Next Article in Journal
Review of the Impacts of Climate Change on Ports and Harbours and Their Adaptation in Spain
Next Article in Special Issue
Review on Water and Energy Integration in Process Industry: Water-Heat Nexus
Previous Article in Journal
Sustainable Practicalities towards Good Governance in Fish Townships and Villages by Ethics-Based Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Techno-Economic Assessment of an Air-Multiple PCM Active Storage Unit for Free Cooling Application
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Review of Thermochemical Technologies for Water and Energy Integration Systems: Energy Storage and Recovery

by
Miguel Castro Oliveira
1,2,
Muriel Iten
1,* and
Henrique A. Matos
2
1
Low Carbon and Resource Efficiency, R&Di, Instituto de Soldadura e Qualidade, 4415-491 Grijó, Portugal
2
Centro Recursos Naturais e Ambiente (CERENA), Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Avenida Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(12), 7506; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127506
Submission received: 20 May 2022 / Revised: 16 June 2022 / Accepted: 17 June 2022 / Published: 20 June 2022

Abstract

:
Thermochemical technologies (TCT) enable the promotion of the sustainability and the operation of energy systems, as well as in industrial sites. The thermochemical operations can be applied for energy storage and energy recovery (alternative fuel production from water/wastewater, in particular green hydrogen). TCTs are proven to have a higher energy density and long-term storage compared to standard thermal storage technologies (sensible and latent). Nonetheless, these require further research on their development for the increasing of the technology readiness level (TRL). Since TCTs operate with the same input/outputs streams as other thermal storages (for instance, wastewater and waste heat streams), these may be conceptually analyzed in terms of the integration in Water and Energy Integration System (WEIS). This work is set to review the techno-economic and environmental aspects related to thermochemical energy storage (sorption and reaction-based) and wastewater-to-energy (particular focus on thermochemical water splitting technology), aiming also to assess their potential into WEIS. The exploited technologies are, in general, proved to be suitable to be installed within the conceptualization of WEIS. In the case of TCES technologies, these are proven to be significantly more potential analogues to standard TES technologies on the scope of the conceptualization of WEIS. In the case of energy recovery technologies, although a conceptualization of a pathway to produce usable heat with an input of wastewater, further study has to be performed to fully understand the use of additional fuel in combustion-based processes.

1. Introduction

Thermochemical technologies (TCT) are a set of sorption and reaction-based components and systems having the ultimate objectives of improving the operation and the sustainability of industrial processes and energy systems [1]. For sustainability promotion, TCTs may be implemented with the aims of improving energy use and water use, and reduce the emissions of liquid or gas pollutants, overall promoting the eco-efficiency of industrial units [2,3]. The role of TCTs is, thus, as improvement measures, similar to heat recovery [4] and wastewater treatment [5]. Within system retrofitting research, thermochemical technologies have a fundamental role for water and energy integration systems (WEIS), namely, in the form of alternative thermal energy storage (TES) [6] and wastewater-to-energy (WWtE) [7]. TCTs present overall efficiencies to their counterparts [2], which is substantially notorious in the case of TES [8]. In the case of wastewater-to-energy, TCTs are particularly relevant for green hydrogen production [9]. In this scope, it is to underline the application of thermochemical water splitting (TWS) as an alternative to electrolysis [10].
Thermochemical technologies are essentially applied for management, reduction, recovery, and treatment of material and energy wastes [11]. Within the context of energy recovery, TCTs are set to be implemented for the promotion of circular economy [12]. Furthermore, the role of these technologies has been proposed for the mitigation of the environment-related impacts of COVID19 pandemic, especially for industrial wastes [11].
The recent EU Energy System Integration Strategy [13,14] pretends the attainment of a net-zero GHG emission-based economy through the promotion of the circular economy perspective on the operation of energy systems. This strategy is itself divided in three pillars: the first pillar (dealing with the energy efficiency and circular economy nexus), the second pillar (dealing with renewable-based electrification), and the third pillar (dealing with alternative low-carbon fuels) [15]. Particular attention shall be applied for the first (which particularly deals with the promotion of waste heat recovery and energy recovery from wastewater) and third pillar (which deals with the promotion of the use of green hydrogen on sectors with more difficult decarbonization) [15].
This work performs a review on the state-of-the-art of thermochemical technologies for energy storage and energy recovery from wastewater. It is set to frame the analysis of the installation of these technologies within water and energy integration systems (WEIS), in follow-up of an ongoing research on this area involving all the aspects associated to the implementation of heat recovery, water treatment and recirculation and eco-efficiency promotion practices in process industry [4,16,17,18,19].

2. Thermochemical Energy Storage (TCES)

Thermochemical Energy Storage (TCES) comprises a set of technologies which combine both the principles of thermal and chemical energy storage. These may be set to be used in the overall paradigm of the conceptualization of Water and Energy Integration Systems (WEIS) with time-dependent supply and demand levels of water and energy resources. TCES technologies generally present a higher energy storage capacity compared to standard thermal energy storage (in this case, sensible and latent storage technologies) [20]. The characterized technologies have been selected due to their adequacy to the purpose of waste heat recovery in process industry and these are, namely, system-level technologies that may be characterized in three parts: heat source, heat storage units, and heat sinks.

2.1. Overview of TCES Potential

Thermochemical energy storage (TCES) technologies are associated to the following advantages [21]: high storage capacity, low heat losses (since energy mat be stored at temperatures near ambient temperature), high storage period, potential of transport at long distance, and high compactness. Nonetheless, these present disadvantages at the level of having high capital costs and being technically complex [22]. In Table 1, these technologies are compared in terms of technical and economic aspects. In Figure 1, the potential of materials set to be used in TCES technologies is compared in terms of energy storage capacity to standard TES materials.
The data presented in both Table 1 and Figure 1 demonstrate that while the scope of application of TCES is wider than the considered standard TES technologies (wider temperature range and higher energy density), these still suffer from drawbacks in terms of technological maturity. Owing to a relatively low technology readiness level (TRL), TCES technologies do not present the same commercial availability as the standard ones and typical values for the lifetime of these is not deeply understood. The integration of these technologies in the conceptualization of industrial systems whose study is inherent to this work may potentiate the improvement of the TRL of these, and, thus, allow for their constitution into higher potential alternatives to sensible and latent TES.

2.2. Description of TCES Technologies

TCES technologies may be either sorption or reaction-based [23]. Sorption technologies may be conceptualized as open or closed systems. In the first, the heat transfer between charging and discharging processes is performed directly between the sorbent and the sorbate. In the latter, the heat transfer occurs in different phases [24]. Reaction-based technologies make use of endothermic and exothermic reactions for the storage of thermal energy (in general, reactions occur in the reactors, where the endothermic reactor corresponds to the heat source and the exothermic reactor to the heat sink) [25]. In general (and as verified by the analysis of Figure 1 above), reaction-based TCES are associated to higher temperature range and energy density than adsorption-based TCES. In Table 2, several TCES technologies are described.
Table 2. Description of TCES Technologies and Strategies.
Table 2. Description of TCES Technologies and Strategies.
TechnologyTechnology CharacterizationOperational Conditions Refs.
Adsorption heat storage (AHS)It is based on the phenomena of desorption (charging) and adsorption (discharging) of an air stream;
The configurations for AHS may be classified into open and closed systems, which are pictorially presented in Figure 2;
Adsorption materials include zeolites (for desorption temperatures up to 180 °C and adsorption temperatures up to 80 °C), aluminophosphates/silico-aluminophosphates (for desorption temperatures of 95–140 °C and adsorption temperatures of 30–40 °C) and metal organic frameworks (for desorption temperatures of 90–140 °C and adsorption temperatures of 30–40 °C).[26,27,28,29,30,31]
Ammonia-based energy storageIt is based on the reactions of dissociation/synthesis of ammonia (NH3) into/from nitrogen gas (N2) and hydrogen gas (H2) (as described below);
It is overall associated to the following advantages: (i) the reaction is single-step and does not require careful control; (ii) the reactants and products are stable at operating temperatures; (iii) the reactants and products are relatively abundant; (iv) possibility for the storage of liquid phase (NH3) and gas phase (N2 and H2) within the same tank due to density differences;
The industrial system typically includes two reaction vessels (for dissociation and synthesis), a separation and storage tank and two heat exchangers—Figure 3a.
Operating temperatures overall vary within the range 400–1000 °C.[32,33,34,35,36,37,38]
Reactions
Haber–Bosch synthesis
(Endothermic)
NH 3 1 2 N 2 + 3 2 H 2 ,   Δ H 0 = + 91.8   kJ / mol (1)
Calcium-looping energy storageIt is based on the reactions of calcination/carbonation of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) into/from calcium oxide (CaO) and carbon dioxide (CO2) (as described below);
The industrial system encompasses three vessels for carbonate, calcium oxide and carbon dioxide—Figure 3b.
Carbonation occurs at about 650 °C, calcination occurs in much more higher temperatures.[39,40,41,42,43]
Reactions
Calcination
(Endothermic)
CaCO 3 CaO + CO 2 ,   Δ H 0 = + 160 172   kJ / mol (2)
Metal oxide energy storageIt is based on the reactions of oxidation/reduction of metal oxides (as described below);
A typical industrial installation includes the supply of a heat source for the occurrence of reduction reaction and a reactor for the occurrence of the oxidation reaction, as represented in Figure 3c;
The reaction enthalpy highly varies for different metal oxides.
The operational temperatures for the occurrence of reaction are set in the range of 700–1400 °C.[44,45,46,47,48,49,50]
Occurring Reaction
Reduction
(Endothermic)
MO n MO n δ + δ 2 O 2 (3)

3. Energy Recovery from Wastewater

Technologies for energy recovery from wastewater may be considered on the overall conceptualization of WEIS. This type of technologies may also be referred as Wastewater-to-energy (WWtE) technologies and subsists not in the direct use of discharge water and waste heat streams as valorized water and energy inputs, respectively. Rather, these subsist on the use of the liquid water streams or the sludge streams which result as by-products in WWT units for the production of additional quantities of fuels [51]. The selected energy recovery technologies have been chosen based on its adequacy in terms of the produced fuels bearing considering the end-users, namely, combustion-based thermal processes. For instance, as the analyzed processes are natural gas-based, the selected technologies correspond to gaseous fuels production.

3.1. Framework of Alternative Fuel Production with Focus on Green Hydrogen

The sludge streams resultant from wastewater treatment may be furtherly valorized to produce additional quantities of fuels (for instance biofuels and synfuels), which may be furtherly used in combustion-based processes (in addition to used primary fuel, such as natural gas) [7]. The particular case of green hydrogen production is a relevant concern on the path to promote innovative low-carbon strategies, with hydrogen being identified as a relevant alternative energy vector [52]. The challenges regarding sustainable hydrogen production include the high cost for hydrogen production technologies and hydrogen distribution within the energy system of a region [53]. In the context of the Portuguese energy system, most recently, the 2020 EN-H2 strategy was approved in the prospect to promote the production and further distribution of green hydrogen. Such strategy prominently aims the creation of an alliance between several Portuguese institutions and enterprises for the development of new technologies, services, and products on this area, which have a period of implementation in the time frame of 2020–2023 [54].
Hydrogen production based on the use of fossil fuels (such as natural gas and coal) represents 95% of the total produced hydrogen, while the remaining 5% correspond to water electrolysis [51,55,56,57]. Presently, electrolysis is the most mature green hydrogen technology, and the one with highest technology readiness level (TRL). Nevertheless, it is associated to two disadvantages [58]:
  • Considerable electricity use (which is already an energy carrier and there is the possibility of additional energy losses by converting it into another energy carrier such as hydrogen);
  • Low efficiency of commercial solar panels.
Most recently, thermochemical water splitting (TWS) technologies [59] have been studied as alternative methods to electrolysis for green hydrogen production [9]. This is a set of technologies that (having the supply of a determinate quantity of heat as the driving force [3]) is set for the production of hydrogen from liquid water. The most recent research and development (R&D) efforts have been taken to improve the technology readiness level associated to this set of technologies by improving its economic viability [57]. TWS technologies may be integrated in heat recovery systems, in particular, in ones that use either waste heat or the heat generated by the implementation of solar thermal systems. As such, these may constitute a significant improvement in terms of the whole energy supply and demand chain involving hydrogen as an energy vector. Since these technologies use heat as the driving force, the necessity of additional energy conversion steps for the supply of the required energy input on the waste-to-energy unit is set to be decreased in the context of a whole energy system. In Figure 4, the incorporation of hydrogen within the conceptualization of a sustainable energy systems (encompassing the implementation of TWS and waste heat recovery within a plant) is summarized.

3.2. Traditional Wastewater-to-Energy Technologies (WWtE)

Traditional wastewater-to-energy (WWtE) technologies with a considerably high technology readiness level include anaerobic digestion (biogas production), gasification (syngas production), and electrolysis (hydrogen production). In the context of green hydrogen production, while the input material stream in an electrolysis and TWS process is only liquid water (which may be the remaining quantity of water present in a sludge stream at the outlet of a wastewater treatment unit) and the main output is hydrogen, the resultant stream from anaerobic digestion and gasification must be further treated to separate hydrogen from other gas components. In Table 3, several traditional WWtE technologies are characterized.
Table 3. Characterization of WWtE Technologies.
Table 3. Characterization of WWtE Technologies.
TechnologyTechnology CharacterizationProduced Fuel CharacterizationRefs.
Anaerobic DigestionIt is a process in which the output is primarily biogas, with a digestate resulting as the by-product;
It is prominently applied for the treatment of wastewater streams with a significant load of organic materials, which are considerable prone to biological degradation;
The anaerobic digestion process may be integrated in the operation of a WWT unit as represented in Figure 5a.
The produced biogas may be injected in natural gas networks, through the process of separation of carbon dioxide and other contaminants to turn biogas into biomethane.[60,61,62,63,64,65,66]
GasificationIt subsists on the partial oxidation of biodegradable material present in wastewater streams for the production of synthesis gas (syngas), as well as a solid fraction of char as by-product;
The gasification process may be integrated in the operation of a WWT unit as represented in Figure 5b.
The produced syngas is commonly composed by hydrogen (H2), carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4);
The produced syngas is an intermediate in the production of other fuel gases, such as diesel fuel (by Fischer-Tropch process) and hydrogen (which must be refined for its use in fuel cells).
[67,68,69,70,71,72]
ElectrolysisIt is a process that uses an electric current to produce hydrogen, based on oxidation-reduction reactions;
A set of by-products (such as chlorine and sodium hydroxide) may also be generated, as represented in Figure 5c;
Several types of electrolysis processes exist, such as: alkaline water electrolysis, solid oxide electrolysis, microbial electrolysis and PEM water electrolysis;
The produced hydrogen may be directly injected into the natural gas fuel supply to combustion-based processes, through processes of production of hydrogen-enriched natural gas (HENG).[73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82]

3.3. Thermochemical Water Splitting (TWS)

The implementation of thermochemical water splitting (TWS) technologies sconsists on several thermochemical cycles (whose input is liquid water and whose output is gaseous hydrogen and oxygen) [83]. Each one of these thermal cycles are based on the occurrence of different multistep reactions encompassing two or more reactions, with the overall reaction being water splitting as represented in Equation (4).
H 2 O H 2 + 1 2 O 2 ,   Δ H 0 = + 241.93   kJ / mol
The assessment of this technology is based on the analysis of the outputs water streams in a plant, heat source availability (for instance thermal energy through high concentration of solar radiation or waste heat from nuclear reactors) and cost-related requirements [83]. Thermochemical cycles that are commonly used for the occurrence of thermochemical water splitting include metal oxide cycles, sulfur-iodine (S-I) cycles and iron-chloride (Fe-Cl) cycle. In Table 4, these thermal cycles are characterized.
Table 4. Characterization of Thermochemical Water Splitting (TWS) Technologies.
Table 4. Characterization of Thermochemical Water Splitting (TWS) Technologies.
TechnologyTechnology CharacterizationOperational Conditions Refs.
Metal oxide cycleIt is a two-step thermal cycle based on the redox reactions of metal oxides (as described below);
It presents the following advantages in comparison to the remaining thermal cycles: (i) in terms of input-output streams, wastewater and heat are the only inputs and hydrogen and oxygen are the only outputs; (ii) the produced H2 and O2 are separated in different reactions; (iii) the existence of continuous recycling of reactants and products; (iv) the produced H2 gas is pure;
A typical installation encompassing this thermal cycle is represented in Figure 6a;
Typical metal oxides implemented for this type of thermal cycle are: CdO/Cd, ZnO/Zn, SnO2/SnO, Mn2O3/MnO, CeO2/Ce2O3 and Fe3O4/FeO;
The operational temperatures across the cycle are in the range of 900–2000 °C;
The reaction enthalpy highly varies for different metal oxides.
[50,59,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99]
Reactions
Reduction MO n MO n δ + δ 2 O 2 (5)
Oxidation MO n δ + δ H 2 O MO n + δ H 2 (6)
Sulfur-iodine cycleIt is three-step thermal cycle based on the use of sulfur and iodine components (as described by the reactions below);
The advantage of being a significantly high efficiency hydrogen production system, although it as an associated drawback of the involvement of high corrosive sulfuric and iodic acids;
A typical installation of this thermal cycle is represented in Figure 6b.
Reaction (CE7) typically occurs at about 120 °C, (CE8) above 800 °C and (CE9) above 350 °C.[10,100,101,102,103,104]
Reactions
Sulfuric acid decomposition H 2 SO 4 SO 2 + H 2 O + 1 2 O 2 ,   Δ H 0 = + 186   kJ / mol (7)
Bunsen reaction I 2 + SO 2 + 2 H 2 O 2 HI + H 2 SO 4 ,   Δ H 0 = 75   kJ / mol (8)
Iodic acid decomposition 2 HI I 2 + H 2 ,   Δ H 0 = + 12   kJ / mol (9)
Iron-chlorine cycleIt is a four-step thermal cycle based on the use of iron and chlorine components (as described by the reactions below);
A typical installation of this thermal cycle is represented in Figure 6c.
Thermal decomposition occurs at 425 °C, the reverse Deacon reaction and hydrolysis in the range 525–925 °C and chlorination at 125 °C.[105,106,107]
Reactions
Thermal Decomposition 2 FeCl 3 2 FeCl 2 + Cl ,   Δ H 0 = 160.5   kJ / mol (10)
Reverse Deacon Reaction Cl 2 + H 2 O 2 HCl + 1 2 O 2 ,   Δ H 0 = + 59.4   kJ / mol (11)
Chlorination Fe 3 O 4 + 8 HCl FeCl 2 + 2 FeCl 3 + 4 H 2 O ,   Δ H 0 = 244   kJ / mol (12)
Hydrolysis 3 FeCl 2 + 4 H 2 O Fe 3 O 4 + 6 HCl + H 2 ,   Δ H 0 = + 156   kJ / mol (13)

4. Thermochemical Technologies for Water and Energy Integration

Thermochemical technologies presented in this work are to be analyzed for integration in Water and Energy Integration Systems (WEIS). The first step for such assessment is the comparison of such technologies to similar ones. Such assessment was already performed in this work, namely, throughout Section 2 and Section 3 with the characterization of the technical and economic aspects associated to each technology.
For the full achievement of the objective of proving the superior potential of TCTs within WEIS, it is necessary to analyze the specific benefits in terms of improved potential, namely, water and energy savings and reduced environmental impacts. Table 5 summarizes the existing research on incorporation of thermochemical technology in heat recovery and energy recovery from wastewater.
Table 5. Characterization of studies for the implementation of Thermochemical Technologies for Water and Energy Integration.
Table 5. Characterization of studies for the implementation of Thermochemical Technologies for Water and Energy Integration.
AspectCharacterizationRefs.
Thermochemical Energy Storage for Heat Recovery from Thermal ProcessesThe functioning of TCES units is analyzed in terms of the supply of variable quantities of thermal energy recovered form waste heat streams;
The studies are generally focused on:
  • Analysis of thermal sensitivity;
  • Analysis of reaction occurrence (in terms of reaction rates and operational temperature and pressure).
[108,109]
Use of thermal energy to drive Wastewater-to-energy unitsThe use of thermal energy (namely the one generated from solar thermal systems) is analyzed for the functioning of WWtE units;
These studies are generally focused on:
  • Analysis of the wastewater contaminant concentration on the conditions for fuel generation;
  • Integration of solar thermal in electrochemical systems for fuel generation.
[110,111]
It is evident that the implementation of thermochemical technologies within the water and energy systems is possible in terms of overall conceptualization (Table 5). In the scope of these studies, these technologies have been successfully exploited in terms of physical phenomena occurrence and equipment sizing. In the case of TCES, the incorporation of these technologies has been proven to be possible within the overall paradigm of waste heat recovery, although the assessment of these as valuable WHR measures has still to be performed for different comparative case-studies (as commonly performed in process integration studies). On the side of WWtE units, further work is still to be developed, namely, in terms of:
  • Analysis of the integration of these units for sustainable fuel generation to be used as additional fuel streams in thermal processes;
  • Assessment of TWS integration as a (potentially) more efficient form of hydrogen production in comparison to electrolysis;
  • Use of waste heat streams as an alternative heat source for TWS instead of solar thermal.
In the scope of WEIS conceptualization, TCES technologies are, overall, a highly viable alternative to sensible and latent TES technologies. Their conceptualization shall also consider, on the other hand, the innovative WWtE technological integration within existing WEIS configurations. Figure 7, represents a concept adapted from Oladejo et al. [112] for the integration of a WWtE within a plant considering their thermal processes and wastewater.
The system represented in Figure 7 enables understanding of the production of additional sustainable fuels from wastewater streams and the allocation of these into thermal process systems (as well as the combustion-based processes within electricity generation systems). Nevertheless, this overall scheme must be analyzed in terms of energy supply and demand requirements (which, in this case, correspond to the WWtE unit and the combustion-based processes, respectively), namely (in the case of gaseous fuels), through a correspondence of the fuel gas to be supplied and the necessary changes to the combustion chambers for the supply of the new gas (for instance, tecno-economic analysis).

5. Conclusions

This work is a contribution to the ongoing research on Water and Energy Integration System (WEIS) in Process Industry. The specific aim of this work is the exploitation of the characteristics of several thermochemical technologies (energy storage and wastewater-to-energy), the superior potential of these technologies compared to their counterparts (for instance sensible and latent storages), and the potential to these to be encompassed on the project of WEIS. In relation to thermochemical energy storage, it was verified that:
  • Sorption and reaction-based technologies present a significantly higher overall potential compared to standard thermal storage technologies owing to the increased energy storage capacity;
  • The approached open and closed system Adsorption Heat Storage (AHS) present an apparatus and operational conditions (lower temperature) that are more adequate to industrial waste heat recovery in comparison to reaction-based technologies (which are commonly set to be installed for the heat source component to be a solar thermal system).
In relation to wastewater-to-energy (WWtE), it was verified that:
  • Thermochemical water splitting has a higher operational potential in comparison to the approached traditional technologies (anaerobic digestion, gasification and electrolysis), which is due to the decreased number of steps to produced hydrogen from wastewater (in comparison to anaerobic digestion and gasification) and energy conversion steps (in comparison to electrolysis);
  • The required enthalpy to be supplied as the driving force for these technologies is significantly high and requires heat sources which are not compatible with the waste heat potential of industrial sites (they require the supply of thermal energy from nuclear reactors and solar thermal systems instead).
In relation to the overall incorporation of TCTs in the conceptualization of WEIS, it was verified that:
  • Thermochemical technologies have been proved to be structurally compatible with the general concept of WEIS, with a small number of studies performing equipment sizing;
  • The potential associated to these technologies in terms of environmental benefits is still set to be furtherly calculated (for instance, for the definition of typical and potential values for overall water savings, energy savings and pollutant reduction);
  • The existing conceptualization for integration of wastewater treatment and WWtE units for additional energy generation is valid in the scope of the overall concept of WEIS, although it still subsists in a deeper comprehension on energy supply and demand analysis and in terms of the modification of the destination processes for the supply of the new fuels.
In general, as TCES technologies are proved to be suitable as higher potential analogues compared to standard TES technologies. Further work regarding the application of such approaches includes the assessment of their benefits as WHR measures. For energy recovery, further work shall be directed to the study of waste heat-based TWS (one of interest for the conceptualization of WEIS) and its analysis in the integration in each process based on the specific fuel production. Additional study directed to the integration of WWtE within WEIS is being developed in a parallel publication to this paper.

Author Contributions

M.C.O., M.I. and H.A.M. performed the literature review; M.C.O. and M.I wrote the paper; M.I. and H.A.M. revised the paper. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programmes under grant agreement “No. 810764” and through CERENA under grant UIDB/04028/2020_UIDP/04028/2020.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

AHSAdsorption heat storage
EUEuropean Union
GHGGreenhouse gases
HENGHydrogen-enriched natural gas
R&DResearch & Development
TCESThermochemical energy storage
TCTThermochemical technology
TESThermal energy storage
TRLTechnology readiness level
TWSThermochemical water splitting
WEISWater and Energy Integration Systems
WHRWaste heat recovery
WWtEWastewater-to-energy

References

  1. Hu, M.; Ye, Z.; Zhang, H.; Chen, B.; Pan, Z.; Wang, J. Thermochemical conversion of sewage sludge for energy and resource recovery: Technical challenges and prospects. Environ. Pollut. Bioavailab. 2021, 33, 145–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Hritz, S.; Eusha, M.; Mir, F.R.; Schories, G. Life cycle analysis of the solar thermochemical energy storage scheme SOCRATCES. Open Res. Eur. 2022, 2, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. DOE-USA Hydrogen Production: Thermochemical Water Splitting. 2013; pp. 1–4. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-production-thermochemical-water-splitting (accessed on 1 June 2022).
  4. Oliveira, M.C.; Iten, M.; Cruz, P.L.; Monteiro, H. Review on energy efficiency progresses, technologies and strategies in the ceramic sector focusing on waste heat recovery. Energies 2020, 13, 6096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Salgot, M.; Folch, M. Wastewater treatment and water reuse. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2018, 2, 64–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Miró, L.; Gasia, J.; Cabeza, L.F. Thermal energy storage (TES) for industrial waste heat (IWH) recovery: A review. Appl. Energy 2016, 179, 284–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Nazari, L.; Sarathy, S.; Santoro, D.; Ho, D.; Ray, M.B.; Xu, C.C. 3-Recent advances in energy recovery from wastewater sludge. In Direct Thermochemical Liquefaction for Energy Applications; Woodhead Publishing Limited: Sawston, Cambridge, UK, 2018; pp. 67–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lin, J.; Zhao, Q.; Huang, H.; Mao, H.; Liu, Y.; Xiao, Y. Applications of low-temperature thermochemical energy storage systems for salt hydrates based on material classification: A review. Sol. Energy 2021, 214, 149–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tizzoni, A.C.; Giaconia, A.; Lanchi, M. Splitting water with renewable Heat: Green hydrogen beyond Electrolysis. Energ. Ambiente E Innov. 2021, 88–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hiroki, N.; Yu, K.; Nobuyuki, T.; Hiroaki, T.; Jin, I.; Seiji, K.; Myagmarjav, O.; Yoshiyuki, I.; Shinji, K. Hydrogen production using thermochemical water-splitting Iodine–Sulfur process test facility made of industrial structural materials: Engineering solutions to prevent iodine precipitation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 46, 22328–22343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Felix, C.B.; Ubando, A.T.; Chen, W.H.; Goodarzi, V.; Ashokkumar, V. COVID-19 and industrial waste mitigation via thermochemical technologies towards a circular economy: A state-of-the-art review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 423, 127215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Zaini, I.N. Enhancing the Circular Economy: Resource Recovery through Thermochemical Conversion Processes of Landfi ll Waste and Biomass. Doctoral Thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 2021; pp. 1–85. [Google Scholar]
  13. European Commission Energy and the Green Deal. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal/energy-and-green-deal_en (accessed on 8 June 2022).
  14. European Comission EU Strategy on Energy System Integration|Energy. 9 April 2020. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-system-integration/eu-strategy-energy-system-integration_en (accessed on 8 June 2022).
  15. European Commission-Press Release Powering a Climate-Neutral Economy: Commission Sets out Plans for the Energy System of the Future and Clean Hydrogen. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1259 (accessed on 8 June 2022).
  16. Oliveira, M.C.; Iten, M.; Matos, H.A. Assessment of energy efficiency improvement in ceramic industry through waste heat recovery modelling. Comput. Aided Chem. Eng. 2021, 50, 1653–1658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Castro Oliveira, M.; Iten, M. Modelling of A Solar Thermal Energy System For Energy Efficiency Improvement In A Ceramic Plant. Renew. Energy Environ. Sustain. 2021, 6, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Iten, M.; Fernandes, U.; Oliveira, M.C. Framework to assess eco-efficiency improvement: Case study of a meat production industry. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 7134–7148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Oliveira, M.C.; Vieira, S.M.; Iten, M.; Matos, H.A. Optimisation of Water-Energy Networks in Process Industry: Implementation of Non-Linear and Multi-Objective Models. Front. Chem. Eng. 2022, 3, 750411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lizana, J.; Chacartegui, R.; Barrios-Padura, A.; Valverde, J.M.; Ortiz, C. Identification of best available thermal energy storage compounds for low-to-moderate temperature storage applications in buildings. Mater. Constr. 2018, 68, 160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Abedin, A.H. A Critical Review of Thermochemical Energy Storage Systems. Open Renew. Energy J. 2011, 4, 42–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Sarbu, I.; Sebarchievici, C. A comprehensive review of thermal energy storage. Sustainability 2018, 10, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Ding, Y.; Riffat, S.B. Thermochemical energy storage technologies for building applications: A state-of-the-art review. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol. 2013, 8, 106–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Rouhani, M. Sorption thermal energy storage for sustainable heating and cooling. Ph.D. Thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  25. André, L.; Abanades, S. Recent advances in thermochemical energy storage via solid–gas reversible reactions at high temperature. Energies 2020, 13, 5859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Farulla, G.A.; Cellura, M.; Guarino, F.; Ferraro, M. A review of thermochemical energy storage systems for power grid support. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ayaz, H.; Chinnasamy, V.; Yong, J.; Cho, H. Review of technologies and recent advances in low-temperature sorption thermal storage systems. Energies 2021, 14, 6052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Krönauer, A.; Lävemann, E.; Brückner, S.; Hauer, A. Mobile sorption heat storage in industrial waste heat recovery. Energy Procedia 2015, 73, 272–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Scapino, L.; Zondag, H.A.; Van Bael, J.; Diriken, J.; Rindt, C.C.M. Sorption heat storage for long-term low-temperature applications: A review on the advancements at material and prototype scale. Appl. Energy 2017, 190, 920–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Abedin, A.H.; Rosen, M.A. Closed and open thermochemical energy storage: Energy- and exergy-based comparisons. Energy 2012, 41, 83–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Vasta, S.; Brancato, V.; La Rosa, D.; Palomba, V.; Restuccia, G.; Sapienza, A.; Frazzica, A. Adsorption heat storage: State-of-the-art and future perspectives. Nanomaterials 2018, 8, 522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Chen, C.; Lovegrove, K.M.; Sepulveda, A.; Lavine, A.S. Design and optimization of an ammonia synthesis system for ammonia-based solar thermochemical energy storage. Sol. Energy 2018, 159, 992–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chen, C.; Zhao, L.; Kong, M.; Lavine, A.S. Heat recovery from an autothermal ammonia synthesis reactor for solar thermochemical energy storage. Sol. Energy 2018, 176, 256–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Chen, X.; Zhang, Z.; Qi, C.; Ling, X.; Peng, H. State of the art on the high-temperature thermochemical energy storage systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 177, 792–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, C.; Zhao, L.; Lavine, A.S. Feasibility of using ammonia-based thermochemical energy storage to produce high-temperature steam or sCO2. Sol. Energy 2018, 176, 638–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chen, C.; Liu, Y.; Aryafar, H.; Wen, T.; Lavine, A.S. Performance of conical ammonia dissociation reactors for solar thermochemical energy storage. Appl. Energy 2019, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Xia, Q.; Feng, S.; Kong, M.; Chen, C. Efficiency enhancement of an ammonia-based solar thermochemical energy storage system implemented with hydrogen permeation membrane. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. IEA ECES ANNEX 23. Applying Energy Storage in Ultra-low Energy Buildings—Final Report. 2014. Available online: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4995.4727 (accessed on 8 June 2022).
  39. Tregambi, C.; Montagnaro, F.; Salatino, P.; Solimene, R. A model of integrated calcium looping for CO2 capture and concentrated solar power. Sol. Energy 2015, 120, 208–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Valverde, J.M.; Barea-López, M.; Perejón, A.; Sánchez-Jiménez, P.E.; Pérez-Maqueda, L.A. Effect of Thermal Pretreatment and Nanosilica Addition on Limestone Performance at Calcium-Looping Conditions for Thermochemical Energy Storage of Concentrated Solar Power. Energy Fuels 2017, 31, 4226–4236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Pillai, B.B.K.; Surywanshi, G.D.; Patnaikuni, V.S.; Anne, S.B.; Vooradi, R. Performance analysis of a double calcium looping-integrated biomass-fired power plant: Exploring a carbon reduction opportunity. Int. J. Energy Res. 2019, 43, 5301–5318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ortiz, C.; Valverde, J.M.; Chacartegui, R.; Pérez-Maqueda, L.A.; Gimenez-Gavarrell, P. Scaling-up the calcium-looping process for co2 capture and energy storage. KONA Powder Part. J. 2021, 38, 189–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Valverde, J.M. The ca-looping process for CO2 capture and energy storage: Role of nanoparticle technology. J. Nanoparticle Res. 2018, 20, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Preisner, N.C.; Bürger, I.; Wokon, M.; Linder, M. Numerical investigations of a counter-current moving bed reactor for thermochemical energy storage at high temperatures. Energies 2020, 13, 772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Block, T.; Schmücker, M. Metal oxides for thermochemical energy storage: A comparison of several metal oxide systems. Sol. Energy 2016, 126, 195–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wu, S.; Zhou, C.; Doroodchi, E.; Nellore, R.; Moghtaderi, B. A review on high-temperature thermochemical energy storage based on metal oxides redox cycle. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 168, 421–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Furtado, O.R. Metal oxides and the thermochemical storage of solar energy. Chim. Oggi/Chem. Today 2019, 37, 16–18. [Google Scholar]
  48. Moya, J.; Marugán, J.; Orfila, M.; Díaz-Pérez, M.A.; Serrano-Ruiz, J.C. Improved thermochemical energy storage behavior of manganese oxide by molybdenum doping. Molecules 2021, 26, 583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Miller, J.E.; Ambrosini, A.; Babiniec, S.M.; Coker, E.N.; Ho, C.K.; Al-Ansary, H.; Jeter, S.M.; Loutzenhiser, P.G.; Johnson, N.G.; Stechel, E.B. High performance reduction/oxidation metal oxides for thermochemical energy storage (PROMOTES). In Proceedings of the ASME 2016 10th International Conference on Energy Sustainability Collocated with the ASME 2016 Power Conference and the ASME 2016 14th International Conference on Fuel Cell Science, Engineering and Technology, Charlotte, NC, USA, 26–30 June 2016; Volume 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Dessie, Y.G.; Hong, Q.; Lougou, B.G.; Zhang, J.; Jiang, B.; Anees, J.; Tegegne, E.B. Thermochemical energy storage performance analysis of (Fe,co,mn)ox mixed metal oxides. Catalysts 2021, 11, 362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bora, R.R.; Richardson, R.E.; You, F. Resource recovery and waste-to-energy from wastewater sludge via thermochemical conversion technologies in support of circular economy: A comprehensive review. BMC Chem. Eng. 2020, 2, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Abdin, Z.; Zafaranloo, A.; Rafiee, A.; Mérida, W.; Lipiński, W.; Khalilpour, K.R. Hydrogen as an energy vector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 120, 109620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sheffield, J.W.; Martin, K.B.; Folkson, R. Electricity and hydrogen as energy vectors for transportation vehicles. In Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicle Technologies for Improved Environmental Performance; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2014; pp. 117–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Governo de Portugal Estratégia Nacional Para o Hidrogénio; Diário da República: Lisbon, Portugal, 2019; pp. 5–13.
  55. AFDC Hydrogen Basics. Available online: https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrogen_basics.html (accessed on 8 June 2022).
  56. Rievaj, V.; Gaňa, J.; Synák, F. Is hydrogen the fuel of the future? Transp. Res. Procedia 2019, 40, 469–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Boretti, A.; Nayfeh, J.; Al-Maaitah, A. Hydrogen Production by Solar Thermochemical Water-Splitting Cycle via a Beam Down Concentrator. Front. Energy Res. 2021, 9, 666191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Boretti, A. Technology Readiness Level of Solar Thermochemical Splitting Cycles. ACS Energy Lett. 2021, 6, 1170–1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Safari, F.; Dincer, I. A review and comparative evaluation of thermochemical water splitting cycles for hydrogen production. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 205, 112182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Sevillano, C.A.; Pesantes, A.A.; Peña Carpio, E.; Martínez, E.J.; Gómez, X. Anaerobic digestion for producing renewable energy-the evolution of this technology in a new uncertain scenario. Entropy 2021, 23, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Saltworks Anaerobic Digester Wastewater Management during Biogas Production. Available online: https://www.saltworkstech.com/articles/anaerobic-digester-wastewater-management-during-biogas-production/ (accessed on 8 June 2022).
  62. Park, C.; Chon, D.H.; Brennan, A.; Eom, H. Investigation of sludge reduction and biogas generation in high-rate anaerobic side-stream reactors for wastewater treatment. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 2018, 4, 1829–1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Wan, J.; Gu, J.; Zhao, Q.; Liu, Y. COD capture: A feasible option towards energy self-sufficient domestic wastewater treatment. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 25054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Vicentin, R.; Fdz-Polanco, F.; Fdz-Polanco, M. Energy integration in wastewater treatment plants by anaerobic digestion of urban waste: A process design and simulation study. Int. J. Chem. Eng. 2019, 2019, 2621048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Chow, W.L.; Chong, S.; Lim, J.W.; Chan, Y.J.; Chong, M.F.; Tiong, T.J.; Chin, J.K.; Pan, G.T. Anaerobic co-digestion of wastewater sludge: A review of potential co-substrates and operating factors for improved methane yield. Processes 2020, 8, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Savickis, J.; Zemite, L.; Zeltins, N.; Bode, I.; Jansons, L.; Dzelzitis, E.; Koposovs, A.; Selickis, A.; Ansone, A. The biomethane injection into the natural gas networks: The EU’s gas synergy path. Latv. J. Phys. Tech. Sci. 2020, 57, 34–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Werle, S.; Dudziak, M. Gasification of sewage sludge. In Industrial and Municipal Sludge Industrial and Municipal Sludge Emerging Concerns and Scope for Resource Recovery; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2019; pp. 575–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Migliaccio, R.; Brachi, P.; Montagnaro, F.; Papa, S.; Tavano, A.; Montesarchio, P.; Ruoppolo, G.; Urciuolo, M. Sewage Sludge Gasification in a Fluidized Bed: Experimental Investigation and Modeling. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2021, 60, 5034–5047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Werle, S. Sewage sludge gasification process for clean and sustainable environment. Renew. Energy Environ. Sustain. 2016, 1, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Werle, S.; Dudziak, M. Influence of wastewater treatment and the method of sludge disposal on the gasification process. Ecol. Chem. Eng. S 2014, 21, 255–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Metawater Wastewater Sludge Gasification Power Generation System. Available online: http://www.metawater.co.jp/eng/product/plant/sewer/gas_convert/ (accessed on 8 June 2022).
  72. Capodaglio, A.G.; Bolognesi, S. Ecofuel feedstocks and their prospects. In Advances in Eco-Fuels for a Sustainable Environment; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2019; pp. 15–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Yu, Z.; Xu, J.; Meng, L.; Liu, L. Efficient hydrogen production by saline water electrolysis at high current densities without the interfering chlorine evolution. J. Mater. Chem. A 2021, 9, 22248–22253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Chlorine Chemistry Chlorine Manufacturing and Production. Available online: https://www.chlorine.org/what-is-chlorine/manufacturing/ (accessed on 10 June 2022).
  75. Naimi, Y.; Antar, A. Hydrogen Generation by Water Electrolysis. In Advances in Hydrogen Generation Technologies; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Coskun Avci, A.; Toklu, E. A new analysis of two phase flow on hydrogen production from water electrolysis. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 47, 6986–6995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Shiva Kumar, S.; Himabindu, V. Hydrogen production by PEM water electrolysis–A review. Mater. Sci. Energy Technol. 2019, 2, 442–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Scott, K. Introduction to Electrolysis, Electrolysers and Hydrogen Production. In Electrochemical Methods for Hydrogen Production; Royal Society of Chemistry: London, UK, 2020; pp. 1–27. [Google Scholar]
  79. Cavaliere, P.D.; Perrone, A.; Silvello, A. Water electrolysis for the production of hydrogen to be employed in the ironmaking and steelmaking industry. Metals 2021, 11, 1816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Ahmad Kamaroddin, M.F.; Sabli, N.; Tuan Abdullah, T.A.; Siajam, S.I.; Abdullah, L.C.; Abdul Jalil, A.; Ahmad, A. Membrane-based electrolysis for hydrogen production: A review. Membranes 2021, 11, 810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Schiro, F.; Stoppato, A.; Benato, A. Modelling and analyzing the impact of hydrogen enriched natural gas on domestic gas boilers in a decarbonization perspective. Carbon Resour. Convers. 2020, 3, 122–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Atlantic Hydrogen Inc. Hydrogen-Enriched Natural Gas Bridge to an Ultra-Low Carbon World; Atlantic Hydrogen Inc.: Fredericton, NB, Canada, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  83. Mehrpooya, M.; Habibi, R. A review on hydrogen production thermochemical water-splitting cycles. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 123836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Chambon, M.; Abanades, S.; Flamant, G. Design of a lab-scale rotary cavity-type solar reactor for continuous thermal reduction of volatile oxides under reduced pressure. In Proceedings of the ASME 2009 3rd International Conference on Energy Sustainability Collocated with the Heat Transfer and InterPACK09 Conferences, San Francisco, CA, USA, 19–23 July 2009; ES2009. Volume 2, pp. 507–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Chambon, M.; Abanades, S.; Flamant, G. Thermal dissociation of compressed ZnO and SnO2 powders in a moving-front solar thermochemical reactor. AIChE J. 2011, 57, 2264–2273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Chambon, M.; Abanades, S.; Flamant, G. Solar thermal reduction of ZnO and SnO2: Characterization of the recombination reaction with O2. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2010, 65, 3671–3680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Levêque, G.; Abanades, S. Kinetic analysis of high-temperature solid-gas reactions by an inverse method applied to ZnO and SnO2 solar thermal dissociation. Chem. Eng. J. 2013, 217, 139–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Koepf, E.; Villasmil, W.; Meier, A. Pilot-scale solar reactor operation and characterization for fuel production via the Zn/ZnO thermochemical cycle. Appl. Energy 2016, 165, 1004–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Lindemer, M.D.; Advani, S.G.; Prasad, A.K. Experimental investigation of heterogeneous hydrolysis with Zn vapor under a temperature gradient. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2017, 42, 7847–7856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Villafán-Vidales, H.I.; Abanades, S.; Montiel-González, M.; Romero-Paredes, H.; Arancibia-Bulnes, C.A.; Estrada, C.A. Transient heat transfer simulation of a 1 kWth moving front solar thermochemical reactor for thermal dissociation of compressed ZnO. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2015, 93, 174–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Levêque, G.; Abanades, S. Investigation of thermal and carbothermal reduction of volatile oxides (ZnO, SnO2, GeO2, and MgO) via solar-driven vacuum thermogravimetry for thermochemical production of solar fuels. Thermochim. Acta 2015, 605, 86–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Pérez, A.; Orfila, M.; Linares, M.; Sanz, R.; Marugán, J.; Molina, R.; Botas, J.A. Hydrogen production by thermochemical water splitting with La0.8Al0.2MeO3-δ (Me= Fe, Co, Ni and Cu) perovskites prepared under controlled pH. Catal. Today 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. de la Calle, A.; Ermanoski, I.; Stechel, E.B. Towards chemical equilibrium in thermochemical water splitting. Part 1: Thermal reduction. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 47, 10474–10482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Mao, Y.; Gao, Y.; Dong, W.; Wu, H.; Song, Z.; Zhao, X.; Sun, J.; Wang, W. Hydrogen production via a two-step water splitting thermochemical cycle based on metal oxide—A review. Appl. Energy 2020, 267, 114860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Cui, B.; Zhang, J.; Liu, S.; Liu, X.; Zhang, Z.; Sun, J. A low-temperature electro-thermochemical water-splitting cycle for hydrogen production based on LiFeO2/Fe redox pair. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 20800–20807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Orfila, M.; Linares, M.; Molina, R.; Marugán, J.; Botas, J.Á.; Sanz, R. Hydrogen production by water splitting with Mn3-xCoxO4 mixed oxides thermochemical cycles: A thermodynamic analysis. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 216, 112945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Roychowdhury, S.; Mukthar Ali, M.; Dhua, S.; Sundararajan, T.; Ranga Rao, G. Thermochemical hydrogen production using Rh/CeO2/γ-Al2O3 catalyst by steam reforming of ethanol and water splitting in a packed bed reactor. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 46, 19254–19269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Abanades, S. Metal oxides applied to thermochemical water-splitting for hydrogen production using concentrated solar energy. ChemEngineering 2019, 3, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Brown, L.C.; Besenbruch, G.E.; Lentsch, R.D.; Schultz, K.R.; Funk, J.F.; Pickard, P.S.; Marshall, A.C.; Showalter, S.K. High Efficiency Generation of Hydrogen Fuels Using Nuclear Power; General Atomics: San Diego, CA, USA, 2003; pp. 29–30. [Google Scholar]
  100. Tanaka, N.; Takegami, H.; Noguchi, H.; Kamiji, Y.; Myagmarjav, O.; Kubo, S. Introduction of loop operating system to improve the stability of continuous hydrogen production for the thermochemical water-splitting iodine–sulfur process. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 46, 27891–27904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Corgnale, C.; Gorensek, M.B.; Summers, W.A. Review of sulfuric acid decomposition processes for sulfur-based thermochemical hydrogen production cycles. Processes 2020, 8, 1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Brown, L.C.; Besenbruch, G.E.; Schultz, K.R.; Showalter, S.K.; Marshall, A.C.; Pickard, P.S.; Funk, J.F. High Efficiency Generation of Hydrogen Fuels Using Thermochemical Cycles and Nuclear Power; American Institute of Chemical Engineers: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 1–31. [Google Scholar]
  103. Moore, R.C. Design Options for a Bunsen Reactor; Sandia National Laboratories (SNL-NM): Albuquerque, NM, USA, 2012; pp. 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  104. Parma, E.J.; Vernon, M.E.; Gelbard, F.; Moore, R.C.; Stone, H.B.J.; Pickard, P.S. Modeling the sulfuric acid decomposition section for hydrogen production. In ANS Embedded Topical Meeting on the Safety and Technology of Nuclear Hydrogen Production, Control and Management; Sandia National Laboratories (SNL-NM): Albuquerque, NM, USA, 2007; pp. 154–160. [Google Scholar]
  105. Safari, F.; Dincer, I. A study on the Fe–Cl thermochemical water splitting cycle for hydrogen production. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 18867–18875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Canavesio, C.; Nassini, H.E.; Bohé, A.E. Evaluation of an iron-chlorine thermochemical cycle for hydrogen production. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40, 8620–8632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Utgikar, V.; Ward, B. Life cycle assessment of ISPRA Mark 9 thermochemical cycle for nuclear hydrogen production. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2006, 81, 1753–1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Energie, V.D.F.; Biotechnik, V. Combined Thermochemical Energy Storage and Heat Transformation for Industrial Waste Heat Recovery; Fakultät für Energie-, Verfahrens- und Biotechnik der Universität Stuttgart: Stuttgart, Germany, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  109. Stengler, J.; Richter, M.; Linder, M. Thermochemical energy storage and heat transformation based on SrBr2: Generic reactor concept for validation experiments. In Proceedings of the Materials Science and Engineering, Darmstadt, Germany, 27–29 September 2016; pp. 27–29. [Google Scholar]
  110. Jiang, H.; Wang, X.; Li, C.; Gu, D.; Jiang, T.; Nie, C.; Yuan, D.; Wu, H.; Wang, B. An alternative electron-donor and highly thermo-assisted strategy for solar-driven water splitting redox chemistry towards efficient hydrogen production plus effective wastewater treatment. Renew. Energy 2021, 176, 388–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Sahu, P.; Wagh, V.; Zodge, S.; Patil, S.; Suryawanshi, K. Hydrogen Generation from Waste Water by using Solar Energy. J. Res. Vol. 2018, 3, 13–19. [Google Scholar]
  112. Oladejo, J.; Shi, K.; Luo, X.; Yang, G.; Wu, T. A review of sludge-to-energy recovery methods. Energies 2019, 12, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. Comparison of sensible, latent, and thermochemical storage in terms of temperature range and storage capacity (adapted from [22]).
Figure 1. Comparison of sensible, latent, and thermochemical storage in terms of temperature range and storage capacity (adapted from [22]).
Sustainability 14 07506 g001
Figure 2. Flowsheet for (a) Open adsorption heat storage system and (b) closed adsorption system (adapted from [29]).
Figure 2. Flowsheet for (a) Open adsorption heat storage system and (b) closed adsorption system (adapted from [29]).
Sustainability 14 07506 g002
Figure 3. Flowsheet for (a) Ammonia-based energy storage and (b) calcium-looping energy storage (adapted from [39,43]).
Figure 3. Flowsheet for (a) Ammonia-based energy storage and (b) calcium-looping energy storage (adapted from [39,43]).
Sustainability 14 07506 g003
Figure 4. Incorporation of hydrogen energy within an energy system with technologies to be analyzed in a plant scale.
Figure 4. Incorporation of hydrogen energy within an energy system with technologies to be analyzed in a plant scale.
Sustainability 14 07506 g004
Figure 5. Flowsheet representations for WWtE technologies: (a) anaerobic digestion, (b) gasification, and (c) electrolysis (adapted from [62,73,76]).
Figure 5. Flowsheet representations for WWtE technologies: (a) anaerobic digestion, (b) gasification, and (c) electrolysis (adapted from [62,73,76]).
Sustainability 14 07506 g005
Figure 6. Flowsheet for thermochemical water splitting systems: (a) Metal oxide cycle, (b) Sulfur-iodine cycle, (c) Iron-chlorine cycle (adapted from [59,102,107]).
Figure 6. Flowsheet for thermochemical water splitting systems: (a) Metal oxide cycle, (b) Sulfur-iodine cycle, (c) Iron-chlorine cycle (adapted from [59,102,107]).
Sustainability 14 07506 g006
Figure 7. Integration of wastewater treatment and wastewater-to-energy units for additional energy generation in thermal processes—WEIS conceptualization (adapted from [112]).
Figure 7. Integration of wastewater treatment and wastewater-to-energy units for additional energy generation in thermal processes—WEIS conceptualization (adapted from [112]).
Sustainability 14 07506 g007
Table 1. Comparison of typical values for main performance parameters between different types of thermal storage (adapted from [21]).
Table 1. Comparison of typical values for main performance parameters between different types of thermal storage (adapted from [21]).
ParameterThermal Storage Type
SensibleLatentThermochemical
Temperature range (Examples)Up to 110 °C (Water Tanks)20–40 °C (paraffins)
30–80 °C (salt hydrates)
20–200 °C
Storage capacity0.2 GJ/m30.3–0.5 GJ/m30.5–3 GJ/m3
LifetimeLongLimitedDependable (on reactant degradation and side reactions)
Technology statusCommercially availablePartially commercially availableGenerally not available
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Castro Oliveira, M.; Iten, M.; Matos, H.A. Review of Thermochemical Technologies for Water and Energy Integration Systems: Energy Storage and Recovery. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7506. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127506

AMA Style

Castro Oliveira M, Iten M, Matos HA. Review of Thermochemical Technologies for Water and Energy Integration Systems: Energy Storage and Recovery. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7506. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127506

Chicago/Turabian Style

Castro Oliveira, Miguel, Muriel Iten, and Henrique A. Matos. 2022. "Review of Thermochemical Technologies for Water and Energy Integration Systems: Energy Storage and Recovery" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7506. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127506

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop