The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Production costs for synthetic methane in 2030 and 2050 of an optimized Power-to-Gas plant with intermediate hydrogen storage
Open accessAbstract
The publication gives an overview of the production costs of synthetic methane in a Power-to-Gas process. The production costs depend in particularly on the electricity price and the full load hours of the plant sub-systems electrolysis and methanation. The full-load hours of electrolysis are given by the electricity supply concept. In order to increase the full-load hours of methanation, the size of the intermediate hydrogen storage tank and the size of the methanation are optimised on the basis of the availability of hydrogen. The calculation of the production costs for synthetic methane are done with economics for 2030 and 2050 and the expenditures are calculated for one year of operation. The sources of volume of purchased electricity are the short-term market, long-term contracts, direct-coupled renewable energy sources or seasonal use of surpluses. Gas sales are either traded on the short-term market or guaranteed by long-term contracts. The calculations show, that an intermediate storage tank for hydrogen, adjustment of the methanation size and operating electrolysis and methanation separately, increase the workload of the sub-system methanation. The gas production costs can be significantly reduced. With the future expected development of capital expenditures, operational expenditure, electricity prices, gas costs and efficiencies, an economic production of synthetic natural gas for the years 2030, especially for 2050, is feasible. The results show that Power-to-Gas is an option for long-term, large-scale seasonal storage of renewable energy. Especially the cases with high operating hours for the sub-system methanation and low electricity prices show gas production costs below the expected market prices for synthetic gas and biogas.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A comprehensive review on PEM water electrolysis
Carmo, M., Fritz, D. L., Mergel, J., & Stolten, D. (2013) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.01.151 · Cited by 5,492
Buttler, A., & Spliethoff, H. (2018) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.09.003 · Cited by 2,510
Pfenninger, S., & Staffell, I. (2016) · Energy · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.060 · Cited by 1,691
Using bias-corrected reanalysis to simulate current and future wind power output
Staffell, I., & Pfenninger, S. (2016) · Energy · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.068 · Cited by 1,489
Review on methanation – From fundamentals to current projects
Rönsch, S., Schneider, J., Matthischke, S., Schlüter, M., Götz, M., Lefebvre, J., Prabhakaran, P., & Bajohr, S. (2016) · Fuel · doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2015.10.111 · Cited by 1,452
Gahleitner, G. (2013) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.12.010 · Cited by 1,174
Schiebahn, S., Grube, T., Robinius, M., Tietze, V., Kumar, B., & Stolten, D. (2015) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.01.123 · Cited by 823
Advances in alkaline water electrolyzers: A review
David, M., Ocampo-Martínez, C., & Sánchez-Peña, R. (2019) · Journal of Energy Storage · doi:10.1016/j.est.2019.03.001 · Cited by 750
The CO2 economy: Review of CO2 capture and reuse technologies
Koytsoumpa, E. I., Bergins, C., & Kakaras, E. (2018) · The Journal of Supercritical Fluids · doi:10.1016/j.supflu.2017.07.029 · Cited by 736
Power to Gas projects review: Lab, pilot and demo plants for storing renewable energy and CO2
Bailera, M., Lisbona, P., Romeo, L. M., & Espatolero, S. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.130 · Cited by 626
Cited by
Rissman, J., Bataille, C., Masanet, E., Aden, N., Morrow, W. R., Zhou, N., Elliott, N., Dell, R., Heeren, N., Huckestein, B., et al. (2020) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114848 · Cited by 1,040
Nnabuife, S. G., Hamzat, A. K., Whidborne, J., Kuang, B., & Jenkins, K. W. (2025) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.06.342 · Cited by 401
Projecting cost development for future large-scale power-to-gas implementations by scaling effects
Böhm, H., Zauner, A., Rosenfeld, D. C., & Tichler, R. (2020) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114780 · Cited by 258
Seymour, K., Held, M., Stolz, B., Georges, G., & Boulouchos, K. (2024) · Sustainable Energy & Fuels · doi:10.1039/d3se00978e · Cited by 65
Metadata
- Authors
- Gorre, J., Ortloff, F., & van Leeuwen, C.
- Venue
- Applied Energy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-11
- Volume
- 253
- Pages
- 113594
- ISSN
- 0306-2619 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2965151707
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 9.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Production costs for synthetic methane in 2030 and 2050 of an optimized Power-to-Gas plant with intermediate hydrogen storage. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113594
- The paper
- Gorre, J., Ortloff, F., & van Leeuwen, C. (2019). Production costs for synthetic methane in 2030 and 2050 of an optimized Power-to-Gas plant with intermediate hydrogen storage. Applied Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113594
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.