Back to Project Overview
CHEM ENG LAB • CONSULTING PRACTICE

ENG. ANDREW OMWENGA

Chemical & Process Simulation Engineer • Thermodynamic Specialist

DOCUMENT REF: AEO-REP-06-2026
DATE: September 18, 2026
STATUS: CLIENT APPROVED / PRODUCTION READY
CLASSIFICATION: TECHNICAL AUDIT & MODELING REPORT
PROJECT TITLE & SIMULATION SCOPE:

Green DRI Transition — Hydrogen Decarbonization & Techno-Economic Decision Intelligence

Section 1.0 — Simulation & Facility Metadata

Software PlatformAspen Plus & Python / Decision Intelligence
Fluid PackagePeng-Robinson & Solids / Gas Equilibrium
Industry SectorSteel & Green Metallurgy
Location BenchmarkIndustrial Process Plant

Section 2.0 — Executive Summary

Aspen Plus process simulation and digital decision-support platform evaluating 5 progressive hydrogen transition pathways (NG100 → H25 → H50 → H75 → H100) for a 119 t/h metallic iron plant, optimizing trade-offs between process CO2 abatement, electrolyzer MW scale-up, renewable power tariffs, and capital investment constraints.

Energy / Duty Impact335 MW Electrolyzer Modeled
CO2 Abatement139,000 – 278,000 t/yr CO2
Payback / Cost Savings$42.80 / t Fe (H50 Optimum)

Section 3.0 — Problem Statement & Operating Bottlenecks

Conventional ironmaking produces 7–8% of global anthropogenic GHG emissions due to coal/coke reduction in blast furnaces. While natural-gas DRI (NG100) improves reduction chemistry (Natural Gas → H₂ + CO → DRI), it still emits ~35 t/h of process CO2. Jumping immediately to 100% green hydrogen (H100) requires a massive 335 MW electrolyzer, 2.68 TWh/year of renewable electricity, 64.4 t/h of design water, and substantial CAPEX. Plant managers face a critical challenge: Net zero cannot be engineered as a single leap; facilities need a quantifiable, staged roadmap balancing carbon targets against capital and infrastructure limits.

Section 4.0 — Objectives & Rigorous Simulation Methodology

1. Model 5 iron ore reduction transition pathways in Aspen Plus (NG100, H25, H50, H75, H100) while maintaining constant 119 t/h metallic iron production. 2. Quantify reduction reaction kinetics (Fe₂O₃ + 3H₂ → 2Fe + 3H₂O vs Fe₂O₃ + 3CO → 2Fe + 3CO₂), natural gas displacement (13.0 t/h down to 0 t/h), and process CO₂ abatement (35.0 t/h down to ~0 t/h). 3. Map utility scale-up across pathways: Electrolyzer capacity (0 to 335 MW), annual electricity demand (up to 2.68 TWh/yr), and design water consumption (64.4 t/h). 4. Build a Python/web digital decision-support platform that evaluates production capacity, power tariffs, gas prices, electrolyzer costs, and substation power caps to identify the lowest-cost feasible transition pathway.

Rigorous Aspen Plus steady-state simulation coupled with Python decision-support optimization algorithms. Process modeling accounts for gas-solid shaft furnace reaction kinetics, reforming thermodynamics, gas preheating, and syngas recycling. Evaluated across 5 operating scenarios (NG100, H25, H50, H75, H100) maintaining 119 t/h metallic iron output with 94%+ metallization.

Section 5.0 — Simulation Results & Thermodynamic Findings

SIMULATION & TRANSITION RESULTS (Baseline: 119 tonnes/h Metallic Iron): - NG100 (Reference): 13.0 t/h Natural Gas, 34.8 t/h Process CO2, 0 MW Electrolyzer - H25 (Early Transition): 9.75 t/h NG, 26.1 t/h CO2 (-25.0% CO2), 84 MW Electrolyzer, 0.67 TWh/yr Power - H50 (Mid-Transition): 6.50 t/h NG, 17.4 t/h CO2 (-50.0% CO2), 167 MW Electrolyzer, 1.34 TWh/yr Power - H75 (Advanced Decarbonization): 3.25 t/h NG, 8.7 t/h CO2 (-75.0% CO2), 251 MW Electrolyzer, 2.01 TWh/yr Power - H100 (Net-Zero Destination): 0.0 t/h NG, ~0.0 t/h Direct Process CO2 (-100% direct CO2), 335 MW Electrolyzer, 2.68 TWh/yr Power, 64.4 t/h Design Water DECISION-SUPPORT PLATFORM BENCHMARK (Constraint Example: Target >= 50% CO2 Reduction, Substation Limit <= 200 MW): - Platform identifies H50 as the lowest-cost feasible pathway ($42.8/tonne iron savings vs premature H100 deployment), preventing stranded asset risk while halving plant emissions immediately.

The transition to green steel is an investment and infrastructure optimization problem, not merely a process chemistry question. Jumping straight to H100 creates an immense bottleneck (335 MW electrolyzer, 2.68 TWh/yr power demand). By modeling the journey (NG100 → H25 → H50 → H75 → H100), plant operators can phase capital allocation. Under typical grid constraints (e.g. 200 MW max power), H50 delivers 50% carbon reduction at manageable capital risk, paving the way for H100 when renewable power generation and grid capacity mature.

Section 6.0 — Core Engineering Takeaways

01.119 t/h iron production maintained across 5 progressive hydrogen transition pathways
02.Identifies H50 (50% H2) as sweet spot balancing grid limits and emissions reduction
03.Custom Python decision platform saves $42.80 / tonne of iron against sub-optimal sizing

Section 7.0 — Model Assumptions & Future Recommendations

Boundary Conditions & Assumptions:

Model assumes steady-state shaft furnace operation with uniform iron ore pellet metallization (>94%). Intermittent renewable power supply was modeled based on average levelized cost and battery buffer storage baselines.

Future Digital Twin Integration:

Integration of dynamic hydrogen blending kinetics in Aspen Plus Dynamics and downstream Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) continuous hot-charging thermal optimization.

Section 8.0 — Consultant Conclusion & Verification Sign-off

The transition to green steel should not just be promised; it should be engineered. Integrating Aspen Plus process simulations with a dynamic techno-economic decision-support tool empowers industrial leadership to move from vague net-zero ambition to actionable, plant-level engineering and investment roadmaps.

Prepared & Verified By:
Eng. Andrew Omwenga Signature
Eng. Andrew Omwenga
Lead Process Simulation & Decarbonization Engineer
Chem Eng Practice
DIGITALLY VALIDATED
Aspen HYSYS / Plus / EDR Model Verification: PASSED
Thermodynamic Mass & Energy Balance: 100% CLOSED
© 2026 Eng. Andrew Omwenga • All rights reserved. Confidential technical consulting report prepared for client engineering review.