Carbon‐negative hydrogen from ethanol via catalytic oxidative reforming

Abstract This study evaluated a commercial technology for producing low‐ or negative‐carbon hydrogen through ethanol catalytic oxidative reforming, focusing on the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, or carbon intensity (CI). Various scenarios were analyzed: (a) comparing corn ethanol (first‐generation or Gen1 ethanol) and cellulosic ethanol (second‐generation or Gen2 ethanol) as feedstocks; (b) assessing carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) for CO 2 from upstream fermentation; and (c) evaluating oxygen sourcing via air separation units vs. on‐site or off‐site water electrolysis using a proton exchange membrane. Findings indicate that the CI for hydrogen production using Gen2 ethanol from corn stover is lower than that of Gen1 corn ethanol. Additionally, using proton exchange membrane‐generated oxygen results in a lower CI than air separation unit‐generated oxygen, regardless of the sourcing method. Implementing CCS for the hydrogen production plant’s evolved CO 2 is essential for achieving a net‐negative CI for hydrogen from Gen1 ethanol. All examined scenarios, including both ethanol generations, oxygen sources, and CCS applications, demonstrated a net‐negative carbon intensity, surpassing the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions threshold of 0.45 kg CO 2 e/kg to enable policy credits as outlined in the Inflation Reduction Act §45V. In comparison, the CI for hydrogen from steam methane reforming stands at 3.4 kg CO 2 e/kg with CCS and 9.4 kg CO 2 e/kg without CCS.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Biofuels Bioproducts and Biorefining
Published
2025-03-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.2760
Primary Topic
Catalysts for Methane Reforming
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Carbon‐negative hydrogen from ethanol via catalytic oxidative reforming

Eric C. D. Tan, Jeffrey B. Harrison, Ryan Davis, Timothy Fogarty
1 links
Biofuels Bioproducts and Biorefining
Catalysts for Methane Reforming
article

Carbon‐negative hydrogen from ethanol via catalytic oxidative reforming

Eric C. D. Tan, Jeffrey B. Harrison, Ryan Davis, Timothy Fogarty
article en

Abstract

Abstract This study evaluated a commercial technology for producing low‐ or negative‐carbon hydrogen through ethanol catalytic oxidative reforming, focusing on the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, or carbon intensity (CI). Various scenarios were analyzed: (a) comparing corn ethanol (first‐generation or Gen1 ethanol) and cellulosic ethanol (second‐generation or Gen2 ethanol) as feedstocks; (b) assessing carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) for CO 2 from upstream fermentation; and (c) evaluating oxygen sourcing via air separation units vs. on‐site or off‐site water electrolysis using a proton exchange membrane. Findings indicate that the CI for hydrogen production using Gen2 ethanol from corn stover is lower than that of Gen1 corn ethanol. Additionally, using proton exchange membrane‐generated oxygen results in a lower CI than air separation unit‐generated oxygen, regardless of the sourcing method. Implementing CCS for the hydrogen production plant’s evolved CO 2 is essential for achieving a net‐negative CI for hydrogen from Gen1 ethanol. All examined scenarios, including both ethanol generations, oxygen sources, and CCS applications, demonstrated a net‐negative carbon intensity, surpassing the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions threshold of 0.45 kg CO 2 e/kg to enable policy credits as outlined in the Inflation Reduction Act §45V. In comparison, the CI for hydrogen from steam methane reforming stands at 3.4 kg CO 2 e/kg with CCS and 9.4 kg CO 2 e/kg without CCS.

Biofuels Bioproducts and BiorefiningVol. 19(6)
National Laboratory of the Rockies (US), Hydrogenics (Belgium) (BE)
U.S. Department of Energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Catalysts for Methane Reforming
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.