academy is the UK’s national academy for the humanities and social sciences. We mobilise these disciplines to understand the world and shape a brighter future. We invest in researchers and projects across the UK and overseas, engage the public with fresh thinking and debates, and bring together scholars, government, business and civil society to influence policy for the benefit of everyone.
www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk @BritishAcademy_

The Learned Society of Wales is the national academy for arts and sciences. Our Fellowship brings together experts from across all academic fields and beyond. We use this collective knowledge to promote research, inspire learning, and provide independent policy advice.
https://www.learnedsociety.wales/

The Royal Academy of Engineering is harnessing the power of engineering to build a sustainable society and an inclusive economy that works for everyone. In collaboration with our Fellows and partners, we’re growing talent and developing skills for the future, driving innovation and building global partnerships, and influencing policy and engaging the public. Together we’re working to tackle the greatest challenges of our age.

The Royal Irish Academy/Acadamh Ríoga na hÉireann is Ireland’s leading body of experts in the sciences, humanities and social sciences. The Academy champions research and identifies and recognises Ireland’s world class researchers. It supports scholarship and promotes awareness of how science and the humanities enrich our lives and benefit society. Membership of the Academy is by election and is considered the highest Academic honour in Ireland.
www.ria.ie

About the Royal Society of Edinburgh

The RSE, using the expertise of its Fellows, creates a unique impact by:

  • Inspiring and supporting talent through a wide-ranging programme of research grants and awards.
  • Engaging the public across Scotland on key contemporary issues through its outreach programme RSE@ and a wide-ranging programme of public events.
  • Providing impartial advice and expertise to inform policy and practice through in-depth examination of major issues and providing expert comment on topical matters.
  • Promoting Scotland’s interests overseas through building relationships with sister academies across the world and facilitating research collaborations.

www.therse.org.uk  @RoyalSocEd

About the Royal Society
The Royal Society is a self-governing Fellowship of many of the world’s most distinguished scientists drawn from all areas of science, engineering, and medicine. The Society’s fundamental purpose, as it has been since its foundation in 1660, is to recognise, promote, and support excellence in science and to encourage the development and use of science for the benefit of humanity.
http://royalsociety.org; @royalsocietyfacebook.com/theroyalsociety

By |2022-06-13T23:01:00+00:00June 13th, 2022|Engineering News|Comments Off on Emerging leaders wanted as first members of new UK Young Academy

Time for a major upgrade of buildings to create healthier indoor environments, says new NEPC report

Government must seize the post-pandemic opportunity to mandate long-term improvements to infection control in commercial, public and residential buildings to reduce the transmission of future waves of COVID-19, new pandemics, seasonal influenza and other infectious diseases, according to a report published today by the National Engineering Policy Centre (NEPC). Infection control must also be coordinated with efforts to improve energy efficiency and fire safety, to support the three goals of safe, healthy and sustainable buildings.

In the event of another severe pandemic during the next 60 years, the societal cost to the UK could equate to £23billion a year, according to an economic assessment that informed the report and that is thought to be the first analysis of its kind following the COVID-19 pandemic. Even without the extreme circumstances of a pandemic, the report estimates that seasonal diseases cost the country as much as £8 billion a year in disruption and sick days. Improving ventilation, air quality and sanitation in buildings could minimise transmission, reducing the number of people infected, thereby saving lives and reducing ill health and its societal impacts.

Commissioned in 2021 by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance FRS FMedSci, the NEPC research, led by the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE), set out to identify the measures needed in the UK’s built environment and transport systems to reduce transmission of infectious diseases.

Ensuring that buildings and transport systems are designed, operated, managed and regulated for infection control is critical to minimise transmission, states the report. However, the pandemic has highlighted that many of the UK’s buildings are not being operated according to the current air quality standards, because they were built to previous standards or before standards were introduced, they have been modified over time, or are not operated as originally intended. People should be able to have confidence that the air in the buildings they use is safe to breathe, just as they would expect the water to be safe to drink.

As well as reducing the impacts of future pandemics, seasonal flu and the associated economic and social costs, the report identifies additional benefits from improving infection resilience. For example, improved ventilation has been proven to reduce infection risks, boost productivity and alleviate asthma and general exposure to air pollutants that can contribute to ‘sick building syndrome’. No-touch technologies, such as sensor-operated doors, help prevent infection on surfaces but also help support building users in wheelchairs. The report recommends that any system used within a building design should be considered from an infection perspective to identify if and where there are wider opportunities to improve experiences and duty of care for building users. 

Today’s report recommends new regulations and standards that apply throughout the lifetime of a building to create healthier environments, taking lessons from existing accessibility, Legionella, or fire regulations. In addition to this, codes of practice should be introduced to make sure that the health of building occupants is a day-to-day consideration for those in the building and construction industry, from designers through to asset managers. The report makes eight recommendations to enshrine infection resilience in building regulations and improve the health of our indoor environments, which include:

  • Establishing best practice – the British Standards Institution (BSI) should convene the relevant expertise and develop meaningful standards that are embedded into existing design and operational practices.
  • Promoting building health – the UK Health Security Agency should promote the benefits of infection resilience and good indoor air quality to building and transport owners and the public through signage and ratings in a similar way to food or water standards.
  • Ensuring that buildings operate as designed in terms of infection resilience – industry bodies and public procurement must drive improvements to the commissioning and testing of building systems at handover, and subsequently over the life of a building.
  • Establishing in-use regulations with local authorities by 2030 to maintain standards of safe and healthy building performance over the building lifetime.
  • Ensuring Government departments such as BEIS, DfT and DLUHC consider incorporating infection resilience into major retrofit programmes designed to meet the commitments of the Net Zero Strategy.

Professor Peter Guthrie OBE FREng, Vice President of the Royal Academy of Engineering and Chair of the NEPC Infection Resilient Environments working group, says:

“If the built environment is not equipped to limit the spread of infections, there will be direct health costs from severe illness, long-term sickness or death. These will be further compounded into economic and social costs as health costs disrupt businesses, education and our daily lives.

“This is not simple because the developers who commission and fund new buildings will not directly benefit from including health provisions at the design stage. Changes to regulation and standards are therefore needed for the scale of change required. The public have a right to expect that buildings and transport will be designed and managed to control infection and minimise the impact of both seasonal diseases and future pandemics.

“With commitments to retrofitting buildings as part of the Net Zero Strategy, there is a moment now to take a coordinated approach to achieve infection resilience alongside improvements in energy efficiency and fire safety. Grasping that opportunity can help deliver a built environment that is safe, healthy and secure.”

Government Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance FRS FMedS, who commissioned the report, says:

“The COVID-19 pandemic has made clear how important infrastructure and the built environment are for our health. I would like to thank the Royal Academy of Engineering and the National Engineering Policy Centre for this independent report which provides government with important evidence and insight to consider as we learn lessons from COVID-19 and ensure we are prepared for the future. 

“We spend most of our time in indoor environments and making these healthier and more sustainable spaces will have wide benefits to our public health, wellbeing, and the economy. I hope this report encourages the coordinated system-wide approach, collaboration, and innovation required between government, academia, and industry to deliver the transformational change recommended.”

Kevin Mitchell CEng, CIBSE President, says:

“This report highlights the importance of good operational practice in our buildings and the significant costs to business and society of not building and managing our buildings to meet standards of health and wellbeing. CIBSE is committed to working with government, industry and the research community to deliver improved standards in our existing building stock, and in new construction.”

Notes for Editors

1.    Infection resilient environments: time for a major upgrade is published by the National Engineering Policy Centre, accompanied by three supporting analyses commissioned by the working group:

2.    The National Engineering Policy Centre connects policy makers with critical engineering expertise to inform and respond to policy issues of national importance, giving policymakers a route to advice from across the whole profession, and the profession a unified voice on shared challenges.  

The Centre is an ambitious partnership, led by the Royal Academy of Engineering, between 43 different UK engineering organisations representing 450,000 engineers.  

Our ambition is that the National Engineering Policy Centre will be a trusted partner for policy makers, enabling them to access excellent engineering expertise, for social and economic benefit. 

3.    The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) publishes guidance providing best practice advice and is internationally recognised as authoritative design guidance for building services. The CIBSE Knowledge Portal, which makes guidance available online to all CIBSE members, is the leading systematic engineering resource for the building services sector.

4.    The Royal Academy of Engineering is harnessing the power of engineering to build a sustainable society and an inclusive economy that works for everyone.

In collaboration with our Fellows and partners, we’re growing talent and developing skills for the future, driving innovation and building global partnerships, and influencing policy and engaging the public.

Together we’re working to tackle the greatest challenges of our age.

For more information please contact:

Jane Sutton at the Royal Academy of Engineering

T: 0207 766 0636

Jane Sutton

By |2022-06-12T23:01:00+00:00June 12th, 2022|Engineering News|Comments Off on Time for a major upgrade of buildings to create healthier indoor environments, says new NEPC report

From off-grid neonatal cribs to portable vaccine fridges, finalists announced for Africa Prize

  • Women make up three of the four finalists for this year’s Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation final, as a Togolese-based innovator features for the first time, alongside finalists from Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa.

Inventors of an off-grid neonatal crib for jaundiced babies, portable vaccine fridges, a Visa-backed card that gives unbanked individuals access to the digital economy, and a fuel-cell-based hydrogen generator that converts gas into electricity have been selected as finalists for the prestigious Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation 2022.

The four finalists – three of whom are women – from Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa and Togo, were selected from a shortlist of 16 African innovators for their ability to use engineering to solve problems for African communities.

The finalists were chosen after receiving eight months of training, mentorship and support, with expert volunteers providing bespoke, one-on-one support with business plans, scaling, recruitment, IP protection, financing and commercialisation.

The Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation, founded by the UK’s Royal Academy of Engineering in 2014, is Africa’s biggest prize dedicated to engineering innovation, and has a proven track record of identifying successful engineering entrepreneurs. Now in its eighth year, it supports talented sub-Saharan African entrepreneurs with engineering innovations that address crucial problems in their communities in a new way. 

The 2022 Africa Prize winner will be selected on 15 June 2022 and will receive £25,000, along with three runners-up who are each awarded £10,000. Local supporters, industry peers, engineering and entrepreneurial enthusiasts as well as media are encouraged to attend the Africa Prize free, virtual event.

The final will be hosted by Dr Shini Somara, a mechanical engineer and fluid dynamicist turned TV presenter, children’s book author, podcaster, TEDx speaker and mentor. Guest speakers will include:

Malcolm Brinded CBE FREng, judge on the Africa Prize panel, said “Once again, it was very tough to select the finalists from such a high-quality shortlist. But these four entrepreneurs stood out because their innovations could have huge potential impact in sub-Saharan Africa, and their businesses look destined for success. It’s great to again have three finalists who are women – and four different countries represented, with a finalist from Togo for the first time in our 8-year history.”

Ibilola Amao, judge on the Africa Prize panel, said “Delivering a consensus on the top four candidates from an exceptional sixteen is quite a task that gets tougher each year. The entries are becoming more impressive, year after year. Hearty congratulations to our 2022 winners who we know will make us very proud.”

The 2023 Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation is now open for entries. Individuals and small teams living and working in sub-Saharan Africa with a scalable engineering innovation to solve a local challenge are invited to enter. The deadline for entries is 19 July 2022.  

2022 Finalists

  • From Nigeria, Virtue Oboro’s innovation is Crib A’glow, a foldable, photo-therapy crib that treats and monitors jaundiced newborns. Virtue and her husband began work on the idea after their son was severely jaundiced after birth, and have since grown the team to include engineers, designers and paediatricians. Crib A’glow can run on either grid or solar power, uses LED lights and actively monitors the level of bilirubin in the baby’s body. It is completely mobile, and a tenth of the cost of the average phototherapy device used in developed countries. To maximise energy efficiency, light rays are focused on the baby’s body instead of spreading out over the crib.
  • Norah Magero’s team in Kenya developed VacciBox, a small, mobile, solar-powered fridge that safely stores and transports temperature-sensitive medicines such as vaccines, for use in field vaccinations and in off-grid hospitals. The VacciBox can also be used to transport blood and tissue. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the cold-chain challenges faced by healthcare practitioners and supply chains in distributing temperature-sensitive medicine were highlighted globally, and remain a problem for many types of vaccines. VacciBox hopes to address this.
  • Dr Jack Fletcher and the HYENA team in South Africa developed the POWER POD technology, a diesel generator replacement technology that produces on-site, on-demand and reliable electricity. Jack and the HYENA team developed the POWER POD technology as a way to deploy fuel cell technology into Africa, where hydrogen distribution is all but non-existent. HYENA’s POWER POD is silent, generates no vibration or unhealthy particulates, and does not require frequent maintenance as there are no moving parts.
  • Software engineer Gaël Matina Egbidi and her team in Togo created Solimi, a prepaid card and account backed by Visa that does not require users to be customers of a specific bank. Africa’s financial inclusion problem is significant – with at least 66% of the population estimated to be unbanked. West Africa has the highest banking fees in the world, with fewer than 10% of Togolese having a bank card. Gaël and her team created the financial product to improve financial inclusivity. This could significantly reduce financial costs, giving unbanked individuals more access to the digital economy.

The remaining 12 candidates from the 2022 Africa Prize shortlist are now eligible for a One-to-Watch Award worth £5,000, which will be judged on the strength of their business pitch by the audience. They will compete for the public’s vote at the Africa Prize final on 15 June.

One-to-Watch Award candidates:

  • A-Lite Vein Locator, Dr Julius Mubiru, Uganda—A device that maps patients’ veins out as shadows on their skin, helping medical staff insert a drip or draw blood more easily.
  • Agelgil, Afomia Andualem, Ethiopia—A sustainable range of packaging and tableware made from agricultural by-products such as barley and wheat straw.
  • Aquaponics Hub, Lawrencia Kwansah, Ghana—A kit for new users to set up their own aquaponics system, complete with smart sensors to monitor crops and fish, and an online marketplace to sell produce.
  • Bleaglee, Juveline Ngum, Cameroon—A sustainable cooking system that includes a smokeless cookstove made from recycled metal scraps, and bio-briquettes made from plastic and biomass waste.
  • Coldbox Store, Adekoyejo Kuye, Nigeria—An off-grid cold storage solution for farmers to store and sell fresh produce without relying on the electrical grid.
  • Genesis Care, Catherine Wanjoya, Kenya—A system to dispense and later dispose of feminine hygiene products. The system is installed to give young girls access to affordable products.
  • HoBeei, Mariam Eluma, Nigeria—An online free-cycle platform where users can upload unwanted or unused items in exchange for virtual currency with which to purchase other goods with.
  • Kukia, Divin Kouebatouka, The Republic of the Congo—A process that transforms the invasive water hyacinth plant into an absorptive fibre that can clean up oil spills and stop oil leaks on land or water.
  • Peec REM, Philip Kyeswa, Uganda—A remote monitoring and metering system for off-grid solar installations. It also alerts utilities to blackouts or tampering.
  • SolarPocha, Oluwatobi Oyinlola, Nigerian—An outdoor workstation, a solar-powered space where students can connect to WiFi and off-grid electricity.
  • TelMi, Fabrice Tueche, Cameroon—A set of devices that help nurses monitor patients, respond to alarms, and collect data in order to improve workflow and response times.
  • TERAWORK, Femi Taiwo, Nigeria—An online platform that connects users to freelancers, so small business owners can find and safely outsource key skills such as coding and accounting.

Notes for Editors

  1. The Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation, founded by the Royal Academy of Engineering in 2014, is Africa’s biggest prize dedicated to developing African innovators, and assisting them to maximise their impact. It awards crucial commercialisation support to ambitious African innovators developing scalable engineering solutions to local challenges and demonstrates how engineering can improve quality of life and economic development.
  2. Judges, mentors and expert reviewers for the Africa Prize for Engineering Innovation have volunteered a combined 2,300 hours of support to entrepreneurs across the continent since the Prize was established – estimated at well over £1 million in support.
  3. The Royal Academy of Engineering is harnessing the power of engineering to build a sustainable society and an inclusive economy that works for everyone.

In collaboration with our Fellows and partners, we’re growing talent and developing skills for the future, driving innovation and building global partnerships, and influencing policy and engaging the public.

Together we’re working to tackle the greatest challenges of our age.

For media enquiries please contact: Chris Urquhart at the Royal Academy of Engineering Tel. +44 207 766 0725; email: Chris.Urquhart@raeng.org.uk

By |2022-06-07T23:00:01+00:00June 7th, 2022|Engineering News|Comments Off on From off-grid neonatal cribs to portable vaccine fridges, finalists announced for Africa Prize

2022 MacRobert Award finalists highlight breadth of UK engineering innovation

A dialysis machine that can treat kidney patients in the home, precision agriculture through vertical farming and transformative electron scanning microscopy are vying to be named the UK’s leading engineering innovation of 2022.

The Royal Academy of Engineering has today announced the shortlist for the 2022 MacRobert Award, the UK’s longest running and most prestigious award for UK engineering innovation. The three finalists represent strikingly different aspects of engineering and are recognised for technical innovation and the commercial and societal impact they’ve demonstrated.

Selected by a judging panel of esteemed engineering experts, the 2022 MacRobert Award finalists are:

  • Intelligent Growth Solutions for helping to de-risk an agriculture sector that’s facing an ageing farming population and an uncertain, volatile future.  Intelligent Growth Solutions’ vertical farming technology blends engineering, crop science and agronomy expertise to manage all environmental inputs for optimal growth, flavour and longevity. The system houses ‘towers’ of crops within an enclosed structure that controls all aspects of the growing environment – light, temperature, humidity, irrigation, nutrition and even air consumption – while ensuring no water wastage at any point in the cycle. The level of control provided by this innovation supports the farmers of today and tomorrow by de-risking the early stages of crop cultivation, while also supporting plant diversification through high-density, high-value indoor crop production. The technology also has the potential to support reforestation through germination and early growth of tree saplings.
  • Oxford Instruments for developing the Symmetry detector that integrates with scanning electron microscopes and dramatically increases the speed, sensitivity and resolution of analysis that is possible. Symmetry enables a deeper understanding of a material’s structure down to the nanoscale-level, allowing minuscule weaknesses or flaws in various materials to be identified and addressed. This opens up vast industrial and scientific opportunities – from developing far more robust and long-lasting batteries and semiconductors, to stronger aircraft turbine blades. It has even been used to analyse meteorites to better understand how extra-terrestrial rock was formed. Symmetry has turned what was a niche technology predominantly used in research labs into a more widely accessible process with applications across a variety of sectors and industries.
  • Quanta Dialysis Technologies for creating a compact and portable dialysis machine, allowing more flexible and accessible care for patients with renal failure. Originally developed to reconstitute orange juice from concentrate, Quanta’s innovative disposable fluid cartridge system was repurposed for use in a compact haemodialysis machine. Simpler to operate, yet as powerful as traditional dialysis machines, Quanta’s SC+ haemodialysis system was designed to bring dialysis directly to the patient, allowing patients to treat themselves at home, rather than spending hours a week at healthcare facilities. It marks a major advance in dialysis technology, which has seen little innovation in decades, and is already used by several NHS Trusts. During the pandemic, Quanta provided its entire stock of dialysis machines to the NHS to help relieve some of the pressure in hospitals and ICUs. The innovation is already CE marked and FDA cleared and stands to be a global leader in the industry, which is projected to exceed $12bn in the US alone.

The winning team will be announced at the Royal Academy of Engineering Awards Dinner on 12 July at Leicester Square’s stunning new sustainably designed and engineered hotel, The Londoner, and will receive a £50,000 prize.  

For more than half a century MacRobert Award winners have been recognised for delivering outstanding engineering innovation, commercial success and tangible social benefit. The first award in 1969 was won jointly by Rolls-Royce for the Pegasus engine used in the iconic Harrier jump jet, and Freeman, Fox and Partners for designing the Severn Bridge. More recently, 2008 winner Touch Bionics i-Limb Hand has helped to transform medical prosthetics while people across all seven continents still rely on winning innovations from the likes of Jaguar Land Rover, Raspberry Pi and Inmarsat.

Professor Sir Richard Friend FREng FRS, Chair of the Royal Academy of Engineering MacRobert Award judging panel, said: “Engineering has a key role to play in combating the greatest challenges of our time – from climate change to driving a sustainable healthcare system through the COVID-19 pandemic and into the future. The breadth of the 2022 MacRobert Award finalists shows exactly that, from innovative healthcare technology that has reduced the strain on the NHS, to vertical farming with zero water waste and a step-change in electron microscopy that is revolutionising research and innovation across a variety of sectors.

“The global impact these vibrant and creative innovations have already had on their respective sectors and society at large is cementing UK engineering’s leading role on the world stage. It goes to show quite how far-reaching UK engineering now is, something that will only continue given the world-beating talent located right here in the UK.”

 

Notes to editors:

First presented in 1969, the MacRobert Award is widely regarded as the most coveted in the industry, honouring the winning organisation with a gold medal and the team members with a cash prize of £50,000. Founded by the MacRobert Trust, the award is presented and run by the Royal Academy of Engineering, with support from the Worshipful Company of Engineers.

The 2022 judging panel is made up of:

  • Professor Sir Richard Friend FREng FRS (Chair of Judges), former Cavendish Professor of Physics, University of Cambridge; Founder, Cambridge Display Technology
  • Naomi Climer CBE FREng, Chair of Council, International Broadcasting Convention (IBC); Former President Media Cloud Services, Sony
  • Dr Andy Harter CBE DL FREng, Chair, Cambridge Network; Founder RealVNC
  • Professor John Fisher CBE FREng FMedSci, former Professor of Mechanical Engineering, University of Leeds
  • Professor Dame Julia King, The Baroness Brown of Cambridge DBE FREng FRS, Chair, The Carbon Trust
  • Professor Gordon Masterton DL OBE FREng FRSE, Trustee; The MacRobert Trust; Chair of Future Infrastructure, University of Edinburgh; Former Vice-President, Jacobs
  • Dr Ruth McKernan CBE, Venture Partner, SV Health Investors & Dementia Discovery Fund
  • Professor Phil Nelson CBE FREng, Professor of Acoustics, University of Southampton
  • Dr Liane Smith CBE FREng, Director, Larkton Ltd; former SVP Digital Solutions, Wood Group

The Royal Academy of Engineering is harnessing the power of engineering to build a sustainable society and an inclusive economy that works for everyone. In collaboration with its Fellows and partners, it’s growing talent and developing skills for the future, driving innovation and building global partnerships, and influencing policy and engaging the public to tackle the greatest challenges of our age.

The MacRobert Award press team can be contacted directly on: 
MacRobertAward@antidotecommunications.com

 

By |2022-06-05T23:01:00+00:00June 5th, 2022|Engineering News|Comments Off on 2022 MacRobert Award finalists highlight breadth of UK engineering innovation

Platinum Jubilee Queen’s Birthday Honours to Academy Fellows

Congratulations to Fellows and friends of the Royal Academy of Engineering who have been recognised in The Queen’s Birthday Honours List 2022 for their services to engineering research, industry and wider society, including:

Dame Grand Cross of the Order of the British Empire GBE

Dr Dame Susan Elizabeth ION DBE FREng FRS, Lately Chair, Nuclear Innovation Research Advisory Board, and Honorary President, National Skills Academy for Nuclear. For services to Engineering

Knight Commander of the most honourable order of the Bath (Military division)

Air Marshal Richard John KNIGHTON CB FREng

Commanders of the Order of the British Empire CBE

Professor Mary Patricia RYAN FREng, Armourers and Brasiers’ Chair in Materials Science, Department of Materials, Imperial College London. For services to Education and to Materials Science and Engineering

Paul Jonathan STEIN FREng, Chairman, Rolls-Royce Small Modular Reactor Consortium. For services to the Economy

Professor Stephen John YOUNG FREng, Professor of Information Engineering, Information Engineering Division, Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge. For services to Software Engineering

Officers of the Order of the British Empire OBE

Professor Constantin COUSSIOS FREng, Director, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Oxford. For services to Biomedical Engineering

Notes for Editors

The Royal Academy of Engineering is harnessing the power of engineering to build a sustainable society and an inclusive economy that works for everyone.

In collaboration with our Fellows and partners, we’re growing talent and developing skills for the future, driving innovation and building global partnerships, and influencing policy and engaging the public.

For more information please contact:

Jane Sutton at the Royal Academy of Engineering

T: +44 207 766 0636

E:  Jane Sutton

By |2022-06-02T09:19:23+00:00June 2nd, 2022|Engineering News|Comments Off on Platinum Jubilee Queen’s Birthday Honours to Academy Fellows
Go to Top