Alexandria Engineering Journal (2016) 55, 2279–2283

H O S T E D BY
Alexandria University

Alexandria Engineering Journal

www.elsevier.com/locate/aej
www.sciencedirect.com

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Upgrade Egyptian biogas to meet the natural gas

network quality standard
Sameh Tawfik Abd Elfattah, Yehia A. Eldrainy *, Abdelhamid Attia

Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Received 22 March 2016; revised 11 May 2016; accepted 15 May 2016

Available online 7 June 2016

KEYWORDS Abstract Biogas is one of the promising renewable energy sources in Egypt. The objective of this
Egyptian biogas; research was to treat the raw biogas in order to clean it from acidic gases CO2 and H2S to meet the
Methane upgrading; standard of the natural gas network. The acidic gases treating plant of the biogas were built up and
Aspen HYSYS; numerically simulated using Aspen HYSYS 8.6 and a proper design of the plant was performed.
Biogas purification The main purpose of the simulation is to determine the optimum working pressure, which can
achieve the methane purity of the Egyptian biogas comparable to natural gas quality. The biogas
treating process was accomplished inside Pressure Swing Absorber (PSA) where the feed sour
gas enters the absorber at the CO2 contents of 0.25, H2S contents of 0.0004, a temperature of
30 °C, a pressure of 1.1 bars, a flow rate of 13 m3/h, Diethanolamine (DEA) concentration of 0.3
and 20 stages PSA with a tray diameter of 1.7 m. it is found that a PSA working pressure of 5 bars
is required to obtain a biogas with methane purity of 95%.
Ó 2016 Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction work and power engines from corrosion due to acidic effect,
and to raise the calorific value of the treated biogas [6–9]. Most
In fact, it is possible to overcome the energy crises in Egypt by of biogas researches in Egypt focused only on biogas produc-
converting the agricultural, industrial and sewage waste to bio- tion from local resources and using it in thermal energy gener-
gas [1] in order to generate a large amount of energy. Sour ation [10–14]; however, there are only few researchers
Egyptian biogas contains other acidic components (CO2 and concentrated on the biogas quality enrichment. The numerical
H2S) where they must be removed before pumping the biogas simulation plays an important role in facilitating the proper
into the natural gas network to meet the standards of these design of sweetening cycle and sizing of its equipment espe-
networks [2–5]. Biogas sweetening is the process in which cially the absorber [15–17]. Aspen HYSYS 8.6 simulation soft-
CO2 and H2S are removed in order to protect the pipelines net- ware program is one of the most important and accurate
programs that have been used in the design of gas treatment
* Corresponding author at: Behind 23, Ibrahim Attar street, Zizinia, process [18–21].
Alexandria, Egypt. Mobile: +20 1015393646. Therefore, this article aimed to determine the optimum
E-mail address: yeldrainy@alexu.edu.eg (Y.A. Eldrainy). PSA working pressure to achieve the methane purity of the
Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria Egyptian biogas that needed to meet the quality standards of
University.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2016.05.015
1110-0168 Ó 2016 Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
2280
Nomenclature
Cond condenser
DEA diethanolamine
L/R Lean/Reach
NG natural gas
PSA Pressure Swing Absorber
ptot total pressure of the gas mixture
px partial pressure of an individual gas component
(X) in the mixture
natural gas networks using Aspen HYSYS 8.6 simulation
program.
The detailed discussion of the ways of biogas upgrading to
remove acidic contents (CO2 and H2S) to match the universal
standard of engines and power stations and intensive study in
using the simulation programs in the purification process of
acid gases has been done [22–26]. However, these previous lit-
eratures did not provide a specific method to determine the
optimum PSA working pressure to extract pure methane from
biogas. Therefore, the present study aimed to upgrade Egyp-
tian biogas to meet the natural gas network quality standard.
2. Methodology
Fig. 1 describes the typical complete acid gases removal cycle
(sweetening cycle) which plugged in Aspen HYSYS 8.6 library
and used for natural gas NG upgrading and purification [27] in
which the acid gas removal steps are performed [28].
The absorber column was selected from Aspen HYSYS
model pallet as shown in Fig. 2 which has the internal con-
struction containing 20 stages, each stage consists of one tray
as having construction looks like a sieve. The acid gas fluid
package which contains DEA is also selected [29].
The feed Egyptian biogas which has the composition as
mentioned in Table 1 enters the absorber at a temperature of
30 °C, a pressure of 1.1 bar and volume flow rate of 13 m3/h
from the bottom of the absorber column. The lean amine
(DEA) enters at the top of the column at conditions of
30 °C, 20 bars and 5.45
104 m3/h. The amine DEA can
absorb CO2 and H2S from the feed Egyptian biogas simultane-
ously. The sweet feed gas, which is free from CO2 to H2S, exits
from the top of column, and the rich amine exits from the bot-
tom of the absorber. Then the rich amine passes through the
expansion valve in order to expand to 43 °C and 1.4 bars
and then it enters the separator. Rich amine exits from the sep-
arator by the same aforementioned conditions to enter a Lean
amine/Rich amine heat exchanger (L/R). The L/R heat
exchanger transfers heat from lean amine into rich amine.
The hot, rich amine, which exits from the exchanger enters a
regeneration column to extract CO2 from the rich amine to
lean it for reusing it, while the lean amine enters a make-up
tank at 74 °C and 1.04 bar which is above atmospheric pres-
sure of 0.027 bar and exits from it at also 74 °C and 1.04 bars
which equal the same inlet conditions of the make-up tank.
Then it is pumped to 74.5 °C and 1.1 bars successively and it
is cooled at constant pressure process to 30 °C to be sent to
S.T.A. Elfattah et al.
RCY recycler
REB reboiler
VLV valve
Vtot total volume of the gas mixture
Vx partial volume of an individual gas component (X)
in the mixture
a recycler. Lean amine exits from recycler at 30 °C and 1.1 bars
[30].
3. Results and discussion
The simulation cycle was run to insure absorber conversion
using Aspen HYSYS for the purpose of PSA working pressure
optimization. All the numerical simulation conditions of tem-
peratures, pressures and feed gas flow rates of the removal
cycle are a result of running numerous simulation trials in
order to get the highest methane purity from Egyptian biogas.
3.1. Effect of Egyptian biogas PSA working pressure on biogas
final product CO2 contents
It can be noted from Fig. 3 that there is a reverse proportion
between PSA working pressure and CO2% in the Egyptian
biogas final product gas. At the point, which is the absorber
PSA working pressure to 5 bar, the CO2 percentage equals to
0.0084. There is little (non economic) effect of PSA working
pressure on the CO2 contents if the pressure is more than
5 bar. Therefore, there is no need to increase the PSA working
pressure to more than 5 bar to maintain the optimum initial
cost for absorber construction.
3.2. Effect of Egyptian biogas PSA working pressure on biogas
final product H2S contents
Fig. 4 shows that there is also a reverse proportion between
PSA working pressure and H2S% in the Egyptian biogas final
product. The H2S contents can be removed completely from
Egyptian biogas final product at the pressure of 1.1 bar. This
leads to say that the pressure value of 5 bar which is needed
to clean CO2 from Egyptian biogas is sufficient to clean the
CO2 and H2S gases simultaneously.
3.3. Effect of Egyptian biogas PSA working pressure on biogas
final product Methane purity
Fig. 5 shows the effect of the PSA working pressure on the
methane purity of the biogas final product. At the point, which
is the absorber PSA working pressure to 5 bar, the methane
purity tends to be 95% which is the desired value of most of
NG networks. There is more effect of PSA working pressure
on the methane purity if the pressure is more than 5 bar.
Upgrade Egyptian biogas 2281

Figure 1 Complete acid gases removal cycle (sweetening cycle) [28].

1.2E-001

1.0E-001
CO2 volume fraction

8.0E-002

6.0E-002

4.0E-002

Figure 2 The absorber column [29]. 2.0E-002

0.0E+000
Table 1 Feed Egyptian biogas composition in mole fraction
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
[30].
Stage Pressure, bars
Component Mole fraction Volume fraction
Methane (CH4) 0.7464 0.7466 Figure 3 Effect of Egyptian biogas PSA working pressure on
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 0.2522 0.2522 biogas final product CO2 contents.
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) 0.0004 0.0004
Water vapor (H2O) 0.0004 0.0001 According to Amagat’s law of additive volume which deals
Hydrogen (H2) 0.0001 0.0001 with partial volume [31], the partial volume of a particular gas
Nitrogen (N2) 0.0002 0.0002
in a mixture is the volume of one component of the gas mix-
Oxygen (O2) 0.0003 0.0003
ture. The partial pressures of the acidic gases are shown in
Tables 2.
p
VX ¼ Vtot
x
ptot
From the above curves which describe the relation between
PSA working pressure and methane purity for Egyptian bio- At the same total volume there is a direct proportion
gas, it is obvious that the optimum pressure, which is needed between Vx and the term of (Px/Ptot); therefore, if the term
to achieve desired methane purity from Egyptian biogas which (Px/Ptot) is very small then the term Vx is very small also. In
is equal to 95% is 5 bar. If the pressure is lower than that value other words the Amagat’s law of additive volume can explain
the biogas treating cycle can produce methane that has lower clearly the increase of total pressure can increase the methane
purity. purity.
2282 S.T.A. Elfattah et al.

7.0E-008
Table 3 Composition of final sweetening Egyptian biogas.
Component Mole fraction Volume fraction
6.0E-008
Methane (CH4) 0.9556 0.9784
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 0.0084 0.0086
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) 0 0
5.0E-008 Water vapor (H2O) 0.0352 0.0121
H2S volume fraction

Hydrogen (H2) 0.0001 0.0001

Nitrogen (N2) 0.0003 0.0003
4.0E-008 Oxygen (O2) 0.0004 0.0004

3.0E-008

The optimum PSA working pressure needed for Egyptian

biogas cleaning of acidic gases was found to be 5 bars. The
2.0E-008
final composition of sweetening gas, which is obtained from
Egyptian biogas will be as mentioned in Table 3.
1.0E-008
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4. Conclusion
Stage Pressure, bars
A numerical simulation using Aspen HYSYS simulation soft-
Figure 4 Effect of Egyptian biogas PSA working pressure biogas ware was performed to determine the optimum Pressure Swing
on final product H2S contents. Absorber (PSA) working pressure in order to achieve the high-
est methane purity from Egyptian Biogas. The feed sour gas
was feeded to the PSA with CO2 contents of 0.25, H2S contents
of 0.0004, a temperature of 30 °C, a pressure of 1.1 bars, and a
flow rate of 13 m3/h. DEA amine solvent with different
0.98
strengths was used to remove the CO2 and H2S simultane-
ously. Simulation showed that the optimum conditions for
the biogas treatment process were a Diethanolamine (DEA)
0.96
concentration of 0.3 and 20 stages PSA with a tray diameter
of 1.7 m. At theses conditions, it is found that the optimum
Methane volume fraction

PSA working pressure to obtain pure methane of 95% purity

0.94
from the Egyptian biogas is 5 bar.

0.92 References

[1] M. Elsamadony, A. Tawfik, Potential of biohydrogen

production from organic fraction of municipal solid waste
0.90
(OFMSW) using pilot-scale dry anaerobic reactor, Bioresour.
Technol. 196 (2015) 9–16.
[2] L. Olsson, M. Fallde, Waste (d) potential: a socio-technical
0.88 analysis of biogas production and use in Sweden, J. Clean.
Product. 98 (2015) 107–115.
[3] M.B. Jensen, C. Scheutz, J. Møller, Comparison of the organic
0.86 waste management systems in the Danish–German border
region using life cycle assessment, in: International Conference
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
on Solid Waste 2015 (ICSWHK2015), 2015.
Stage Pressure, bars
[4] G. Rodriguez et al, Biotrickling filters for biogas sweetening:
oxygen transfer improvement for a reliable operation, Process
Figure 5 Effect of Egyptian biogas PSA working pressure biogas
Saf. Environ. Prot. 92 (3) (2014) 261–268.
on final product methane purity. [5] EPA Methane Rule Would Set Costly Bar for Oil and Gas
Industry, Despite Current Reduction Efforts. <http://
enerknol.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/EnerKnol-Research-
EPA-Methane-Regs-1.20.15.pdf> [accessed in 2016, 5].
[6] G.P. Helsing, Options for Carbon Capture with Storage or
Reuse in Waste Incineration Processes, 2015.
Table 2 Partial pressure of CO2 and H2S in both of Egyptian [7] Z. Wang et al, Selection of microalgae for simultaneous biogas
biogas. upgrading and biogas slurry nutrient reduction under various
photoperiods, J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 91 (7) (2015) 1982–
Acidic component Partial pressure
1989.
CO2 partial pressure 0.2774 bar [8] M. Scholz, T. Melin, M. Wessling, Transforming biogas into
H2S partial pressure 4.455
104 bar biomethane using membrane technology, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 17 (2013) 199–212.
Upgrade Egyptian biogas
[9] X.Y. Chen et al, Membrane gas separation technologies for
biogas upgrading, RSC Adv. 5 (31) (2015) 24399–24448.
[10] I. Teichmann, Technical Greenhouse-Gas Mitigation Potentials
of Biochar Soil Incorporation in Germany, 2014.
[11] G.F. Parkin, W.F. Owen, Fundamentals of anaerobic digestion
of wastewater sludges, J. Environ. Eng. 112 (5) (1986) 867–920.
[12] S.D. Abou Hussein, O.M. Sawan, The utilization of agricultural
waste as one of the environmental issues in Egypt (a case study),
J. Appl. Sci. Res. 6 (8) (2010) 1116–1124.
[13] S. Wentzel, R.G. Joergensen, Effects of biogas and raw slurries
on grass growth and soil microbial indices, J. Plant Nutr. Soil
Sci. 179 (2016) 215–222.
[14] V. Bansal, V. Tumwesige, J.U. Smith, Water for Small-Scale
Biogas Digesters in Sub-Saharan Africa, GCB Bioenergy, 2016.
[15] J. Krischan, A. Makaruk, M. Harasek, Design and scale-up of
an oxidative scrubbing process for the selective removal of
hydrogen sulfide from biogas, J. Hazard. Mater. 215 (2012) 49–
56.
[16] R.A. Gawel, Design simulations for a biogas purification
process using aqueous amine solutions, Chem. Pap. 66 (11)
(2012) 1010–1018.
[17] E.M. Elkanzi, Simulation of the process of biological removal of
hydrogen sulfide from gas, in: H.E. Alfadala, G.V.R. Reklaitis,
M.M. El-Halwagi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st Annual Gas
Processing Symposium, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2009, pp. 266–
275.
[18] L. Deng, H. Chen, Z. Chen, Y. Liu, X. Pu, L. Song, Process of
simultaneous hydrogen sulfide removal from biogas and
nitrogen removal from swine wastewater, Bioresour. Technol.
100 (2009) 5600–5608.
[19] A.H. Nafez et al, Sewage sludge composting: quality assessment
for agricultural application, Environ. Monit. Assess. 187 (11)
(2015) 1–9.
[20] S.T.A. Elfattah, Y.A. Eldrainy, A. Attia, Utilization of Aspen
HYSYS simulation to determine the optimum absorber working
2283
pressure needed to achieve more than 0.99 methane purity from
Egyptian biogas, Int. J. Inf. Res. Rev. 03 (01) (2016) 1739–1744.
[21] S.T.A. Elfattah, Y.A. Eldrainy, A. Attia, Optimization of
Pressure Swing Absorber (PSA) geometry to achieve highest
methane purity from the Egyptian biogas using Aspen HYSYS
simulation, Int. J. Innov. Res. Develop. 5 (1) (2016).
[22] L. ErikØi, Comparison of Aspen HYSYS and Aspen Plus
simulation of CO2 absorption into MEA from atmospheric gas,
Energy Proc. 23 (2012) 360–369.
[23] L. Peters et al, CO2 removal from natural gas by employing
amine absorption and membrane technology—a technical and
economical analysis, Chem. Eng. J. 172 (2) (2011) 952–960.
[24] Z. Niu et al, Experimental studies and rate-based process
simulations of CO2 absorption with aqueous ammonia
solutions, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51 (14) (2012) 5309–5319.
[25] Z. Kapetaki, P. Brandani, S. Brandani, H. Ahn, Process
simulation of a dual-stage Selexol process for 95% carbon
capture efficiency at an integrated gasification combined cycle
power plant, Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 39 (2015) 17–26.
[26] I.K. Kapdan, F. Kargi, Bio-hydrogen production from waste
materials, Enz. Microb. Technol. 38 (5) (2006) 569–582.
[27] S.T.A. Elfattah, Y.A. Eldrainy, A. Attia, Numerical simulation
to optimize Di-Ethanol-Amine (DEA) strength for achieving the
highest methane purity from biogas, Int. J. Adv. Sci. Tech. Res.
4 (5) (2015) 742–751.
[28] M.K.A. Hamid, HYSYSÒ: An Introduction to Chemical
Engineering Simulation, Apostila de Hamid, 2007.
[29] E.E. Ludwig, Applied Process Design for Chemical and
Petrochemical Plants, vol. 2, Gulf Professional Publishing, 1997.
[30] M. Zayat, M. Hassan, C. Taylor, S. Haggar, Feasibility of
biogas utilization in developing countries: Egypt a case study,
Austin Chem. Eng. 2 (2) (2015) 1–7.
[31] C. Radke, J. Prausnitz, Thermodynamics of multi-solute
adsorption from dilute liquid solutions, AIChE J. 18 (4) (1972)
761–768.