A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen Production
This study explores hydrogen’s potential as a sustainable energy source for Brunei, given the nation’s reliance on fossil fuels and associated environmental concerns. Specifically, it evaluates two hydrogen production technologies; steam methane reforming (SMR) and alkaline water electrolysis (AWE),...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-03-01
|
| Series: | Hydrogen |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4141/6/2/23 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1839653824235569152 |
|---|---|
| author | Ching Cheng Chu Muhammad Danial Suhainin Dk Nur Hayati Amali Pg Haji Omar Ali Jia Yuan Lim Poh Serng Swee Jerick Yap Raymundo Ryan Xin Han Tan Mei Kei Yap Hsin Fei Khoo Hazwani Suhaimi Pg Emeroylariffion Abas |
| author_facet | Ching Cheng Chu Muhammad Danial Suhainin Dk Nur Hayati Amali Pg Haji Omar Ali Jia Yuan Lim Poh Serng Swee Jerick Yap Raymundo Ryan Xin Han Tan Mei Kei Yap Hsin Fei Khoo Hazwani Suhaimi Pg Emeroylariffion Abas |
| author_sort | Ching Cheng Chu |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This study explores hydrogen’s potential as a sustainable energy source for Brunei, given the nation’s reliance on fossil fuels and associated environmental concerns. Specifically, it evaluates two hydrogen production technologies; steam methane reforming (SMR) and alkaline water electrolysis (AWE), through a techno-economic framework that assesses life cycle cost (LCC), efficiency, scalability, and environmental impact. SMR, the most widely used technique, is cost-effective but carbon-intensive, producing considerable carbon dioxide emissions unless combined with carbon capture to yield “blue hydrogen”. On the other hand, AWE, particularly when powered by renewable energy, offers a cleaner alternative despite challenges in efficiency and cost. The assessment revealed that AWE has a significantly higher LCC than SMR, making AWE the more economically viable hydrogen production method in the long term. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted to determine the main cost factors affecting the LCC, providing insights into the long term viability of each technology from an operational and financial standpoint. AWE’s economic viability is mostly driven by the high electricity and feedstock costs, while SMR relies heavily on feedstock costs. However, Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) indicates that AWE produces significantly higher carbon dioxide emissions than SMR, which emits approximately 9100 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually. Nevertheless, findings suggest that AWE remains the more sustainable option due to its higher LCC costs and compatibility with renewable energy, especially in regions with access to low-cost renewable electricity. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-aa7f0c19097f4c5ab6d0ce85a0b52ba6 |
| institution | Matheson Library |
| issn | 2673-4141 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Hydrogen |
| spelling | doaj-art-aa7f0c19097f4c5ab6d0ce85a0b52ba62025-06-25T13:56:09ZengMDPI AGHydrogen2673-41412025-03-01622310.3390/hydrogen6020023A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen ProductionChing Cheng Chu0Muhammad Danial Suhainin1Dk Nur Hayati Amali Pg Haji Omar Ali2Jia Yuan Lim3Poh Serng Swee4Jerick Yap Raymundo5Ryan Xin Han Tan6Mei Kei Yap7Hsin Fei Khoo8Hazwani Suhaimi9Pg Emeroylariffion Abas10Faculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiFaculty of Integrated Technologies, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410, BruneiThis study explores hydrogen’s potential as a sustainable energy source for Brunei, given the nation’s reliance on fossil fuels and associated environmental concerns. Specifically, it evaluates two hydrogen production technologies; steam methane reforming (SMR) and alkaline water electrolysis (AWE), through a techno-economic framework that assesses life cycle cost (LCC), efficiency, scalability, and environmental impact. SMR, the most widely used technique, is cost-effective but carbon-intensive, producing considerable carbon dioxide emissions unless combined with carbon capture to yield “blue hydrogen”. On the other hand, AWE, particularly when powered by renewable energy, offers a cleaner alternative despite challenges in efficiency and cost. The assessment revealed that AWE has a significantly higher LCC than SMR, making AWE the more economically viable hydrogen production method in the long term. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted to determine the main cost factors affecting the LCC, providing insights into the long term viability of each technology from an operational and financial standpoint. AWE’s economic viability is mostly driven by the high electricity and feedstock costs, while SMR relies heavily on feedstock costs. However, Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) indicates that AWE produces significantly higher carbon dioxide emissions than SMR, which emits approximately 9100 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually. Nevertheless, findings suggest that AWE remains the more sustainable option due to its higher LCC costs and compatibility with renewable energy, especially in regions with access to low-cost renewable electricity.https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4141/6/2/23techno-economic analysishydrogen productionsteam methane reformingalkaline water electrolysisblue hydrogengreen hydrogen |
| spellingShingle | Ching Cheng Chu Muhammad Danial Suhainin Dk Nur Hayati Amali Pg Haji Omar Ali Jia Yuan Lim Poh Serng Swee Jerick Yap Raymundo Ryan Xin Han Tan Mei Kei Yap Hsin Fei Khoo Hazwani Suhaimi Pg Emeroylariffion Abas A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen Production Hydrogen techno-economic analysis hydrogen production steam methane reforming alkaline water electrolysis blue hydrogen green hydrogen |
| title | A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen Production |
| title_full | A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen Production |
| title_fullStr | A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen Production |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen Production |
| title_short | A Techno-Economic Assessment of Steam Methane Reforming and Alkaline Water Electrolysis for Hydrogen Production |
| title_sort | techno economic assessment of steam methane reforming and alkaline water electrolysis for hydrogen production |
| topic | techno-economic analysis hydrogen production steam methane reforming alkaline water electrolysis blue hydrogen green hydrogen |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4141/6/2/23 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chingchengchu atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT muhammaddanialsuhainin atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT dknurhayatiamalipghajiomarali atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT jiayuanlim atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT pohserngswee atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT jerickyapraymundo atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT ryanxinhantan atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT meikeiyap atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT hsinfeikhoo atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT hazwanisuhaimi atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT pgemeroylariffionabas atechnoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT chingchengchu technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT muhammaddanialsuhainin technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT dknurhayatiamalipghajiomarali technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT jiayuanlim technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT pohserngswee technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT jerickyapraymundo technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT ryanxinhantan technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT meikeiyap technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT hsinfeikhoo technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT hazwanisuhaimi technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction AT pgemeroylariffionabas technoeconomicassessmentofsteammethanereformingandalkalinewaterelectrolysisforhydrogenproduction |