On the integration of CO2 capture with coal-fired power plants: A methodology to assess and optimise solvent-based post-combustion capture systems

Amine and other liquid solvent CO2 capture systems capture have historically been developed in the oil and gas industry with a different emphasis to that expected for fossil fuel power generation with post-combustion capture. These types of units are now being adapted for combustion flue gas scrubbing for which they need to be designed to operate at lower CO2 removal rates – around 85–90% and to be integrated with CO2 compression systems. They also need to be operated as part of a complete power plant with the overall objective of turning fuel into low-carbon electricity. The performance optimisation approach for solvents being considered for post-combustion capture in power generation therefore needs to be updated to take into account integration with the power cycle and the compression train. The most appropriate metric for solvent assessment is the overall penalty on electricity output, rather than simply the thermal energy of regeneration of the solvent used. Methodologies to evaluate solvent performance that have been reported in the literature are first reviewed. The results of the model of a steam power cycle integrated with the compression system focusing on key parameters of the post-combustion capture plant – solvent energy of regeneration, solvent regeneration temperature and desorber pressure – are then presented. The model includes a rigorous thermodynamic integration of the heat available in the capture and compression units into the power cycle for a range of different solvents, and shows that the electricity output penalty of steam extraction has a strong dependence on solvent thermal stability and the temperature available for heat recovery. A method is provided for assessing the overall electricity output penalty (EOP), expressed as total kWh of lost output per tonne of CO2 captured including ancillary power and compression, for likely combinations of these three key post-combustion process parameters. This correlation provides a more representative method for comparing post-combustion capture technology options than the use of single parameters such as solvent heat of regeneration.

[1]  Paul Feron,et al.  Exploring the potential for improvement of the energy performance of coal fired power plants with post-combustion capture of carbon dioxide , 2010 .

[2]  Andrew Forbes Alexander Hoadley,et al.  Reducing the energy penalty of CO2 capture and compression using pinch analysis , 2010 .

[3]  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 .

[4]  Mathieu Lucquiaud.  Steam cycle options for capture-ready power plants, retrofits and flexible operation with post-combustion CO2 capture , 2010 .

[5]  Luis M. Romeo,et al.  Designing a supercritical steam cycle to integrate the energy requirements of CO2 amine scrubbing , 2008 .

[6]  Irene Bolea,et al.  Integration of post-combustion capture and storage into a pulverized coal-fired power plant , 2010 .

[7]  Masaki Iijima,et al.  Development of energy saving technology for flue gas carbon dioxide recovery in power plant by chemical absorption method and steam system , 1997 .

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

[9]  Eric Croiset,et al.  Techno-economic study of CO2 capture from an existing coal-fired power plant: MEA scrubbing vs. O2/CO2 recycle combustion , 2003 .

[10]  Luis M. Romeo,et al.  Integration of power plant and amine scrubbing to reduce CO2 capture costs , 2008 .

[11]  Olav Bolland,et al.  A novel methodology for comparing CO2 capture options for natural gas-fired combined cycle plants , 2003 .

[12]  Jon Gibbins,et al.  Effective retrofitting of post-combustion CO2 capture to coal-fired power plants and insensitivity of CO2 abatement costs to base plant efficiency , 2011 .

[13]  Alfons Kather,et al.  Optimised integration of post-combustion CO2 capture process in greenfield power plants , 2010 .

[14]  Gary T. Rochelle,et al.  Alternative stripper configurations for CO2 capture by aqueous amines , 2007 .

[15]  J. Houghton,et al.  Climate change 2001 : the scientific basis , 2001 .

[16]  Alfons Kather,et al.  Post-combustion CO2-capture from coal-fired power plants: Preliminary evaluation of an integrated chemical absorption process with piperazine-promoted potassium carbonate , 2008 .

[17]  Tomio Mimura,et al.  Research and development on energy saving technology for flue gas carbon dioxide recovery and steam system in power plant , 1995 .

[18]  Aie.  World Energy Outlook 2009 , 2000 .

[19]  Klaus Görner,et al.  Analysis of retrofitting coal-fired power plants with carbon dioxide capture , 2009 .

[20]  Jon Gibbins,et al.  Scope for reductions in the cost of CO2 capture using flue gas scrubbing with amine solvents , 2004 .

[21]  M. Thring.  World Energy Outlook , 1977 .

[22]  J. Plaza,et al.  Modeling CO2 capture with aqueous monoethanolamine , 2003 .

[23]  Gary T. Rochelle,et al.  Energy performance of stripper configurations for CO2 capture by aqueous amines , 2006 .

[24]  Amornvadee Veawab,et al.  Integration of CO2 capture unit using blended MEA–AMP solution into coal-fired power plants , 2009 .

[25]  Graeme Puxty,et al.  CO2 capture by aqueous amines and aqueous ammonia–A Comparison , 2009 .

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

[27]  Luis M. Romeo,et al.  Optimization of intercooling compression in CO2 capture systems , 2009 .

[28]  N. Meinshausen,et al.  Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne , 2009, Nature.