skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Hydrothermal Liquefaction Treatment Hazard Analysis Report

Abstract

Hazard analyses were performed to evaluate the modular hydrothermal liquefaction treatment system. The hazard assessment process was performed in 2 stages. An initial assessment utilizing Hazard Identification and Preliminary Hazards Analysis (PHA) techniques identified areas with significant or unique hazards (process safety-related hazards) that fall outside of the normal operating envelope of PNNL and warranted additional analysis. The subsequent assessment was based on a qualitative What-If analysis. The analysis was augmented, as necessary, by additional quantitative analysis for scenarios involving a release of hazardous material or energy with the potential for affecting the public. The following selected hazardous scenarios received increased attention: •Scenarios involving a release of hazardous material or energy, controls were identified in the What-If analysis table that prevent the occurrence or mitigate the effects of the release. •Scenarios with significant consequences that could impact personnel outside the immediate operations area, quantitative analyses were performed to determine the potential magnitude of the scenario. The set of “critical controls” were identified for these scenarios (see Section 4) which prevent the occurrence or mitigate the effects of the release of events with significant consequences.

Authors:
 [1];  [1]
  1. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1406834
Report Number(s):
PNNL-24219 Rev 3
BM0108010
DOE Contract Number:
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
09 BIOMASS FUELS

Citation Formats

Lowry, Peter P., and Wagner, Katie A. Hydrothermal Liquefaction Treatment Hazard Analysis Report. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.2172/1406834.
Lowry, Peter P., & Wagner, Katie A. Hydrothermal Liquefaction Treatment Hazard Analysis Report. United States. doi:10.2172/1406834.
Lowry, Peter P., and Wagner, Katie A. 2016. "Hydrothermal Liquefaction Treatment Hazard Analysis Report". United States. doi:10.2172/1406834. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1406834.
@article{osti_1406834,
title = {Hydrothermal Liquefaction Treatment Hazard Analysis Report},
author = {Lowry, Peter P. and Wagner, Katie A.},
abstractNote = {Hazard analyses were performed to evaluate the modular hydrothermal liquefaction treatment system. The hazard assessment process was performed in 2 stages. An initial assessment utilizing Hazard Identification and Preliminary Hazards Analysis (PHA) techniques identified areas with significant or unique hazards (process safety-related hazards) that fall outside of the normal operating envelope of PNNL and warranted additional analysis. The subsequent assessment was based on a qualitative What-If analysis. The analysis was augmented, as necessary, by additional quantitative analysis for scenarios involving a release of hazardous material or energy with the potential for affecting the public. The following selected hazardous scenarios received increased attention: •Scenarios involving a release of hazardous material or energy, controls were identified in the What-If analysis table that prevent the occurrence or mitigate the effects of the release. •Scenarios with significant consequences that could impact personnel outside the immediate operations area, quantitative analyses were performed to determine the potential magnitude of the scenario. The set of “critical controls” were identified for these scenarios (see Section 4) which prevent the occurrence or mitigate the effects of the release of events with significant consequences.},
doi = {10.2172/1406834},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 9
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • A preliminary hazard assessment was completed during February 2015 to evaluate the conceptual design of the modular hydrothermal liquefaction treatment system. The hazard assessment was performed in 2 stages. An initial assessment utilizing Hazard Identification and Preliminary Hazards Analysis (PHA) techniques identified areas with significant or unique hazards (process safety-related hazards) that fall outside of the normal operating envelope of PNNL and warranted additional analysis. The subsequent assessment was based on a qualitative What-If analysis. This analysis was augmented, as necessary, by additional quantitative analysis for scenarios involving a release of hazardous material or energy with the potential for affectingmore » the public.« less
  • A preliminary process model and techno-economic analysis (TEA) was completed for fuel produced from hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) of sludge waste from a municipal wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and subsequent biocrude upgrading. The model is adapted from previous work by Jones et al. (2014) for algae HTL, using experimental data generated in fiscal year 2015 (FY15) bench-scale HTL testing of sludge waste streams. Testing was performed on sludge samples received from MetroVancouver’s Annacis Island WWTP (Vancouver, B.C.) as part of a collaborative project with the Water Environment and Reuse Foundation (WERF). The full set of sludge HTL testing data from thismore » effort will be documented in a separate report to be issued by WERF. This analysis is based on limited testing data and therefore should be considered preliminary. Future refinements are necessary to improve the robustness of the model, including a cross-check of modeled biocrude components with the experimental GCMS data and investigation of equipment costs most appropriate at the smaller scales used here. Environmental sustainability metrics analysis is also needed to understand the broader impact of this technology pathway. The base case scenario for the analysis consists of 10 HTL plants, each processing 100 dry U.S. ton/day (92.4 ton/day on a dry, ash-free basis) of sludge waste and producing 234 barrel per stream day (BPSD) biocrude, feeding into a centralized biocrude upgrading facility that produces 2,020 barrel per standard day of final fuel. This scale was chosen based upon initial wastewater treatment plant data collected by the resource assessment team from the EPA’s Clean Watersheds Needs Survey database (EPA 2015a) and a rough estimate of what the potential sludge availability might be within a 100-mile radius. In addition, we received valuable feedback from the wastewater treatment industry as part of the WERF collaboration that helped form the basis for the selected HTL and upgrading plant scales and feedstock credit (current cost of disposal). It is assumed that the sludge is currently disposed of at $16.20/wet ton ($46/dry ton at 35% solids; $50/ton dry, ash-free basis) and this is included as a feedstock credit in the operating costs. The base case assumptions result in a minimum biocrude selling price of $3.8/gge and a minimum final upgraded fuel selling price of $4.9/gge. Several areas of process improvement and refinements to the analysis have the potential to significantly improve economics relative to the base case: • Optimization of HTL sludge feed solids content • Optimization of HTL biocrude yield • Optimization of HTL reactor liquid hourly space velocity (LHSV) • Optimization of fuel yield from hydrotreating • Combined large and small HTL scales specific to regions (e.g., metropolitan and suburban plants) Combined improvements believed to be achievable in these areas can potentially reduce the minimum selling price of biocrude and final upgraded fuel by about 50%. Further improvements may be possible through recovery of higher value components from the HTL aqueous phase, as being investigated under separate PNNL projects. Upgrading the biocrude at an existing petroleum refinery could also reduce the MFSP, although this option requires further testing to ensure compatibility and mitigate risks to a refinery. And finally, recycling the HTL aqueous phase product stream back to the headworks of the WWTP (with no catalytic hydrothermal gasification treatment) can significantly reduce cost. This option is uniquely appropriate for application at a water treatment facility but also requires further investigation to determine any technical and economic challenges related to the extra chemical oxygen demand (COD) associated with the recycled water.« less
  • A preliminary process model and techno-economic analysis (TEA) was completed for fuel produced from hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) of sludge waste from a municipal wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and subsequent biocrude upgrading. The model is adapted from previous work by Jones et al. (2014) for algae HTL, using experimental data generated in fiscal year 2015 (FY15) bench-scale HTL testing of sludge waste streams. Testing was performed on sludge samples received from Metro Vancouver’s Annacis Island WWTP (Vancouver, B.C.) as part of a collaborative project with the Water Environment and Reuse Foundation (WERF). The full set of sludge HTL testing data frommore » this effort will be documented in a separate report to be issued by WERF. This analysis is based on limited testing data and therefore should be considered preliminary. In addition, the testing was conducted with the goal of successful operation, and therefore does not represent an optimized process. Future refinements are necessary to improve the robustness of the model, including a cross-check of modeled biocrude components with the experimental GCMS data and investigation of equipment costs most appropriate at the relatively small scales used here. Environmental sustainability metrics analysis is also needed to understand the broader impact of this technology pathway. The base case scenario for the analysis consists of 10 HTL plants, each processing 100 dry U.S. ton/day (92.4 ton/day on a dry, ash-free basis) of sludge waste and producing 234 barrel per stream day (BPSD) biocrude, feeding into a centralized biocrude upgrading facility that produces 2,020 barrel per standard day of final fuel. This scale was chosen based upon initial wastewater treatment plant data collected by PNNL’s resource assessment team from the EPA’s Clean Watersheds Needs Survey database (EPA 2015a) and a rough estimate of what the potential sludge availability might be within a 100-mile radius. In addition, we received valuable feedback from the wastewater treatment industry as part of the WERF collaboration that helped form the basis for the selected HTL and upgrading plant scales and feedstock credit (current cost of disposal). It is assumed that the sludge is currently disposed of at $16.20/wet ton ($46/dry ton at 35% solids; $50/ton dry, ash-free basis) and this is included as a feedstock credit in the operating costs. The base case assumptions result in a minimum biocrude selling price of $3.8/gge and a minimum final upgraded fuel selling price of $4.9/gge. Several areas of process improvement and refinements to the analysis have the potential to significantly improve economics relative to the base case: •Optimization of HTL sludge feed solids content •Optimization of HTL biocrude yield •Optimization of HTL reactor liquid hourly space velocity (LHSV) •Optimization of fuel yield from hydrotreating •Combined large and small HTL scales specific to regions (e.g., metropolitan and suburban plants) Combined improvements believed to be achievable in these areas can potentially reduce the minimum selling price of biocrude and final upgraded fuel by about 50%. Further improvements may be possible through recovery of higher value components from the HTL aqueous phase, as being investigated under separate PNNL projects. Upgrading the biocrude at an existing petroleum refinery could also reduce the MFSP, although this option requires further testing to ensure compatibility and mitigation of risks to a refinery. And finally, recycling the HTL aqueous phase product stream back to the headworks of the WWTP (with no catalytic hydrothermal gasification treatment) can significantly reduce cost. This option is uniquely appropriate for application at a water treatment facility but also requires further investigation to determine any technical and economic challenges related to the extra chemical oxygen demand (COD) associated with the recycled water.« less
  • The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) aims to develop and deploy technologies to transform renewable biomass resources into commercially viable, high-performance biofuels, bioproducts and biopower through public and private partnerships (DOE, 2016). BETO and its national laboratory teams conduct in-depth technoeconomic assessments (TEA) of biomass feedstock supply and logistics and conversion technologies to produce biofuels, and life-cycle analysis of overall system sustainability.
  • No abstract provided.