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

被引:95
作者
Manzolini, G. [1 ]
Fernandez, E. Sanchez [2 ]
Rezvani, S. [3 ]
Macchi, E. [1 ]
Goetheer, E. L. V. [2 ]
Vlugt, T. J. H. [4 ]
机构
[1] Politecn Milan, I-20156 Milan, Italy
[2] TNO Gas Treatment, NL-2628 CA Delft, Netherlands
[3] Univ Ulster, Belfast BT15 1ED, Antrim, North Ireland
[4] Delft Univ Technol, NL-2628 CB Delft, Netherlands
关键词
CESAR-1; solvent; 2-Amino-2-methyl-propanol; Piperazine; MEA; Post-combustion CO2 capture (PCC); Economic analysis; PILOT-PLANT; AQUEOUS MEA; FLUE-GAS; DEGRADATION; PERFORMANCE; MONOETHANOLAMINE; EMISSIONS; SOLVENTS; SCALE; COST;
D O I
10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.04.066
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
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-methylpropanol (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 (sic)/MW h in the case of the ASC plant compared to 0.67 (sic)/MW h 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 (sic)/t CO2 and 2 (sic)/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. (C) 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:546 / 558
页数:13
相关论文
共 70 条
  • [61] Stobbs R, 7 INT C GHG TECHN CA
  • [62] Degradation pathways for monoethanolamine in a CO2 capture facility
    Strazisar, BR
    Anderson, RR
    White, CM
    [J]. ENERGY & FUELS, 2003, 17 (04) : 1034 - 1039
  • [63] Strazisar BR, 2002, FUEL CHEM DIV PREPRI, V47, P55
  • [64] Part 2: Solvent management: solvent stability and amine degradation in CO2 capture processes
    Supap, Teeradet
    Saiwan, Chintana
    Idem, Raphael
    Tontiwachwuthikul, Paitoon P. T.
    [J]. CARBON MANAGEMENT, 2011, 2 (05) : 551 - 566
  • [65] University CM, 2010, IECM SOFTW
  • [66] Studies of SO2- and O2-induced degradation of aqueous MEA during CO2 capture from power plant flue gas streams
    Uyanga, Itoro J.
    Idem, Raphael O.
    [J]. INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH, 2007, 46 (08) : 2558 - 2566
  • [67] Degradation of MEA; a theoretical study
    Vevelstad, Solrun Johanne
    Eide-Haugmo, Ingvild
    da Silva, Eirik Falck
    Svendsen, Hallvard F.
    [J]. 10TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES, 2011, 4 : 1608 - 1615
  • [68] Integrated assessment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the German power sector and comparison with the deployment of renewable energies
    Viebahn, Peter
    Daniel, Vallentin
    Samuel, Hoeller
    [J]. APPLIED ENERGY, 2012, 97 : 238 - 248
  • [69] Post-combustion CO2 capture with chemical absorption: A state-of-the-art review
    Wang, M.
    Lawal, A.
    Stephenson, P.
    Sidders, J.
    Ramshaw, C.
    [J]. CHEMICAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH & DESIGN, 2011, 89 (09) : 1609 - 1624
  • [70] ZEP (Zero Emission platform), 2009, COST CO2 CAPT