Economic assessment of novel amine based CO2 capture technologies integrated in power plants based on European Benchmarking Task Force methodology

The objective of this paper is to assess the economic advantages of an innovative solvent for CO2 capture on state-of-the-art solvents. The CESAR-1 solvent, which is an aqueous solution of 2-amino-2-methyl-propanol (AMP) and piperazine (PZ), is applied both to advanced supercritical pulverised (ASC) coal and natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plants with post-combustion CO2 capture units. The methodology includes process model developments using commercial simulation programs, which determine the thermodynamic properties of the selected power plants and the performance of the CO2 capture units. The results show that the techno-economic benefit of CESAR-1 versus MEA is more significant for ASC than that for NGCC due to a higher concentration of CO2 in the flue gas. This follows from the fact that the switch from MEA to CESAR-1 solvents reduces the electricity cost by 4.16€/MWh in the case of the ASC plant compared to 0.67€/MWh in connection with the proposed NGCC plant. Based on the above figures, we can conclude that CESAR-1 reduces the cost of CO2 avoided compared to MEA by 6€/t CO2 and 2€/t CO2 for the selected ASC and NGCC plants respectively. In view of that, the techno-economics can be improved if the CO2 capture plant is designed to operate using the CESAR-1 absorption technology due to a reduction in the regeneration energy and the solvent recirculation rate (considering its higher CO2 net capacity). However, the variable costs of running the capture plant are higher for the CESAR-1 solvent due to the higher cost of the amines.

[1]  P. Carrette,et al.  Amine degradation in CO2 capture. I. A review , 2012 .

[2]  Meihong Wang,et al.  Post-combustion CO2 capture with chemical absorption: A state-of-the-art review , 2011 .

[3]  Edward S Rubin,et al.  A technical, economic, and environmental assessment of amine-based CO2 capture technology for power plant greenhouse gas control. , 2002, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  Gary T. Rochelle,et al.  Monoethanolamine Degradation: O2 Mass Transfer Effects under CO2 Capture Conditions , 2004 .

[5]  H. Herzog,et al.  Scaling up carbon dioxide capture and storage: From megatons to gigatons , 2011 .

[6]  P. James.  The future of coal , 1982 .

[7]  Hallvard F. Svendsen,et al.  Comparison of MEA degradation in pilot-scale with lab-scale experiments , 2011 .

[8]  S. Bhattacharyya.  Energy Economics: Concepts, Issues, Markets and Governance , 2011 .

[9]  C. M. White,et al.  Degradation of Monoethanolamine Used in Carbon Dioxide Capture from Flue Gas of a Coal-Fired Electric Power Generating Station , 2001 .

[10]  Ennio Macchi,et al.  Integration of SEWGS for carbon capture in Natural Gas Combined Cycle. Part B: Reference case comparison , 2011 .

[11]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage , 2007 .

[12]  Klaus D. Timmerhaus,et al.  Plant design and economics for chemical engineers , 1958 .

[13]  Steinar Pedersen,et al.  Effects of NOx in the flue gas degradation of MEA , 2011 .

[14]  Ashleigh Cousins,et al.  PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF PROCESS FLOW SHEET MODIFICATIONS FOR ENERGY EFFICIENT CO2 CAPTURE FROM FLUE GASES USING CHEMICAL ABSORPTION , 2011 .

[15]  Bin Huang,et al.  Industrial test and techno-economic analysis of CO2 capture in Huaneng Beijing coal-fired power station , 2010 .

[16]  Gary T. Rochelle,et al.  Carbon dioxide capture with concentrated, aqueous piperazine , 2009 .

[17]  H. Svendsen,et al.  Degradation of MEA; a theoretical study , 2011 .

[18]  Raphael Idem,et al.  Studies of SO2- and O2-Induced Degradation of Aqueous MEA during CO2 Capture from Power Plant Flue Gas Streams , 2007 .

[19]  Peter Viebahn,et al.  Integrated assessment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the German power sector and comparison with the deployment of renewable energies , 2012 .

[20]  Aaron Cottrell,et al.  Performance of MEA and amine-blends in the CSIRO PCC pilot plant at Loy Yang Power in Australia , 2012 .

[21]  Gavin Towler,et al.  Chemical engineering design : principles, practice, and economics of plant and process design , 2008 .

[22]  Jacob Nygaard Knudsen,et al.  Experience with CO2 capture from coal flue gas in pilot-scale: Testing of different amine solvents , 2009 .

[23]  Jacob Nygaard Knudsen,et al.  On-line monitoring and controlling emissions in amine post combustion carbon capture: A field test , 2012 .

[24]  Matthias Finkenrath,et al.  Cost and Performance of Carbon Dioxide Capture from Power Generation , 2011 .

[25]  Peter Moser,et al.  Performance of MEA in a long-term test at the post-combustion capture pilot plant in Niederaussem , 2011 .

[26]  A. Chakma,et al.  Comparison of chemical solvents for mitigating CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants , 1995 .

[27]  Ennio Macchi,et al.  Thermodynamic assessment of amine based CO2 capture technologies in power plants based on European Benchmarking Task Force methodology , 2014 .

[28]  Lora L Pinkerton,et al.  Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 1a: Bituminous Coal (PC) and Natural Gas to Electricity Revision 3 , 2011 .

[29]  B. C. Williams,et al.  TECHNO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT STUDIES OF “CLEAN” FOSSIL FUEL POWER GENERATION TECHNOLOGIES , 1995 .

[30]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  Understanding the pitfalls of CCS cost estimates , 2012 .

[31]  Paul Clark,et al.  Canadian Clean Power Coalition: The evaluation of options for CO2 capture from existing & new coal-fired power plants , 2005 .

[32]  Francesca Ferrara,et al.  Techno-economic comparison between different technologies for a CCS power generation plant integrated with a sub-bituminous coal mine in Italy , 2012 .

[33]  R. Idem,et al.  Pilot Plant Studies of the CO2 Capture Performance of Aqueous MEA and Mixed MEA/MDEA Solvents at the University of Regina CO2 Capture Technology Development Plant and the Boundary Dam CO2 Capture Demonstration Plant , 2006 .

[34]  Amornvadee Veawab,et al.  Integration of CO2 capture unit using single- and blended-amines into supercritical coal-fired power plants: Implications for emission and energy management , 2007 .

[35]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  A proposed methodology for CO2 capture and storage cost estimates , 2013 .

[36]  Curt M. White,et al.  Degradation Pathways for Monoethanolamine in a CO2 Capture Facility , 2003 .

[37]  Gary T. Rochelle,et al.  Amine volatility in CO2 capture , 2010 .

[38]  G. Versteeg,et al.  CO2 capture from power plants. Part I: A parametric study of the technical performance based on monoethanolamine , 2007 .

[39]  Bruce G. M.S Miller,et al.  Clean Coal Engineering Technology , 2010 .

[40]  Neil Hewitt,et al.  Comparative assessment of sub-critical versus advanced super-critical oxyfuel fired PF boilers with CO2 sequestration facilities , 2007 .

[41]  David R. Luebke,et al.  Advances in CO2 capture technology: A patent review , 2013 .

[42]  Neil Hewitt,et al.  Natural gas oxy-fuel cycles—Part 3: Economic evaluation , 2009 .

[43]  Stephen A. Rackley,et al.  Carbon Capture and Storage , 2009 .

[44]  Paitoon Tontiwachwuthikul,et al.  Part 2: Solvent management: solvent stability and amine degradation in CO2 capture processes , 2011 .

[45]  Ashleigh Cousins,et al.  Analysis of combined process flow sheet modifications for energy efficient CO2 capture from flue gases using chemical absorption , 2011 .

[46]  Alexandre Szklo,et al.  Integrated gasification combined cycle and carbon capture: A risky option to mitigate CO2 emissions of coal-fired power plants , 2011 .