sbh4 consulting: due diligence and net-zero advisory

Co-recovery of helium from natural gas streams has been the helium sourcing paradigm since the 1970s. The countries with the largest helium reserves are Qatar, US, Algeria, Russia and Australia. Armed conflict, international tensions, depleting reserves and planned or unplanned outages in these key locations have influenced the global helium supply and demand balance dramatically. The concentration of helium in #naturalgas streams, where its recovery is commercially viable, is typically between 0.2 and 2%. This makes helium production costly and complex which is sometimes an unwelcome distraction from the core activity of natural gas processing. This means that planned maintenance shutdowns are timed around the needs of the gas processing machinery and gas market prices. These cycles do not necessarily reflect the need to balance the global helium supply and demand. Over the past three decades, the US has been both the largest producer and consumer of helium. However, US reserves are dwindling, production is falling and imports are growing. The international dynamics of helium sourcing are at a pivotal point. Excessive tension in the supply chain is frequent and four major global shortages have disrupted the industry since 2005. There is increasing pressure to reduce fossil fuel usage and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Natural gas production may peak around 2050 and then decline. But helium applications will continue to be critical for humanity long after that, and turning off the tap will not be a solution for patients in hospitals which run MRI scanners for medical diagnostic purposes. A new paradigm for the 2030s must emerge. Helium sourcing will progressively be de-coupled from natural gas production. The answers will include co-extraction of #helium with #naturalhydrogen and on-purpose helium exploration and exploitation. Increased circularity of helium usage through recovery and loss avoidance will also be ongoing imperatives.

Carbon Dioxide Removals, or CDR means exactly what it says: removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere - permanently. In this context, there is an emerging definition of permanence to mean 1,000 years or more. The acronym CCS is also used to mean CO2 capture and storage. I prefer to separate CCS from #cdr since CCS has generally been used to mean underground geological storage of CO2 and CCS is therefore only one type of CDR. I also find it helpful to put a U into CCS to make CCUS - to emphasise that we can either utilise, or store CO2. The carbon from #co2 can be utilised to build essential hydrocarbons such as medical plastics, fertilizers and pharmaceuticals. As such, the idea of #decarbonization is helpful to set the direction, but life without carbon would mean that you and I cease to exist! Defossilization is, I propose, a more precise term to describe that goal. In addition to the U, I like T: with milk, no sugar please 🙂. OK, what I really mean is the letter 'T' to remind us that the transportation or logistics infrastructure must exist to move captured CO2 to where it will either be stored or utilised. So, we are left with CCTUS. At sbh4 consulting - net zero advisory we specialise in performing Due Diligence for climate-tech investors and Net-Zero projects. Interested to know more about that? Take a look at the video below. For a more detailed discussion on these points, join me at the gasworld CO2 Summit in Rotterdam on 19th March. I will make a conference presentation on this theme and identify the key aspects of #duediligence in these CO2 management areas.

What an inspirational 2-days we had at Carbon Capture Technology Expo Europe in Hamburg. Here are a few highlights... Catching up with Walter Giacopini of Giammarco-Vetrocoke who specialise in HPC for #co2capture in process streams and for emissions reduction. They have several innovative processes to minimise energy consumption. Also some flow sheets that re-use waste heat and can be fully electrified. And, they are a worldwide leader in re-vamping older CO2 capture units to improve their #energyefficiency and sustainability. Learning about the end-to-end flue gas treatment EPC services offered by K2-CO2 which integrates #co2 capture, waste heat recovery and pollutant gas emissions reduction technologies. Chatting with Hugo Lucas of REVCOO - a French cryogenic CO2 capture technology startup. Their process uses liquid #nitrogen to capture and liquefy CO2 in one unit operation. Talking with Brett Andrews of MTR Carbon Capture to understand the unique aspects of their membrane system which can be deployed pre and post CO2 liquefaction to maximise CO2 capture rates and minimise power consumption. Digging into the equipment design that GEA Group is proposing for amine-based CO2 capture. Their idea is to use engineering plastics for the CO2 absorber tower unit to reduce CAPEX. To ensure structural stability, the stronger stainless steel CO2 stripper / amine regeneration tower supports the two sections of the absorber, which sit at either side. An innovative approach to leverage the properties of each material to its fullest potential.

📣 Speaker Announcement!  #GWCO2 We are delighted to announce that Stephen B. Harrison, Managing Director at sbh4 consulting - net zero advisory, will be our Closing Keynote in Rotterdam for our European CO2 Summit 2025. Stephen B. Harrison is the founder and managing director of sbh4 GmbH. He focuses on decarbonisation through e-fuels, hydrogen, ammonia, and CCTUS. In 2023, he evaluated projects for the European Commission’s €2 billion Innovation Fund. With 27 years at BOC Gases and Linde Gas, Stephen brings deep expertise in clean energy. He has led projects in Asia and advised on hydrogen strategies in Namibia and Pakistan. Additionally, he supports M&A and investment in clean-tech sectors and serves on advisory boards for H2 View, gasworld, and CEM 2023. Book now: https://bit.ly/GWCO2EU-25 Need more information? Register your details and our team will be in touch: https://bit.ly/GWCO225 📞 +44 1872 225 031 📧conferences@gasworld.com #CO2Summit2025 #gasworld #Innovation #CO2Industry #Nippon #CO2

Impure water can be extremely damaging to #electrolysis projects for #greenhydrogen production. Calcium or magnesium cations in the water will rapidly damage a proton exchange membrane (PEM) electrolyser membrane due to interaction with the water-splitting catalyst that coats the membrane. Alkaline and solid oxide electrolysers (SOEC) are also sensitive to poisons in the water. The SOEC technology is well aligned to green ammonia projects due to the potential for process integration and energy efficiency. Waste heat from the Haber-Bosch ammonia synthesis can be used to reduce the electrical power input to the SOEC electrolyser, which operates at high temperatures. When fed with steam, an SOEC requires around 20% less power than a PEM or alkaline electrolyser to generate the same amount of hydrogen. The catalysts used in SOEC technology are sensitive to sulphate ions as well as silicates, siloxanes, and aluminium oxides. These impurities must be reduced to less than 5 or 10 parts per billion to avoid degradation of the SOEC stack performance. It is essential to meet the ultrapure feed water specification that the electrolyser manufacturer requires and design a suitable ultrapure water treatment facility. There are two internationally recognised standards that refer to ultrapure water quality. The ASTM D1193-06(2018) Standard Specification for Reagent Water and the ISO 3696:1987. The ISO standard is titled ‘Specifications for Water for Analytical Laboratory Use’ and includes three grades of purity. The typical feed for an electrolyser would be Grade 2 with a maximum conductivity of 0.1 mS/m – identical to ASTM Type 2 water. Most modern #hydrogen #electrolyser manufacturers would specify feed water conductivity of less than 2μS/cm (0.2 mS/m) as the target. They may also offer the required water purification equipment as part of a complete package to ensure ultrapure water is generated according to their requirements. Read on in this article that I wrote for H2 View recently.

The EU regulation related to the production of renewable fuels of non-biological origin (RFNBOs) has a sunset clause that prohibits the use of fossil carbon dioxide (CO2) captured from power generation after 2035. Five years later, the production of RFNBOs using #co2 captured from so-called ‘unavoidable’ industries, such as cement making, must be phased out in 2041. The implication of this EU RFNBO legislation is that biogenic CO2 and CO2 from #directaircapture (DAC) are the favoured long-term sources of carbon for hydrocarbon fuels and materials. Whilst these dates may seem to be far away, many e-fuels and Power to X project developers are thinking ahead and future-proofing their supply chains. Biogenic CO2 attracts a green premium today. The cost of biogenic CO2 is likely to rise as more e-fuels producers chase the available molecules. Biogenic CO2 is captured from #biogas to biomethane upgrades in many small plants. It is also produced when crops are fermented to yield ethanol, a liquid biofuel. However, these sources are limited. A growth in bio-energy carbon capture (BECC) from power plants burning wood chips or other biomass will be needed to supply the additional biogenic CO2 molecules. And, when these sources are sold-out, #efuels plants will be forced to seek alternatives. Whilst the battle to source biogenic CO2 molecules is raging, DAC will be maturing. As it does so, equipment costs will fall, and operating efficiencies will rise. The cost of CO2 from DAC is likely to fall to similar level to biogenic CO2 at some point in the next decade. Keeping abreast of DAC technology developments and biogenic CO2 supply and demand imbalances will both be essential for business analysis involved in #saf production and CO2 sourcing strategies. Read on in this article that I wrote for gasworld recently...

It was great to discuss #biocarbon and green syngas Lars-Gunnar Almryd of Envigas AB at the Green Steel World show in Essen last week. Their syngas can be used to replace fossil natural gas. Their biocarbon can displace fossil coke from coal or petcoke in the iron and steel making insutries, or other sectors. Ground biocarbon can be used for #gasification to generate syngas for upgrading to #greenhydrogen or to make FTS fuels or bio-methanol. Take a look at this quick interview that we managed to record on the sidelines of the show.

Hydrogen and ammonia for zero emissions aviation: a flight of fantasy, or an emerging reality? Innovations are bringing vision of #hydrogen powered flight closer by the day. Storage of gaseous or liquid hydrogen on board the aircraft is a key issue. As is the infrastructure development for refuelling. Then there is the question of fuel cell, jet engine or ICE for propulsion. With the race on to find zero-emissions solutions, how long will sustainable kerosene built from circular #co2 remain the most suitable option for longer flights? Take a look at this article I wrote for gasworld discussing these issues.

Ammonia is produced from hydrogen, which is generated through reforming of natural gas or #gasification of coal. The reforming process often introduces air, which brings in the #nitrogen that reacts with hydrogen to make ammonia. However, the air also contains the inert gas argon. Some methane from the natural gas also slips through the reformer without being converted to hydrogen. The methane and argon can be separated from the #hydrogen and nitrogen using a cryogenic nitrogen wash to ensure cost-effective #ammonia production. KBR has innovated ammonia production over several decades. Their plant designs have catered for ever increasing capacities on a single train and have focused on low capital cost and high efficiency. The KBR Purifier™ design was first implemented in 1966. It uses a cryogenic nitrogen wash gas separation process to recycle methane as a fuel gas to the SMR and remove inert argon from the reactor recycle gas. The Burrup Fertilizers Ammonia Plant was commissioned in April 2006 and was, at that time, the largest implementation of the KBR, Inc. Purifier™ process. The maximum ammonia production capacity is 950,000 tonnes per annum which equates to 2,600 tonnes per day. Yara Pilbara Fertilisers Pty Ltd, part of Yara International ASA, acquired the controlling stake of the Burrup plant in 2012. The plant is located approximately 11km from the town of Karratha in the Burrup Peninsula, which is a rocky headland on the West Pilbara coast. The Burrup Peninsula has been identified as having cultural significance due to the abundance of Aboriginal rock art. In 2013, the area was proclaimed as the Murujuga National Park. In 2016, KBR completed handover of a 2,190 tonne per day ammonia plant to Dyno Nobel at Waggaman, Louisiana. Dyno Nobel Louisiana Ammonia LLC is a subsidiary of Australia’s Incitec Pivot Limited . The project was the first to use KBR's Purifier™ ammonia technology along with KBR's engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) services. The combination proved to be very successful and the time from contract award to handover was only 42 months. Linde Engineering provided the cryogenic nitrogen wash system for this project. Read on in this article I wrote for gasworld recently...

The top players in #industrialgases are some of the most valuable companies in the chemicals / materials sectors. We are talking about names like Linde, Air Products, Air Liquide, Messer SE & Co. KGaA, and Nippon Sanso Holdings Corporation. There are significant synergies between industrial gases, petrochemicals, base chemicals and the energy sectors. Products flow from one to the other in multiple directions. An example is the production of ethylene oxide. EO is a petrochemical building block that is used to make plastics and anti-freeze. The industrial gas #oxygen is used in the production of EO. And the production of EO requires separation of #co2 from the gas recycle stream in the reactor. This CO2 is, in turn, recovered as an industrial gas. Read on in this article I wrote for the latest gasworld magazine focusing on air gases... a core product gorup of the industrial gases sector.