Start-up builds containers for hydrogen from pellets

Start-up builds containers for hydrogen from pellets-kilos wood required kilo pure

The start-up “BtX Energy”, which specializes in technologies for generating and storing sustainable and green energy, has contributed to a joint project with “A.H.T. Syngas Technology” received a positive funding decision from the Federal Ministry of Economics. This emerges from a message from the company BtX, based in Bavarian Hof. The joint project “BiDroGen” aims to develop a container solution for the decentralized generation of hydrogen from pelleted wood residues to market maturity. According to the company, the total funding from the BMWi for the “Wood to Hydrogen” project is 630.800 euros.

The basics of the project are the existing carburetor technology of BTX with extremely clean product gas as well as the cleavage of pure hydrogen from mixed gases, it is called. According to BtX, this project builds on another project that has been applied for with the Technical University of Cologne. The aim is to maximize the hydrogen content of the wood gas produced from pellets by using so-called shift catalysts and to guarantee the purity of the gas for the subsequent processes.

As a result, high-purity hydrogen is to be obtained from the pelleted residual wood. Depending on the gas quality, between 12 and 15 kilos of wood are required for one kilo of pure hydrogen. That corresponds to an efficiency of more than 50 percent, according to the statement. This is significantly higher than that of combustion engines. In addition, the energy comes entirely from renewable sources. If the project is successful, a container should be ready for series production at the end, with the help of which green hydrogen can be made available independently and decentrally.

“The area of production of hydrogen from biomass has great potential in rural areas – also and especially as an alternative to hydrogen production with electric power,” says BTX boss Andy Gradel. Breaking through the “chicken-egg problem” is particularly important, according to Gero Bernhard Ferges, Managing Director of A.H.T. “Municipalities could, for example, immediately purchase hydrogen-powered vehicles, even though there is not yet a hydrogen filling station in the region.The transportable container is suitable both for a transitional period and as a permanent solution.

Related articles

Please follow and like us:

4 thoughts on “Start-up builds containers for hydrogen from pellets”

  1. The poor trees.
    Now they also have to serve their crown for a questionable technical exploitation in a completely inefficient way with a lot of energy expenditure.
    Even just burning it is more efficient.
    When the hydrogen is then processed into eFuel, the cycle of nonsense closes 🙂

  2. A small bill with…

    Depending on the gas quality, between 12 and 15 kilos of wood are required for one kilo of pure hydrogen.

    … and …

    Absolutely dry hardwood has a calorific value of around 5 kWh/kg. (Source: Wikipedia)

    … gives 60 to 75 kWh calorific value for 1 kg of hydrogen (33.33 kWh), which would be about 50%.

    In FCEV vehicles, approx. 20 to 22 kWh (compared to BEV), i.e. around 30% efficiency (diesel plus x / gasoline engine minus x) and thus on the level of combustion engines.

    Better to generate heat with a calorific value of 60 to 75 kWh from 12 to 15 kilos of pellets instead of H2 (33.33 kWh).

    Hydrogen could be obtained from waste water with waste water plasmalysis (20 kWh per kg H2).

    In the future, large amounts of green hydrogen will be needed, especially for industry, and this hydrogen should be obtained as efficiently and resource-friendly as possible.

    A revival of the old wood gasifier via the detour of hydrogen and fuel cell would be the wrong way.

  3. I say out of the stomach that the raw material quantities available for us will be sufficient for no macroeconomic significant H2 production. Can someone calculate.

    How much H2 produces such a container for now and how much wood does he consume? On the side of 120 kg / D is the speech, so we take 1.6t wood (Roundabout 4 SRM, for many of the years for heating). 120 kg H2 rich – in cars – for 12.000 km. That roughly corresponds to the usual annual mileage with us. Let’s say so: A container provides hydrogen every year for 365 cars while it takes 365 households the firewood (= more expensive). The passenger passenger passport is 45 million, all other sectors such as transportation, construction, aviation … the hot stone is damn big, on which this drop is coming.

    Oh, after this simple bill and current end customer prices for pellets, I come up alone at the raw material costs 4.5 € / kg H2. You may argue that this is certainly cheaper in bulk purchase or self-production – but there will not be much in it, because the market pays more.

    And that was just that naive consideration without gray energy. Production and operation of the plant, ash disposal, provision of raw materials (felling, transport, pelleting, drying, transport, filling…) etc. And: Wood is not an unlimited resource! Just go to the hardware store and see what lumber costs right now. Pellet prices have also increased by at least 50% in the last three years. And just take a look at the forests that are dying due to climate catastrophes. Abroad, the increased demand is served by massive overexploitation. How the hydrogen is separated and high-pressure compressed? Probably electrically powered.

    The horribly stupid thing about this concept is that it ignores H2’s sole purpose of being an energy store. Wood is already one (as is pyrolysis gas).

    But why should one buy something like this and the H2 vehicles can be driven directly as a gas in the burner? Who says we should? It’s all about promotion – lack of investors?

    But what always seems interesting about pyrolysis is that the process should produce coal pellets. what happens to it? …Remain silent. On the page you read it somewhere: It’s called “coke” and burned to provide the process heat. So in the end CO2 comes out as well, instead of either sequestering the coal or using it to replace fossil coal in other areas. Note:
    A tree that grows today contains 1/3 carbon from fossil sources.
    But you can also use other biogases! Yeah right. But then they are withdrawn from use elsewhere.
  4. Corresponding to an efficiency of more than 50 percent, it says in the message. This is significantly higher than that of combustion engines.

    It’s nice, but isn’t there a corresponding detail missing in the comparison? Z.B., that at first only H2 was produced with this level of efficiency, but nothing was yet compressed, let alone moved. So there are a few more efficiencies to add in the chain.

    We also need the forest as a CO2 sink. Leave the trees alone!



Leave a Comment