Hydrogen can be produced from a variety of feed stocks. These include fossil resources, such as natural gas and coal, as well as renewable resources, such as biomass and water with input from renewable energy sources (e.g. sunlight, wind, wave or hydro-power). A variety of process technologies can be used, including chemical, biological, electrolytic, photolytic and thermo-chemical. Each technology is in a different stage of development, and each offers unique opportunities, benefits and challenges. Local availability of feedstock, the maturity of the technology, market applications and demand, policy issues, and costs will all influence the choice and timing of the various options for hydrogen production. INTRODUCTION

KINETIC MODEL (1) (2) (3) (4) The kinetic model established is based on Langmuir-Hinshelwood mechanism and the reaction rate of expressions are:

Mathematical Model i :{R, W, D} j:{CH 3 OH, H 2 O, CO, CO 2, H 2,O 2 } : The model we have developed is based on the following simplifying assumptions:  Plug flow in the bed,  No radial profiles,  The axial diffusion in the bed, the losses are negligible,  The intra-particle diffusion is negligible,  Steady state,  Pseudo-homogeneous model, isothermal and isobaric  The reactions on the surface of the membrane are ignored.

Initial Conditions

Table of Operating Conditions for simulation

Results and discussion 1/ Effet of molar ratio (O/C) and (S/C) Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Molar ratio (O/C) Figure 2: Effect of (O/C) on the performance of the reaction Operating conditions: I = 3, S/C = 1.0, T = 260 ° C, 1 bar = Pp

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Molar ratio (O/C) Figure 3: Effect of (O/C) on the performance of the reaction Operating conditions: I = 3, S/C = 1.0, T = 280 ° C, 1 bar = Pp

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Molar ratio (O/C) Figure 4: Effect of (O/C) on the performance of the reaction Operating conditions: I = 3, S/C = 1.5, T = 260 ° C, 1 bar = Pp

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Molar ratio (O/C) Figure 5: Effect of (O/C) on the performance of the reaction Operating conditions: I = 3, S/C = 1.5, T = 280 ° C, 1 bar = Pp

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Molar ratio (O/C) Figure 6: Effect of (O/C) on the performance of the reaction Operating conditions: I = 3, S/C = 2.0, T = 260 ° C, 1 bar = Pp

2/Temperature effect Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Temperature (°C) Figure 7: Effect of the temperature on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: I=3, S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, P= 1 bar, Pp=1 bar

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Temperature (°C) Figure 8: Effect of the temperature on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: I=3, S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, P= 3 bar, Pp=1 bar

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Temperature (°C) Figure 9: Effect of the temperature on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: I=3, S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, P= 5 bar, Pp=1 bar

3/Pressure effect Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Pressure (bar) Figure 10: Effect of the pressure on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: I=3, S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, T=240°C, Pp=1 bar

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Pressure (bar) Figure 11: Effect of the Pressure on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: I=3, S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, T=260°C, Pp=1 bar

4/Sweep gas effect Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Sweep gas |Factor (I) Figure 12: Effect of sweep gas on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, T=240°C, P= 1 bar, Pp=1 bar

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Sweep gas Factor (I) Figure 13: Effect of sweep gas on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, T=260°C, P= 1 bar, Pp=1 bar

Recovered Hydrogen Methanol Conversion Sweep gas Factor (I) Figure 14: Effect of sweep gas on the performances of the reaction Operating conditions: S/C=1.0, O/C=0.4, T=280°C, P= 1 bar, Pp=1 bar

CONCLUSION The study on the autothermal reforming of methanol allows us to highlight the effect of some operating parameters on the behavior of the process. A mathematical model is developed by which a various parameters are simulated and the performances are quantified (methanol conversion and the amount of recovered hydrogen). The main results show that the performances of the reactor depend strongly on the pair (S/C and O/C). At O/C=0.4 and S/C=1 good performances in term of conversion and hydrogen recovered are noted.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES [1] I.E. Wachs, R.I. Madix (1978) kinetic model of methanol oxidation over Cu/ZnO catalyst. J Catal, Vol 53, Page 208 [3] T.L Reitz, P.L Lee, K.F Czaplewski, J.C Lang, K.E Popp, H.H Kung (2001) Time Resolved XANES Investigation of CuO/ZnO in the Oxidative Methanol Reforming Reaction. J Catal, Vol 199, Pages [2] J. Agrell, H. Birgersson, M. Boutonnet, I. Melián-Cabreara, R. M. Navarro, and J. L. G. Fierro (2003) Production of hydrogen from methanol over Cu/ZnO catalysts promoted by ZrO 2 and Al 2 O 3. J Catal, Vol 219, Pages [4] B.A. Peppley, J.C. Amphlett, L.M. Kearns, R.F. Mann (1999) Methanol steam reforming on Cu/ZnO/ Al 2 O 3 catalyst. Part 2: A comprehensive kinetic model, Appl Catal A: Gen, Vol 179, Pages [5] J. R. Lattner, M. P. Harold (2005) Comparison of methanol-based fuel processors for PEM fuel cell systems. Appl Catal B: Environ, Vol 56, Pages 149–169.