• Login
    View Item 
    •   DSpace Home
    • AUS Sustainability
    • Faculty Work (AUS Sustainability)
    • View Item
    •   DSpace Home
    • AUS Sustainability
    • Faculty Work (AUS Sustainability)
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Thermodynamic analysis of models used in hydrogen production by geothermal energy

    Thumbnail
    View/ Open
    This is a placeholder. To access the document, please use the URL in the record. (112.6Kb)
    Date
    2010-08
    Author
    Kanoglu, Mehmet
    Bolatturk, Ali
    Yilmaz, Ceyhun
    Advisor(s)
    Unknown advisor
    Type
    Article
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Four models are developed for the use of geothermal energy for hydrogen production. These include using geothermal work output as the work input for an electrolysis process (Case 1); using part of geothermal heat to produce work for electrolysis process and part of geothermal heat in an electrolysis process to preheat the water (Case 2), using geothermal heat to preheat water in a high-temperature electrolysis process (Case 3), and using part of geothermal work for electrolysis and the remaining part for liquefaction (Case 4). These models are studied thermodynamically, and both reversible and actual (irreversible) operation of the models are considered. The effect of geothermal water temperature on the amount of hydrogen production per unit mass of geothermal water is investigated for all four models, and the results are compared. The results show that as the temperature of geothermal water increases the amount of hydrogen production increases. Also, 1.34 g of hydrogen may be produced by one kg of geothermal water at 200 °C in the reversible operation for Case 1. The corresponding values are 1.42, 1.91, and 1.22 in Case 2, Case 3, and Case 4, respectively. Greater amounts of hydrogen may be produced in Case 3 compared to other cases. Case 2 performs better than Case 1 because of the enhanced use of geothermal resource in the process. Case 4 allows both hydrogen production and liquefaction using the same geothermal resource, and provides a good solution for the remote geothermal resources. A comparison of hydrogen production values in the reversible and irreversible conditions reveal that the second-law efficiencies of the models are 28.5%, 29.9%, 37.2%, and 16.1% in Case 1, Case 2, Case 3, and Case 4, respectively.
    DSpace URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11073/8205
    External URI
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319910011481
    Collections
    • Faculty Work (AUS Sustainability)

    Browse

    All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsCollege/DeptArchive ReferenceSeriesThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsCollege/DeptArchive ReferenceSeries

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
    Submission Policies | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Send Feedback

    Return to AUS
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV