CCPP Final Report

Report No: AUS8579 - 2
United Mexican States

MX TF Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage
Development in Mexico
Pre-Feasibility Study for Establishing a Carbon Capture Pilot Plant in
Mexico
.
May 18, 2016
.
GEE04
LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN
.
Document of the World Bank

.
.
.
Standard Disclaimer:
This volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank. The findings,
interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World
Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The
boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of
The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
.
Copyright Statement:
.
The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a
violation of applicable law. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank encourages dissemination
of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly.
For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete information to the Copyright
Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA, telephone 978-750-8400, fax 978-750-4470,
http://www.copyright.com/.
All other queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to the Office of the Publisher, The World
Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA, fax 202-522-2422, e-mail pubrights@worldbank.org.
`

PreFeasibilityStudyforEstablishingaCarbonCapturePilot
PlantinMexico(WorldBankContract7175527)

FinalReport

byNexant,Inc.

Inpartnershipwith:
BechtelCorporation

May18,2016

Disclaimer
This study report was prepared by Nexant under a contract with the World Bank. Neither Nexant
nor any of its employees or team members make any warranty, express or implied, or assume
any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any
information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe
upon privately own rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial process, product or
service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or
imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by any entity identified herein.
Task 1, the Technology Evaluation Study, was performed, in part, based on information that was
provided to Nexant under the terms of Non-Disclosure Agreements with several technology
licensors. No third-party proprietary information and/or data are directly revealed in the report.
In performing the study, Nexant had to adjust some of the data and fill in any missing
information, thus rendering the study results and conclusions as only Nexants interpretation of
the technologies.
While it is believed that the information contained in this report will be reliable under the
conditions and subject to the limitations set forth herein, Nexant cannot guarantee the accuracy
thereof. The views and opinions expressed herein and, in particular, in the documentation that
constitute this study are specifically those of the authors of this study. The use of this report or
any information contained therein shall be at the users own risk.
FinalReport:PreFeasibilityStudyforEstablishingaCarbonCapturePilotPlantinMexico 2
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
E.1 PROJECTBACKGROUND
The subject study was performed as part of an ongoing World Bank funded project to develop
capacity for carbon capture, utilization and storage technology (CCUS) in Mexico. This project has
theoverallobjectiveofsupportingMexicosSecretariadeEnergia(SENER)andotherGovernmentof
Mexico(GoM)stakeholderswiththeimplementationoftheMexicanCCUSroadmap.Theultimate
goalistosuccessfullydevelopanddeployCCUSintheelectricityandoilandgasindustriesinMexico
aswellasinothers,suchasironandsteel,cementandchemicalindustries.
AnintegralandcriticalpartofthisMexicanCCUSroadmapisthedesign,construction,andoperation
ofaCO2capturepilotplant,whichwoulddemonstratethepotentialandfeasibilityofcapturingCO2
from natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plants in Mexico. This endeavor will create a
knowledge base for the various stakeholders and the experience gained from this study will
hopefullyallowthemtodeveloplargerprojectsinthefutureandfurtheradvancetheapplicationof
CCUSinMexico.
E.2 STUDYOBJECTIVES
The Nexantteamwas tasked to carry outa prefeasibilitystudy to:1)assessandrecommend the
most appropriate commerciallyavailable postcombustion capture technology for NGCC power
plantsin Mexico,and2) developaconceptualdesignofacapturepilotplanttobelocatedatthe
250 MW Poza Rica NGCC generating station in the State of Veracruz. The pilot plant conceptual
designwastobedevelopedwithsufficientprocessdetailsinordertoenablethepreparationofa
frontendengineeringdesign(FEED)packageaspartofaPhaseIIactivityfortheproject.TheFEED
preparationisnotpartofthecurrentprefeasibilitystudy.
Itshouldbenotedthatinitiallyanotherpowerplant,DosBocas,whichisalsolocatedinthestateof
Veracruz, was identified as a potential site for the study as well. However, the project team was
laterinformedthatDosBocaswouldnotbeasuitablesite,asthepowerplantisscheduledtobe
shutdownin2018.
E.3 WORKSCOPEANDDELIVERABLES
Theprojectworkscopeconsistsoffivemajortasksasfollows:
Task 1 Technology Selection, Evaluation and Recommendation of Best Available NGCC Post
CombustionCO2Capture(PCC)Technologies
Subtask1.1PlantandSiteDataRequisitionandPreparationofaStudyDesignBasis
Subtask1.2ProjectKickoffMeetingandSiteVisit
Subtask1.3TechnologySurveyQuestionnairePreparation
Subtask1.4TechnologyScreening,EvaluationandSelection
Task2:InterimReportMeetingwithRecommendations
Task3:PilotPlantFeasibilityDesign
Executive Summary
Subtask3.1CO2CapturePilotPlantProcessDesign
Subtask3.2NGCC/PCCIntegration
Task4:FinalReport
Task5:Workshop
A copy of the Project Work Scope/Terms of Reference, as amended on September 25, 2015, is
includedinAppendixB.
TheTask1Report(deliveredaspartofTask2)summarizesall workperformedunderTask1.The
Task1resultswerepresentedataprojectreviewmeetingandworkshop,whichwereorganizedby
theWorldBankandSENERonJanuary2729,2016.
TheTask3reportdescribestheworkperformedunderTask3PilotPlantFeasibilityDesign.
A final Workshop for the project, as Task 5 activity, was given to the World Bank and the GoM
stakeholdersonMay11,2016.
E.4 TASK1TECHNOLOGYSELECTION,EVALUATIONANDRECOMMENDATIONOF
BESTAVAILABLEPCCTECHNOLOGIES
E.4.1 PreScreeningandSelectionofPCCTechnologies
Based on previous work conducted by the US Department of Energy (USDOE) and Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI) assessing the technology readiness level (TRL) of different types of PCC
technologies,aswellasNexantsownassessmentofcurrentstateoftheartPCCtechnologies,the
NexantteamrecommendedtotheWorldBankthattheprefeasibilitydesignshouldbefocusedon
solventbased absorption processes. This recommendation was made in order to meet the World
BankandtheGoMteamsdesiretobuildandcompleteoperationofthePozaRicaNGCCpilotplant
by 2019, based on commerciallyavailable PCC technology for near term deployment. This
recommendationwasdiscussedandacceptedbytheWorldBank,SENERandtheComisinFederal
deElectricidad(CFE)representativesattheProjectKickoff(KO)meetingintheCFEofficeonOctober
27, 2015. A list of ten potential advanced solventbased absorption PCC technology
developers/licensorswerecollectivelyidentified,selectedandaskedtoparticipateinthestudy.Of
thetenPCClicensorscontacted,sixrespondedpositivelyandwerewillingtoparticipatewhilefour
declined,forvariousreasons.TableE1summarizesthePCClicensorsresponses.
NexantdevelopedastudyDesignBasis,basedinpartonthePozaRicaplantdatathatwereprovided
by CFE. Based on the study Design Basis, a Technology Survey Questionnaire was prepared to
collect process information from the six PCC technology developers. The responses received from
thequestionnaire,supplementedwithNexantteamsinhouseknowledge,formedthebasisforthe
technologyscreening,evaluationandcomparisonoftheprocesses.
Executive Summary
TableE1ListofPCCLicensorsParticipationResponses
AcceptedtoParticipate DeclinedtoParticipate
Alstom(AdvancedAmineProcess) AkerSolutions
BASF CO2Solutions
Fluor Hitachi
HTC Siemens
MHI
ShellCansolv
E.4.2 OverallNGCCPerformanceBeforeandAfterFullScalePCCRetrofit
Nexantdevelopedareferencegeneric30%MEAbasedPCCprocessdesigntoserveasabenchmark
forcomparingtheperformanceofthesixPCCtechnologiesparticipatedinthestudy,assessingtheir
claimed improvement and filling in any missed data that are needed for their fullscale Poza Rica
retrofitanalysis.AcompanionpowertrainmodelwasalsodevelopedforthePozaRicaNGCCplant
to estimate its performance before and after fullscale PCC retrofit. Figure E1 shows a simplified
flowschemeoftheretrofittedplantanditsPCCinterfacingrequirements.
TableE2summarizestheoverallPozaRicaplantperformanceandpowerbalancebeforeandafter
PCCretrofitting,forthegeneric30%MEAdesign,aswellasthesixproprietaryPCCtechnologies.All
sixoftheproprietaryaminebasedPCCtechnologiesshowalowerheatofregenerationcompared
togeneric30%MEA,byabout20to25%.Withinthegroup,however,thedifferenceisrathersmall,
only 3%. As a result, all six technologies show an improvement in overall efficiency over the
generic30%MEAbasedretrofittedPozaRicaplantalossofplantefficiencyrangingfrom8.4to9.3
percentagepointsinsteadof9.9percentagepoints.
E.4.3 PozaRicaNGCCPCCRetrofitEconomicEvaluationResults
ThesixPCCtechnologieswerecomparedandrankedusingtheCostofElectricity(COE)asthefigure
ofmerittoestimatePozaRicaspotentialeconomicpenaltywithCO2capture.COEisameasureof
the revenue received per net MWh that provides the stipulated internal rate of return on equity
overtheentireeconomicanalysisperiod.
TableE3showstheincrementalCOEforeachofthePCCtechnologiesretrofittedintothePozaRica
NGCC plant. The various PCC licensors technologies were ranked for comparative purposes
accordingtotheirincrementalCOEs;thelowertheincrementalCOE,thehighertheranking.
Executive Summary
FigureE1PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCSimplifiedBFD
De-Superheater
Post-PCC Retrofit
Poza Rica NGCC BP Power
CO2-Lean Flue
Gas Vent from
Recovery Absorber top
Turbine
LP Sat
Condensat Steam
CO2-Rich
Flue Gas
HP SH PCC Plant
Steam Flue Gas CO2 Recovery
3 Identical Single
Booster Blower
Steam Turbines GT/HRSG
LP
CO2
S/C
CO2
PCC Plant Super-Critical
Three Identical Siemen Stm Turb: GT/HRSG: CO2 CO2 to EOR Via
1. 192,000 #/Hr HP SH Stm Each 1. 163 MW Siemen/Westinghouse GT Compression Pipeline
2. 1,100 psig/975 F HP SH Stm 2. 1,595 MMBtu(LHV)/Hr NG Firing
3. 27 MW Gross Pre-PCC Each 3. 900 MMBtu/Hr HRSG Abs Duty
4. 580,000 #/Hr HP Stm
Existing NGCC, No Change Other NGCC Plant Modifications:

Design & Cost by Nexant 1. CW/CT Systems
Design & Cost by PCC Licensor 2. Raw & Filtered Water Systems
Design & Cost by Others 3. RO/De-Ionized Water System
4. Electrical Distribution Systems
5. Inter-Connecting Pipings
Executive Summary
TableE2PozaRicaNGCCPrePCCvsPostPCCRetrofitPerformanceSummary
Generic30% HTC
SeeNote1 PrePCC Alstom BASF Fluor MHI ShellCanSolv
MEAPCC Purenergy
NGCCCO2Emissions,MTPD(STPD) 2297(2532) 345(380) 328(362) 344(379) 229(252) 346(381) 346(381) 342(377)
RecoveredCO2Product,MTPD(STPD) 0(0) 1952(2152) 1969(2170) 1953(2153) 2068(2280) 1951(2151) 1951(2151) 1955(2155)
%CO2Capture 0 85% 86% 85% 90% 85% 85% 85%
PowerBalance,MW
Generation
GasTurbineGrossOutput 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6
SteamTurbineGrossOutput 82.5 39.6 49.6 49.4 46.0 46.7 49.2 49.4
BackPressureTurbine 0 21.6 17 17 18 18 17 16.7
TotalGrossOutput 249.1 227.8 232.8 232.7 231.0 231.3 232.6 232.7
AuxiliaryConsumption
ExistingNGCCPlantParasiticLoads 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2
FlueGasBlower 0 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8
PCC+CO2Compression+PlantMods 0 16.1 17.3 14.1 16.6 14.0 15.7 14.2
TotalNewPCCParasiticLoad 7.2 32.0 33.3 30.1 32.5 29.9 31.7 30.1
NetPowerPlantExport,MW 241.9 195.8 199.5 202.6 198.4 201.4 200.9 202.5

DeltaPlantExport,MW 46.1 42.4 39.3 43.4 40.5 41.0 39.3
%PlantExportReduction 19% 18% 16% 18% 17% 17% 16%
NetPlantHeatRate,MJ/kWh(Btu/kWh) 6.94(6584) 8.57(8134) 8.42(7984) 8.28(7860) 8.46(8025) 8.33(7907) 8.35(7926) 8.29(7862)

NetPlantEfficiency,%LHV 51.8 42.0 42.7 43.4 42.5 43.2 43.1 43.4
DeltaPlantEfficiency,percentagept 9.9 9.1 8.4 9.3 8.7 8.8 8.4
IncrementalWaterImport,lpm(gpm) 0(0) 1537(406) 3058(808) 1718(454) 1618(427) 1328(351) 2561(676) 1580(417)

Note1:ValuespresentedhereareNexantsinterpretationofthedataprovidedbythePCClicensors.
Executive Summary
TableE3IncrementalPCCCostsforVariousLicensors
EstimatedPostCombustionCO2CaptureCosts
IncrementalCoststoPozaRica Generic
NGCCwithoutCO2Capture 30%MEA BASF/ HTC Shell
[Note1] PCCDesign Alstom Linde Fluor Purenergy MHI CanSolv
CAPEXEstimate,$MMUSUSGC
PCCPlant+CO2Compression
[Note2] 181.4 234.7 187.7 181.9 194.5 178.8 194.9
FlueGasBlower 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2
PozaRicaPlantModifications 32.8 32.4 30.4 31.9 29.1 30.9 30.4
TOTAL 228.4 281.4 232.3 228.0 237.8 223.9 239.5
O&MEstimate,$MMUS
VariableCosts[Note3] 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.5 7.3 7.5 7.5
FixedCosts 11.0 13.3 11.1 10.9 11.4 10.8 11.6
TOTAL 18.5 21.0 18.7 18.5 18.7 18.3 19.1
EstimatedCostofElectricity
(COE),$/MWh[Note4] 37.6 41.4 35.3 36.5 36.2 35.1 36.0
RankingbasedonCOE N/A 6 2 5 4 1 3

Note1ValuespresentedhereareNexantsinterpretationofthedataprovidedbythePCClicensors.
Note2AllfiguresexceptNexants'Generic30%MEADesign'arebasedonvendorprovideddata,whichareconsideredproprietary.
Note3Majorcomponentistheaminereplacementcosts,whichareconsideredproprietary.
Note4IncrementaltoestimatedexistingPozaRicaNGCCCOEof$40.69/MWh
Executive Summary
FigureE2IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustmentforFluor
45
IncrementalCOEbasedonLicensors'Data
IncrementalCOEAdjustedfor85%CO2CaptureforFluor
41.4
40
IncrementalCOE,$/MWh
36.5
36.0 36.2
35 35.3
35.0 35.1
30
25
Fluor MHI BASF ShellCanSolv HTCPurenergy Alstom

Executive Summary
E.4.4 EconomicEvaluationResultsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustments
TableE2showsthecomparisonofthesixPCCtechnologiesagainst30%MEA,allatabout85%CO2
capture except for Fluor. While Nexants questionnaire specified for a PCC design from the six
developerstocapture85%oftheCO2fromPozaRicaplantfluegas,Fluorprovideddatabasedona
capturerateof90%.NexantmadetheadjustmentsbyproratingFluorstotalCO2regenerationduty
from 90% to 85%; revising the PCC auxiliary power consumption, CO2 compression power
requirementsandcooling duty;andreducingits costsaccordingly.FigureE2presentstherevised
COEsgraphically,beforeandaftertheCO2capturerateadjustmentforFluor.Withtheadjustment,
theestimatedCOEislowerforFluorcomparedtotheotherfivePCCdevelopers.
E.4.5 ConclusionsandRecommendations
Withinthelevelofdataaccuracyforthestudy,itwouldbereasonabletoconcludethatthetopfive
proprietaryPCCtechnologiesallhavesimilareconomicperformanceanditcannotbedetermined,
withcertainty,thatoneisclearlysuperiortotheothers.Ifthreetopofclasscandidatesmustbe
chosenfromthelistbasedontheirCOEresults,thenthesewouldhavetobeFluor,MHI,andBASF,
asshowninFigureE2.However,finaltechnologyselectionforfuturePozaRicaPCCimplementation
would most likely need to take into other factors for consideration, such as process guarantee,
technologylicensingfee,willingnesstoworkwiththeGoMstakeholderstotakeonanactiverolein
theproject,etc.,asrequired.
TheoriginalTask1PCCtechnologyevaluationobjectivewastoselectthebesttechnologyandthen
have the technology licensor design and build a pilot plant to test the selected PCC process. This
meansthatonlytheselectedaminetechnologycanbetesteddueitsproprietarynature.TheTask1
study results showed that it is not possible to choose the best PCC technology with any certainty
because there is very little performance and cost differences among the top few technologies. In
addition, there are almost no data regarding trace contaminant emissions, which can potentially
shutdownaPCCprocessregardlessofitsperformanceoreconomicadvantages.
SincenoneofthetopproprietaryPCCtechnologiesstandsoutamongtherest,andallofthemare
aminebasedtechnologiesthatoperatealongthesamebasicprinciplesasanMEAplant,therefore,
inordertoproceedwiththepilotplantdesigninTask3,Nexantproposedthatitbedesignedfor
genericMEA,butwithadditionaldesignfeaturesthatgrantsitflexibilitytoallowforthetestingand
validation of other aminebased technologies. This recommendation was accepted by the World
Bank team, which subsequently amended the Terms of Reference (TOR) to accept a pilot plant
processdesignpackagebasedongenericMEAforTask3,asshowninAppendixB.
E.5 TASK3CO2CAPTUREPILOTPLANTFEASIBILITYSTUDY
E.5.1 PilotPlantSizeSelection
Inordertoproceedwiththepilotplantdesign,aninitialprojecttaskwastocomeupwithapilot
plant size agreeable to all parties. To facilitate that effort, Nexant performed an analysis and
presented the results showing the impacts of PCC pilot plant size on the Poza Rica NGCC plant
Executive Summary
performanceanditsvarioussupportfacilitydemands,attheOct5,2015meetingatCFEsofficein
MexicoCity.SincethegeneralconsensusisthatMEAbasedPCCistheleastefficientoptionoutof
thesixnearcommercialPCCtechnologieswhichareallaminebased,apilotplantdesignedforMEA
should be able to accommodate testing the other technologies with minimal preinvestment
modificationstothecaptureplantdesign.
AfterreviewingtheintegrationrequirementforPCCpilotplantsizesrangingfromtreating1%toup
to25%ofthefluegasfromthePozaRicaNGCCgasturbine(GT),NexantrecommendedthatthePCC
pilotplantbesizedtotreatnomorethan5%oftheGTfluegasflowbasedonmaximumutilization
ofexistingNGCCsupportfacilitieswithoutaddingnewcapacities.
Nexantprovideditsrecommendationandrationaleforthe5%pilotplantsizeselectiontotheWorld
BankonJanuary27,2016.Becauseactualpilotplantcapitalcostcanonlybedevelopedafterpilot
plantsizeisdefinedanditsdesigniscarriedout,onlyanestimatedrelativecapitalcostcurvewas
providedduringthepreliminarysizeselectionevaluation.Inaddition,sincepilotplantfundingand
operational length were not defined at the January 27 meeting, Nexants 5% pilot plant size
recommendationwasbasedonlyontheplantstechnicalviabilityanditspotentialimpactsonthe
PozaRicaplantoperations.Whileitisdesirabletohavearelativelylargepilotplantwiththeability
tobetterassesstechnologyscaleup,itwasalsorecognizedthatcosts(bothCAPEXandO&M)can
beprohibitivewithalargescalepilotplant.
After the January meeting, subsequent discussions between the World Bank and the Mexican
entitiesconsistingofInstitutodeInvestigacionesElctricas(IIE),SENER,andCFEwereheldand,with
potential project funding constraints in mind, a decision was made to size the PCC pilot plant to
treat1%ofthePozaRicaplantfluegas.ThepilotplantssizeisshowninTableE4.
TableE4PilotPlantSize
MWePlantEquivalent 2.4MWe
FlueGasThroughput 387mTPD
CO2inFlueGas 23mTPD
RecoveredCO2 20mTPD
CO2RecoveryRate 85%
E.5.2 MEAPCCPilotPlantSystemDesign
APCCpilotplantforPozaRicawasdesignedasaTask3activity.Thedesignisfullyintegratedinto
thePozaRicaplantoperations.Thepilotplantprocessdesignpackagecontainssufficientdefinition
to facilitate FEED preparation during Phase II of this project by an experienced engineering,
procurement, and construction (EPC) company to validate the feasibility of the pilot facility. The
pilot plant design includes only the CO2 capture facility, plus support facilities and modifications
Executive Summary
neededfortheexistingPozaRicaNGCCplanttosupportthePCCpilotplant operations.Captured
CO2istobevented,soaCO2compressionfacilityisnotincluded.
ThePCCpilotplantisdesignedtotreat1%ofthePozaRicaNGCCfluegasandrecover85%ofthe
containedCO2.Afeasibilitystudyprocessdesignpackagewasdevelopedcontainingthefollowing:
Simplifiedprocessflowdiagramanddescription
Majorstreamflowheat,materialandutilitybalances
Preliminaryplotplan
Majorequipmentlistandpreliminarydatasheets
Specificationofeffluents
DescriptionofintegrationrequirementsintothePozaRicaNGCCplant,and
Preliminarycapitalandoperatingcostestimates,includingallcatalystsandchemicalsandutility
consumptionestimates.
The pilot plant process scheme consists of three major processing steps: (1) Flue Gas Feed
Scrubbing, (2) Flue Gas CO2 Absorption, and (3) Amine Solution Regeneration. A total of three
operatingscenarioswerecarriedout.Thesewere:
DesignCase(Des)tosizealmostallpilotplantequipment.Thisrepresentsaneasilyachievable
MEAoperationthatresultsinconservativeequipmentsizes.
Expected Operation Case (Exp) for expected pilot plant performances. This represents a
projectedbestachievableMEAoperationbasedonNexantspastexperienceswithcommercial
amineplants.
Absorber InterCooled Operation Case (IC) to size absorber intercooling equipment. This
represents a projected achievable MEA operation based on a colder absorber bottom
temperatureduetoabsorberinterstagecooling.
ThepilotplantprocessdesigndetailsaresummarizedintheTask3ReportandpresentedinSections
8through13ofthisFinalReport.
E.5.3 OverallNGCCPerformanceBeforeandAfterPCCPilotPlantOperation
Theoverallpowerbalance,CWandCTloadsofthePozaRicaNGCCwiththePCCpilotplantdesign
case are summarized in Table E5. The existing prePCC performance is shown for comparison
purposes.Ascanbeseenfromthesummarytable,duetothesmallsize(1%fluegasslipstream)of
thepilotplant,theimpactonoverallNGCCplantoperationisminimal.
Executive Summary
TableE5OverallNGCCBalanceandPerformance
Post-PCC
Overall Poza Rica NGCC Performance: MEA PCC Pilot (Design
Plant Pre PCC Operation)
Flue Gas Feed and CO2 Recovery Rates:
Flue Gas Feed Rate, mTPD (STPD) N/A 387 (427)
CO2 in Pilot PCC Feed Gas, mTPD (STPD) N/A 23 (25)
CO2 in Recovered, mTPD (STPD) N/A 20 (22)
CO2 Recovery Rate, % 0 85%
Steam Consumption Rates:
Reboiler Steam (4.1bara/151C), mTPD (STPD) N/A 40 (45)
Reboiler Steam, ton/ton CO2 Recovered N/A 2.07
Output at Generator Outlet, kW:
Existing Siemens/Westinghouse GT 166,570 166,570
Existing Siemens Steam Turbine (Total for 3 operating) 82,500 82,272
Total Gross Generation 249,070 248,842
Parasitic Loads, kW:
Existing NGCC Loads 7,213 7,213
PCC Pilot Plant CO2 Capture Loads 0 162
Total NGCC/PCC Electrical Loads 7,213 7,375
Net Poza Rica Power Export, kW 241,857 241,467

Power Export, kW -- -391
Post-PCC
(Design
Poza Rica CW/CT Duty Breakdown: MEA PCC Pilot Plant Pre PCC Operation)
Existing NGCC CW/CT Duty, GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr) 666 (631) 662 (628)
New PCC CW/CT Duty, GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr) 0 6 (5)
Total Poza Rica CW/CT Duty, GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr) 666 (631) 668 (633)
E.5.4 EmissionsandDischarges
AirEmissions
ThePCCpilotplantwill emit treatedfluegasfrom the topoftheabsorbercolumnandseparated
CO2fromthestripperoverheaddrum.BothofthesegasesmaypotentiallycontainVOCemissions,
stemmingfromtheamineanditsdegradationproducts.Awaterwashsectionwasdesignedatthe
topoftheabsorberusingalltherecycledreboilercondensateasthewashingmediumtoreducethe
aminecontentofthetreatedfluegastolessthan1ppmV.ThePCCpilotplantisdesignedtobeable
toreducethewashwaterflowinordertotesttheminimumwashwaterquantityrequiredtomeet
theamineemissionslimit.
Executive Summary
Nitrosamines and nitramines, both degradation products, are known carcinogens. The exact
concentrations of these degradation products in the emissions are unknown due to the lack of
publisheddata.However,thepilotplantissetuptotestfortheirconcentrationsinthetreatedflue
gasandCO2ventwithsystemsinplacewheregassamplescanbetakenforanalyticalmeasurement
todeterminetheemissionlevels.
LiquidDischarges
ThePCCpilotplantusessteamfromtheNGCCplanttoprovidethereboilingdutytostripofftheCO2
fromtherichaminesolutioninthestrippercolumn.Thereboilersteamcondensateisnotreturned
to the power plant, but rather used as wash water for the absorber and ultimately purged to the
wastewatertreatmentfacility.Tooperatethepilotplant,additionalmakeupwaterisrequiredand
it has to go through the NGCC plants existing filtration and electrodialysis (ED) water treatment
systems, generating incremental waste that is also purged to the existing waste water facility for
treatment.
The reboiler condensate that is used for water wash removes most of the volatile and entrained
MEAinthetreatedfluegas.Thewashwaterisexpectedtocontainabout8kg/h(18lb/h)ofMEA.
Thiswater,dependingonthepowerplantoperatorswillingness,canbeusedaswatermakeupto
theMEAstoragetankand/orasmakeupwatertotheCT.
SolidWasteDischarge
ThesolidwastegeneratedbythePCCpilotplantconsistsofreclaimerwaste,spentactivatedcarbon
and the spent filter media. These waste products are assumed to be hazardous and have to be
disposedofappropriately,mostlikelyviaincineration.Ahazardouswastedisposalcompanycanbe
contractedtocollectandtransportthesolidwastetoanincinerationfacility.Itisrecommendedthat
the PCC pilot plant operator approach PEMEX, which most likely has experience hiring waste
disposalcompaniestoremovehazardouswastefromtheirrefineries,togainaccesstosuchdisposal
companies.
E.5.5 PozaRicaNGCCPCCPilotPlantCostEstimation
The capital cost of the MEAbased PCC pilot plant is estimated, with a target accuracy of +/ 30
percent, using a major equipment (ME) factored estimation approach. Table E6 summarizes the
estimatedcapitalcostforthePCCpilotplant.
ThetotalcapitalcostincludescostallowancesfortheassociatedNGCCplantmodificationsandpilot
plant support facilities, which include the control and laboratory testing equipment plus trailer
costs. These are reported as single line cost items in in the cost estimate. Factoring in all of the
abovementionedcosts,theestimatedtotalplantcost(TPC)forthePCCpilotplantisabout$22.1
million.
Executive Summary
TableE6MEAPCCPilotPlantEstimatedTotalPlantCost
Costs, $1,000 Total

Major Equipment Costs
Columns and Internals 1,794
Vessels and Tanks 78
Heat Exchangers 233
Blowers 522
Pumps and Drivers 234
Others MEA Filter Package 78
Others Soda Ash Package 10
Others Ductwork 194
Freight 125
Total Major Equipment Costs 3,268
Bulk Material Costs 5,938
Total Direct Costs 9,206
Construction Indirect Costs 1,818
Total Field Costs 11,025
Startup Vendor Repre 272
Home Office Costs 2,288
Plant Mod Allowance 400
Control, Lab and Admin Trailer Allowance 3,000
Total Constructed Cost w/o Contingency 16,985
Contingency (30%) 5,096
Total Plant Cost 22,081

The operating and maintenance (O&M) costs for the MEA PCC pilot plant are allocated as either
fixedorvariableoperatingcosts.FixedO&Mcostsareessentiallyindependentoftheactualcapacity
factor,numberofhoursofplantoperationoramountofkilowattsproduced.Theyconsistmainlyof
costs of employee salaries, taxes and insurances. Variable O&M costs are directly proportional to
the PCC pilot plant throughputs and include the purchase costs of the pilot plants process
consumables,catalystsandchemicals.TableE7summarizestheestimatedannualO&Mcostsand
percentagebreakdownMEAPCCpilotplant.
ThePCCpilotplantsannualO&Mcostis$2.5million.ThefixedO&Mcosts,at$2.1million,makeup
thebulkofthesecosts,at84%ofthetotalO&Mcosts.AbouthalfofthefixedO&Mcostsstemfrom
theoperatinglaborandoverheadcosts,consistingofthewagespaidtothePCCplantoperatorsand
other staff. These costs total $1.1 million, equivalent to 53% of the total fixed O&M costs. The
remaining47%ofthefixedO&Mcostsconsistofthemaintenancelaborandmaterial,insuranceand
propertytaxes,whichareestimatedbasedonapercentageofthePCCpilotplantscapitalcost.
ThevariableO&Mcostsmakeuptheremaining16%ofthetotalincrementalO&Mcosts,atabout
$0.41million.Theprocessconsumablestotal$0.16 million,whilethe catalystsand chemicalscost
$0.25 million. The export power losses make up almost all (98.5%) of the process consumables
costs. The costs of the other process consumables, i.e. the raw water import and waste water
Executive Summary
disposalcosts,areminimal(1.5%)comparedtotheexportpowerlosses.Similarly,thebulkofthe
catalystsandchemicalscostsconsistofamine/additivemakeupanddisposalcosts(89%),whilethe
watertreatmentchemicalsandfilterreplacementsarerelativelyminorcosts(11%).
TableE7EstimatedO&MCostsforPCCPilotPlantOperation
Post-PCC (Design
Operation)
Annual Operating Cost: MEA PCC Pilot Plant $1,000/year %
PROCESS CONSUMABLE COSTS (VARIABLE):
River Water Import 2.2 0.1
Process Waste Water Disposal 0.1 0.0
CO2 Product Export - -
Export Power Losses 156.2 6.1
TOTAL PROCESS CONSUMABLES 158.5 6.2
CATALYSTS & CHEMICAL COSTS (VARIABLE):
Water Treating Chemicals 18.7 0.7
PCC Amine/Additives Makeup & Disposal 223.1 8.8
PCC Carbon/Filters/Dessicant Replace & Disposal 7.4 0.3
TOTAL CAT & CHEMICALS 249.3 9.8
FIXED COSTS:
Operating Labor 744.0 29.2
Maintenance Labor 331.2 13.0
Maintenance Material 220.8 8.7
Overhead Charges 400.0 15.7
Insurance & Property Tax 441.6 17.3
TOTAL FIXED COSTS 2,137.6 84.0
TOTAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST 2,545.4 100.0
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVESUMMARY...................................................................................................................3
E.1 PROJECTBACKGROUND..................................................................................................................3
E.2 STUDYOBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................3
E.3 WORKSCOPEANDDELIVERABLES...............................................................................................3
E.4 TASK1TECHNOLOGYSELECTION,EVALUATIONANDRECOMMENDATIONOFBEST
AVAILABLEPCCTECHNOLOGIES...........................................................................................................4
E.4.1 PreScreeningandSelectionofPCCTechnologies.........................................................4
E.4.2 OverallNGCCPerformanceBeforeandAfterFullScalePCCRetrofit............................5
E.4.3 PozaRicaNGCCPCCRetrofitEconomicEvaluationResults..........................................5
E.4.4 EconomicEvaluationResultsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustments............................10
E.4.5 ConclusionsandRecommendations............................................................................10
E.5 TASK3CO2CAPTUREPILOTPLANTFEASIBILITYSTUDY.........................................................10
E.5.1 PilotPlantSizeSelection..............................................................................................10
E.5.2 MEAPCCPilotPlantSystemDesign............................................................................11
E.5.3 OverallNGCCPerformanceBeforeandAfterPCCPilotPlantOperation....................12
E.5.4 EmissionsandDischarges............................................................................................13
E.5.5 PozaRicaNGCCPCCPilotPlantCostEstimation.........................................................14
TASK1TECHNOLOGYSELECTION,EVALUATIONANDRECOMMENDATIONOFBESTAVAILABLE
PCCTECHNOLOGIES
1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................26
1.1 PROJECTBACKGROUND................................................................................................................26
1.2 STUDYOBJECTIVES......................................................................................................................26
1.3 WORKSCOPE.............................................................................................................................26
2. PRESCREENINGOFCO2CAPTURETECHNOLOGIES........................................................28
2.1 OVERVIEWOFCO2CAPTURETECHNOLOGYDEVELOPMENT.................................................................28
2.2 PRESCREENINGPCCTECHNOLOGIES..............................................................................................28
2.3 SELECTIONOFPCCTECHNOLOGIESFORDETAILEDPROCESSEVALUATION...............................................32
2.4 PARTICIPATINGPCCTECHNOLOGYLICENSORS..................................................................................33
2.5 QUESTIONNAIRETOPARTICIPATINGPCCLICENSORS..........................................................................33
2.6 QUESTIONNAIRERESPONSESBYPCCLICENSORS...............................................................................34
3. DESIGNBASIS...............................................................................................................35
3.1 OBJECTIVE.................................................................................................................................35
3.2 OVERVIEWOFRETROFITTINGPOZARICANGCCFORPCC..................................................................35
3.3 SITERELATEDCONDITIONS...........................................................................................................37
3.4 METEOROLOGICALDATA..............................................................................................................37
3.5 PCCFEEDANDPRODUCTPROPERTIES............................................................................................37
3.6 PCCUTILITYREQUIREMENTS........................................................................................................39
3.7 PROCESSWASTESTREAMS...........................................................................................................42
3.8 ENVIRONMENTALANDEMISSIONSREQUIREMENTS............................................................................42
4. TECHNOLOGYDESCRIPTIONOFINTERESTEDPCCLICENSORS........................................43
4.1 ALSTOMADVANCEDAMINEPROCESS(AAP)...................................................................................43
4.2 BASFOASEBLUEPROCESS........................................................................................................46
4.3 FLUORECONAMINEFGPLUSSM.....................................................................................................50
4.4 HTCPURENERGY........................................................................................................................53
4.5 MHIKMCDRPROCESS..............................................................................................................56
4.6 SHELLCANSOLVCO2CAPTURETECHNOLOGY...................................................................................59
Table of Contents
5. INTEGRATIONMETHODOLOGYFORFULLSCALEPCCWITHPOZARICANGCC...............63
5.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................63
5.2 EVALUATIONMETHODOLOGY........................................................................................................65
5.3 EXISTING(PREPCCRETROFIT)POZARICANGCCMODELPERFORMANCE............................................66
5.3.1 SteamCyclePerformance............................................................................................66
5.3.2 OverallNGCCBalanceandPerformance.....................................................................68
5.4 PCCDESIGNBASISANDQUESTIONNAIRETOSELECTEDLICENSORS.......................................................69
5.5 FULLSIZE30%GENERICMEABASEDPCCANDCO2COMPRESSIONDESIGN........................................69
5.6 POSTPCCRETROFITPOZARICANGCCMODELPERFORMANCE..........................................................70
5.6.1 SteamCyclePerformance............................................................................................70
5.6.2 OverallNGCCBalanceandPerformance.....................................................................72
5.7 NGCCPLANTMODIFICATIONSREQUIREDFORPCCRETROFIT.............................................................73
5.8 PRELIMINARYPOST30%MEAPCCRETROFITPLOTLAYOUTS............................................................74
5.8.1 PreliminaryPCCPlotLayouts.......................................................................................74
5.8.2 PCCEquipmentPlacement/IntegrationGuidelines.....................................................75
5.9 POZARICANGCCPCCRETROFITECONOMICEVALUATIONBASIS........................................................79
5.9.1 IncrementalCapitalCost.............................................................................................79
5.9.2 IncrementalOperatingCost........................................................................................80
5.9.3 EconomicEvaluationFigureofMerit..........................................................................82
5.9.4 PozaRicaNGCCEconomicsforFullSizeLicensorPCCRetrofit....................................84
6. RESULTSOFFULLSCALEPCCINTEGRATIONWITHPOZARICANGCC.............................85
6.1 POZARICANGCCPREANDPOST30%MEAPCCRETROFITPERFORMANCE.......................................85
6.2 POZALICENSORRESPONSESCHECKAGAINSTGENERIC30%MEA.......................................................86
6.3 POZARICANGCCPOSTPCCRETROFITPERFORMANCEEVALUATIONFORALLLICENSORS........................87
6.4 POZARICANGCCPCCRETROFITECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTS....................................................90
6.5 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSAFTERCO2CAPTURERATEADJUSTMENTS.........................................93
6.6 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTOPCCCAPEX...........................................................96
6.7 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTOREBOILINGDUTY......................................................98
6.8 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTONATURALGASPRICES.............................................100
6.9 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTOANNUALONSTREAMFACTOR(AOF)........................100
6.10 ESTIMATEDPCCPLOTSPACEREQUIREMENTS................................................................................103
7. SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS..................................................................................104
7.1 SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................104
7.1.1 DesignAnalysisofRetrofittingPozaRicaPlantforGeneric30%MEABasedPCC....104
7.1.2 ComparisonofSixAdvancedAminebasedPCCTechnologies..................................105
7.2 PCCTECHNOLOGYLICENSORSREVIEWANDCOMMENT....................................................106
TASK3PILOTPLANTFEASIBILITYDESIGN
8. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................108
8.1 PROJECTBACKGROUND..............................................................................................................108
8.2 STUDYOBJECTIVES....................................................................................................................108
8.3 WORKSCOPE...........................................................................................................................108
9. DELIVERABLES............................................................................................................110
10. PILOTPLANTDESIGNBASIS........................................................................................111
10.1 OBJECTIVE...............................................................................................................................111
10.2 OVERVIEWOFRETROFITTINGPOZARICANGCCFORPCC................................................................111
Table of Contents
10.3 SITERELATEDCONDITIONS.........................................................................................................113
10.4 METEOROLOGICALDATA............................................................................................................113
10.5 PCCFEEDANDPRODUCTPROPERTIES..........................................................................................113
10.6 PCCUTILITYREQUIREMENTS......................................................................................................115
10.7 PROCESSWASTESTREAMS.........................................................................................................118
10.8 ENVIRONMENTALANDEMISSIONSREQUIREMENTS..........................................................................119
11. PILOTPLANTSIZERECOMMENDATION.......................................................................121
11.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................121
11.2 PILOTPLANTINTEGRATIONARRANGEMENTANDSIZESELECTIONCRITERIA........................121
11.3 DISCUSSIONS........................................................................................................................123
11.3.1PilotReboilerSteamDemandsvs.HRSGIPandLPSteamGenerationCapacity
Consideration.......................................................................................................................123
11.3.2IncrementalPilotPCCCWLoadsvs.ExistingNGCCCW/CTCapacityConsideration.124
11.3.3NetPowerExportLoss...............................................................................................125
11.3.4IncrementalRawWaterImportConsideration.........................................................126
11.3.5PilotPlantAbsorberDiametervs.TransportationLimitationConsideration............127
11.3.6RelativePilotPlantCapitalCost................................................................................128
11.3.7PilottoFullSizePCCPlantScaleUpFactorConsideration.......................................129
11.3.8PowerandPotentialCO2ProductOfftakeOption....................................................129
11.4 NEXANTSRECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................129
11.5 FINALPILOTPLANTSIZE.............................................................................................................130
12. PCCPILOTPLANTINTEGRATIONMETHODOLOGYANDEXISTINGPOZARICANGCC
PERFORMANCE..........................................................................................................................132
12.1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................132
12.2 METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................132
12.3 EXISTING(PREPCCRETROFIT)POZARICANGCCMODELPERFORMANCE..........................................133
12.3.1SteamCyclePerformance..........................................................................................133
12.3.2OverallNGCCBalanceandPerformance...................................................................135
13. MEAPCCPILOTPLANTSYSTEMDESIGN.....................................................................137
13.1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................137
13.2 PCCPILOTPLANTOBJECTIVE......................................................................................................137
13.3 PCCPILOTPLANTDESIGNCRITERIAANDASSUMPTIONS..................................................................138
13.4 PCCPILOTPLANTRETROFITARRANGEMENT..................................................................................139
13.5 PCCPILOTPLANTPROCESSDESIGNMETHODOLOGY.......................................................................141
13.5.1Design(Des)CasePilotPlantOperation....................................................................141
13.5.2Expected(Exp)CasePilotPlantOperation................................................................147
13.5.3AbsorberIntercooled(IC)CasePilotOperation........................................................153
13.6 PCCPILOTPLANTPROCESSFLOWDESCRIPTION.............................................................................159
13.7 DESIGNCASEEQUIPMENTDESCRIPTION........................................................................................162
13.8 PROCESSDATASHEETSFORDESIGNCASEOPERATION.....................................................................172
13.9 PRELIMINARYPILOTPLANTSUPPORTFACILITYDESIGN.....................................................................172
13.9.1ConceptualPilotPlantControlCenter.......................................................................172
13.9.2ConceptualPilotPlantLaboratoryFacility................................................................174
13.10 NGCCPLANTMODIFICATIONSREQUIREDFORPCCPILOTPLANTINSTALLATION...................................175
13.11 PRELIMINARYPCCPILOTPLANTPLOTPLAN..................................................................................176
13.11.1 PCCEquipmentPlacement/IntegrationGuidelines..............................................176
13.11.2 PreliminaryPCCPilotPlantLayout......................................................................176
Table of Contents
14. OVERALLPILOTPLANTPERFORMANCEANDCOSTESTIMATES...................................180
14.1 POZARICANGCCPERFORMANCEWITHPCCPILOTPLANTOPERATION..............................................180
14.1.1SteamCyclePerformance..........................................................................................180
14.1.2OverallNGCCBalanceandPerformance...................................................................182
14.1.3OverallWaterBalances.............................................................................................183
14.1.4EmissionsandDischarges..........................................................................................183
14.2 POZARICANGCCPCCPILOTPLANTCOSTESTIMATION..................................................................184
14.2.1CostEstimationBasis.................................................................................................184
14.2.2CapitalCost................................................................................................................185
14.2.3OperatingandMaintenanceCosts............................................................................188
14.3 PRELIMINARYASSESSMENTOFSOCIAL,ENVIRONMENTALANDHEALTHIMPACTSOFTHEPCCPILOTPLANT190
14.3.1OperationalandSocialImpacts.................................................................................190
14.3.2EnvironmentalImpacts..............................................................................................191
15. PCCPILOTPLANTSPECIALOPERATIONSDESCRIPTIONS..............................................193
15.1 STARTUP.................................................................................................................................193
15.2 HOTSTANDBYOPERATION..........................................................................................................194
15.3 COLDSTANDBYOPERATION........................................................................................................195
15.4 SHUTDOWN.............................................................................................................................195
APPENDIXA ACRONYMSANDABBREVIATIONS......................................................................200
APPENDIXB PROJECTWORKSCOPEANDTERMSOFREFERENCE............................................204
APPENDIXC QUESTIONNAIRETOPCCLICENSORS...................................................................212
APPENDIXD DESIGNBASISDOCUMENT..................................................................................224
APPENDIXE SUMMARYOFPCCLICENSORSQUESTIONNAIRERESPONSES.............................270
APPENDIXF 30%MEABASEDPCCPLANTDESIGNFORPOZARICANGCC................................284
APPENDIXG ALSTOMSCOMMENTS.......................................................................................290
APPENDIXH EQUIPMENTDATASHEETS...................................................................................291
Table of Contents
FIGURESANDTABLES
ListofTables
TableE1ListofPCCLicensorsParticipationResponses..............................................................................5
TableE2PozaRicaNGCCPrePCCvsPostPCCRetrofitPerformanceSummary........................................7
TableE3IncrementalPCCCostsforVariousLicensors................................................................................8
TableE4PilotPlantSize.............................................................................................................................11
TableE5OverallNGCCBalanceandPerformance....................................................................................13
TableE6MEAPCCPilotPlantEstimatedTotalPlantCost.........................................................................15
TableE7EstimatedO&MCostsforPCCPilotPlantOperation.................................................................16
Table21DOETechnologyReadinessLevel(TRL)andDescriptions..........................................................29
Table22ListofPCCLicensorsParticipationResponses............................................................................33
Table31SiteConditions............................................................................................................................37
Table32MeteorologicalData...................................................................................................................37
Table33PozaRicaNGCCFlueGasCompositionandFlowRate...............................................................38
Table34RecoveredCO2Properties...........................................................................................................38
Table35PozaRicaNGCCPlantSteamConditions....................................................................................40
Table36PozaRicaCoolingTowerDesignConditions...............................................................................41
Table37PozaRicaProcessWaterSupplyConditions...............................................................................42
Table38EnvironmentalTargets................................................................................................................42
Table41AlstomAAPOperatingExperience..............................................................................................44
Table42BASFOASEblueOperatingExperience.....................................................................................47
Table43FluorsEconamineFGPlusSMOperatingExperience...................................................................50
Table44HTCPurenergyPCCOperatingExperience.................................................................................53
Table45MHIKMCDRProcessOperatingExperience..............................................................................57
Table46ShellCansolvCO2CaptureTechnologyOperatingExperience...................................................60
Table51ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance.......................................................68
Table52PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance.......................................72
Table53Generic30%MEAbasedPCCRetrofitCapitalCosts...................................................................80
Table54Generic30%MEAbasedPCCOperatingCosts...........................................................................81
Table55Generic30%MEAbasedPCCRetrofitCAPEX+7YearOPEXBEP..............................................82
Table56Generic30%MEAbasedPCCRetrofitCOE.................................................................................83
Table57EconomicAssumptionsUsedtoDetermineCCF........................................................................84
Table61PozaRicaNGCCPrePCCvsPost30%MEAPCCRetrofitPerformanceSummary......................86
Table62SelectedSummaryofPCCLicensorResponsesRelativetoNexant30%MEAPCCCase............87
Table63PozaRicaNGCCPrePCCvsPostPCCRetrofitPerformanceSummary......................................89
Table64IncrementalPCCCostsforVariousLicensors..............................................................................91
Table65IncrementalPCCCostsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustmentforFluor.....94
Table66EstimatedPCCPlotSpaceRequirements..................................................................................103
Table101SiteConditions........................................................................................................................113
Table102MeteorologicalData...............................................................................................................113
Table103PozaRicaNGCCFlueGasSlipstreamCompositionandFlowRate.........................................114
Table104RecoveredCO2Properties.......................................................................................................115
Table of Contents
Table105PozaRicaNGCCPlantSteamConditions................................................................................117
Table106PozaRicaCoolingTowerDesignConditions...........................................................................118
Table107PozaRicaProcessWaterSupplyConditions...........................................................................118
Table108EnvironmentalTargets............................................................................................................119
Table121ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance...................................................135
Table131PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantH&MBTableDesignCaseOperation.............143
Table132PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantUtilityConsumptionSummaryTableDesign
CaseOperation.........................................................................................................................................145
Table133PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantCatalystsandChemicalsConsumptionSummary
DesignCaseOperation..............................................................................................................................146
Table134PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantH&MBTableExpectedCaseOperation.........149
Table135PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantUtilityConsumptionSummaryTableExpected
CaseOperation.........................................................................................................................................151
ExpectedCaseOperation..........................................................................................................................152
Table137PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantHMBTableAbsorberInterCooledOperation155
Table138PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantUtilityConsumptionSummaryTableAbsorber
InterCooledOperation.............................................................................................................................157
AbsorberInterCooledOperation.............................................................................................................158
Table1310PCCPilotPlantMajorEquipmentList...................................................................................163
Table141PostPCCPilotPlantPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance...............................182
Table142MEAPCCPilotPlantEstimatedTotalPlantCost.....................................................................187
Table143EstimatedO&MCostsforPCCPilotPlantOperation.............................................................190

Table of Contents
ListofFigures
FigureE1PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCSimplifiedBFD.......................................................................6
FigureE2IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustmentforFluor..............9
Figure21EPRIAssessmentofPCCTechnologies.......................................................................................31
Figure22EPRIsPCCTRLRanking..............................................................................................................32
Figure31PozaRicaNGCCFlowConfiguration(withPCCandCO2Compression/Dehydration)...............36
Figure32PozaRicaNGCCHRSG/SteamTurbineConfiguration................................................................39
Figure33PozaRicaNGCCPlantExistingCoolingTowerArrangement.....................................................41
Figure41SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheAlstomAAP......................................................................45
Figure42SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheBASFOASEblueProcess................................................48
Figure43SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheFluorEconamineFGPlusSMProcess.................................51
Figure44SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheHTCLCDesignTM...............................................................54
Figure45SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheHTCdeltaReclaimerSystem............................................56
Figure46SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheMHIKMCDRProcess.....................................................58
Figure47SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheShellCansolvPCCPlant...................................................61
Figure51PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCSimplifiedBFD.....................................................................64
Figure52ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOperation...........................................................................................67
Figure53ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance.......................................................................69
Figure54PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOperation............................................................................71
Figure55PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance........................................................73
Figure5630%MEAPCCPlotLayoutFlueGasBlower,MEATankageandCO2AbsorptionSections....76
Figure5730%MEAPCCPlotLayoutCO2RegenerationandCompression/DehydrationSection.........77
Figure58RetrofittedPozaRicaNGCCwith30%MEAPCCPlotPlan........................................................78
Figure61IncrementalPCCCOEsforVariousLicensors.............................................................................92
Figure62IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustmentforFluor...........95
Figure63IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorswith10%PCCCAPEX...............................................97
Figure64IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2RegenerationDutyAdjustments................99
Figure65COESensitivitytoNaturalGasPricesforVariousPCCLicensors.............................................101
Figure66COESensitivitytoAnnualOnStreamFactorforVariousPCCLicensors.................................102
Figure101PozaRicaNGCCFlowConfiguration(withPCCPilotPlant)...................................................112
Figure102PozaRicaNGCCHRSG/SteamTurbineConfiguration............................................................116
Figure103PozaRicaNGCCPlantExistingCoolingTowerArrangement.................................................118
Figure111ConceptualPCC/NGCCIntegrationScheme..........................................................................122
Figure112CO2RecoveryvsPilotPlantSize............................................................................................123
Figure113ReboilerSteamExtractionvsPilotPlantSize........................................................................124
Figure114CWLoadsvsPilotPlantSize..................................................................................................125
Figure115NGCCExportPowerLossvs.PilotPlantSize.........................................................................126
Figure116IncrementalRawWaterImportvsPilotPlantSize................................................................127
Figure117AbsorberDiametervsPilotPlantSize...................................................................................128
Figure118RelativeCapitalCostvsPilotPlantSize.................................................................................129
Figure121ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOperation.......................................................................................134
Figure122ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance...................................................................136
Figure131PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCSimplifiedBFD.................................................................140
Figure132PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantPFDDesignCaseOperation..........................142
Figure133PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantPFDExpectedCaseOperation......................148
Table of Contents
Figure134PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantPFDAbsorberInterCooledOperation.........154
Figure135PCCPilotPlantControlRoomandAdministrationTrailers...................................................173
Figure136PCCPilotPlantLaboratoryTrailers........................................................................................175
Figure137PCCPilotPlantLayout............................................................................................................178
Figure138AerialViewofPozaRicaNGCCwithPCCPilotPlant..............................................................179
Figure141PozaRicaNGCCSteamCyclePerformancewithMEAPCCPilotPlantinOperation(Design
Case)..........................................................................................................................................................181
Figure142PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance....................................................183
Figure151PCCPilotPlantStartupFlowDiagram...................................................................................197
Figure152PCCPilotPlantHotStandbyFlowDiagram...........................................................................198
Figure153PCCPilotPlantShutdownFlowDiagram...............................................................................199

Task1TechnologySelection,Evaluationand
RecommendationofBestAvailablePCCTechnologies

Task 1 Technology Selection and Evaluation
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECTBACKGROUND
ThesubjectstudyisbeingperformedaspartofanongoingWorldBankfundedprojecttodevelop
capacity for the carbon capture, utilization and storage technology (CCUS) in Mexico. The project
has the overall objective of supporting Mexicos Secretaria de Energia (SENER) and other
Government of Mexico (GoM) stakeholders with implementation of the Mexican CCUS roadmap.
The ultimate goal is to successfully develop and deploy CCUS in the electricity, and oil and gas
industriesinMexico.AnintegralpartofthisMexicanCCUSroadmapisthedesign,construction,and
operation of a CO2 capture pilot plant, which would demonstrate the potential and feasibility of
capturingCO2fromnaturalgascombinedcycle(NGCC)powerplantsinMexico.Thisendeavorwill
createaknowledgebaseforthevariousstakeholdersandtheexperiencegainedfromthisstudywill
CCUSintheMexico.
1.2 STUDYOBJECTIVES
TheNexantteamistaskedtocarryoutaprefeasibilitystudy1)toassessandrecommendthemost
appropriatecommerciallyavailablepostcombustioncapturetechnologyforNGCCpowerplantsin
Mexico,and2)todevelopaconceptualdesignofacapturepilotplanttobelocatedatthe250MW
PozaRicaNGCCgeneratingstationintheStateofVeracruz.Thepilotplantconceptualdesignisto
be developed with sufficient process details in order to enable the preparation of a front end
engineeringdesign(FEED)packageasaPhaseIIactivityfortheproject.TheFEEDpreparationisnot
partofthecurrentprefeasibilitystudy.
It should be noted that initially, another power plant located in the State of Veracruz, Dos Bocas,
wasalsoidentifiedasapotentialsiteforthestudy.However,theprojectteamwaslaterinformed
thatitwouldnotbeasuitablesite,asitisscheduledtobeshutdownin2018.
1.3 WORKSCOPE
Theprojectworkscopeconsistsofthe4majortasks.ThisreportcoversworkcompletedunderTask
1 and 2. To facilitate ease of reading, the report is structured differently from the task/subtask
orders.However,thesectioninthereportthataddresseseachtask/subtaskisstatedinparentheses
below:
Subtask 1.1 Plant & Site Data Requisition and Preparation of a Study Design Basis
(Section3)
Subtask1.3TechnologySurveyQuestionnairePreparation(Section2andAppendixC)
Subtask 1.4 Technology Screening, Evaluation and Selection (Section 4, Section 5, Section 6,
AppendixDandAppendixE)
Task2:InterimReportMeetingwithRecommendation
Task3:PilotPlantFeasibilityStudy
Task4:FinalReport
Task5:Workshop
2. PRESCREENINGOFCO2CAPTURETECHNOLOGIES
2.1 OVERVIEWOFCO2CAPTURETECHNOLOGYDEVELOPMENT
Over the last decade, there have been significant carbon capture and storage activities being
undertakenworldwideinbothgovernmentandprivatesectors,withmajorprogramstakingplacein
North America and Europe. A great deal of research and development (R&D) efforts have been
spent on developing advanced postcombustion capture (PCC) technologies with the promise of
reducingtheoverallcaptureenergypenaltyandcostsincomparisontothecurrentstateoftheart
aminebased30%MEA(monoethanolamine)absorptiontechnology.
IntheU.S.,forexample,theDepartmentofEnergy(DOE)hasaveryactiveCarbonCaptureProgram
with the goals to develop secondgeneration capture technologies that are ready for largescale
testingin2020and transformationaltechnologies thatarereadyforlargescaletestingin2030.A
good source of information regarding the current status of these R&D efforts can be found in a
recentU.S.DOEreport1.Technologiesthathavebeenorarecurrentlybeinginvestigatedincludenot
onlyPCCprocesses,butCO2captureprocessesassociatedwithprecombustionandoxycombustion
systems as well. The knowledge gained and lessons learned from these findings could serve as a
valuablesourceofinformation,forboththeWorldBankandtheGoM,tohelpwithimplementation
oftheMexicanCCUSroadmap.
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), in close cooperation with U.S. DOE, is also very active in
PCCtechnologies,especiallywiththeevaluationandstatusmonitoringofvarioustechnologiesthat
were/are under development. EPRI published a report in 2007 entitled Assessment of Post
Combustion Carbon Capture Technology Developments2in which it assessed the various PCC
technologies andprocessesthatwere underdevelopment.Thetechnologiesinvestigatedincluded
absorption, adsorption, membrane, mineralization and biological capture. These assessments are
updated on a regular basis, the latest being a 2014 report3. This report is available at no cost to
EPRIs funding members, or for a fee to the general public. Throughout the years, EPRI has also
reportedtheirfindingsinvariousworkshopsandconferences4,5.
2.2 PRESCREENINGPCCTECHNOLOGIES
In their PCC technology development and evaluation, both the U.S. DOE and EPRI use the
Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as a scale to gauge a technologys maturity and readiness for

1Brickett,L.,Shailesh,V.,Indrikanti,P.,etal.DOE/NETLAdvancedCarbonDioxideCaptureR&DProgram:Technology
Update.May2013
2Freeman,B.AssessmentofPostCombustionCarbonCaptureTechnologyDevelopments,EPRIReport1012796,Technical
Update.February2007
3PostCombustionCO2CaptureTechnologyDevelopment:2014Update,EPRIReport002004592.October2014
4Rhudy,R.CO2CapturePrimerandIndustry/EPRIInitiatives,SECARBAnnualMeetingatAtlanta,GA,March2009
5Bhown,A.CarbonCaptureR&DatEPRI.CarbonCaptureWorkshop,StanfordUniversity,May2011
potential commercial deployment. In their 2012 Technology Readiness Assessment6, the U.S. DOE
defined the TRL methodology as a systematic metric/measurement system that supports
assessmentsofthematurityofaparticulartechnologyand the consistent comparisonofmaturity
betweendifferenttypesoftechnology.TRLsdonotestablishapass/failgrade,butratheryieldan
assessment of the technology development spanning progress from early research on basic
principles through service conditions and size needed for the technology to perform when it is
deployedorputintouse.TRLsareparticularlyusefulinestablishingaconsistentsetofterminology
andasupportingevaluationprocessthatcanbeusedtobenchmarkatechnologyscurrentstateof
progress.Bymoreclearlyunderstandingthecurrentstateandassessingthedegreeofdevelopment,
theTRLmethodologyemergesasausefultoolintheplanningoffutureresearchanddevelopment
activities.
The TRL approach was originally developed by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space
Administration(NASA)for itsSpaceShuttleprogram andlateradaptedby the U.S.Departmentof
Defense (DoD) for use in its defense systems acquisition. Similarly, the U.S. DOE adapted the TRL
methodologytoprovideacomprehensiveandconsistentprocessforassessingthematurityofthe
diverse portfolio of technologies currently under development. Table 21 provides the TRL
definitionsanddescriptionsusedintheassessment.
Table21DOETechnologyReadinessLevel(TRL)andDescriptions
TRL DOEDefinition DOEDescription
1 Basicprinciplesobservedand Lowestleveloftechnologyreadiness.Scientificresearchbeginstobe
reported translatedintoappliedR&D.Examplesincludepaperstudiesofa
technologysbasicproperties.
2 Technologyconceptand/or Inventionbegins.Oncebasicprinciplesareobserved,practicalapplications
applicationformulated canbeinvented.Applicationsarespeculativeandtheremaybenoproof
ordetailedanalysistosupporttheassumptions.Examplesarestilllimited
toanalyticstudies.
3 Analyticalandexperimentalcritical ActiveR&Disinitiated.Thisincludesanalyticalandlaboratoryscale
functionand/orcharacteristicproof studiestophysicallyvalidatetheanalyticalpredictionsofseparate
ofconcept elementsofthetechnology(e.g.,individualtechnologycomponentshave
undergonelaboratoryscaletestingusingbottledgasestosimulatemajor
fluegasspeciesatascaleoflessthan1scfm).
4 Componentand/orsystem Benchscaleprototypehasbeendevelopedandvalidatedinthelaboratory
validationinalaboratory environment.Prototypeisdefinedaslessthan5%finalscale(e.g.,
environment completetechnologyprocesshasundergonebenchscaletestingusing
syntheticfluegascompositionatascaleofapproximately1100scfm).
5 Laboratoryscalesimilarsystem Basictechnologicalcomponentsareintegratedsothatthesystem
validationinarelevantenvironment configurationismatchesthefinalapplicationinalmostallrespects.
Prototypeisdefinedaslessthan5%finalscale(e.g.,completetechnology
hasundergonebenchscaletestingusingactualfluegascompositionata
6USDOEOfficeofFossilEnergyCleanCoalResearchProgram.2012TechnologyReadinessAssessment.December2013
scaleofapproximately1100scfm).
6 Engineering/pilotscaleprototypical Engineeringscalemodelsorprototypesaretestedinarelevant
systemdemonstratedinarelevant environment.Pilotorprocessdevelopmentunitscaleisdefinedasbeing
environment between0and5%finalscale(e.g.,completetechnologyhasundergone
smallpilotscaletestingusingactualfluegascompositionatascale
equivalenttoapproximately1,25012,500scfm)
7 Systemprototypedemonstratedin ThisrepresentsamajorstepupfromTRL6,requiringdemonstrationofan
aplantenvironment actualsystemprototypeinarelevantenvironment.Finaldesignisvirtually
complete.Pilotorprocessdevelopmentunitdemonstrationofa525%
finalscaleordesignanddevelopmentofa200600MWplant(e.g.,
completetechnologyhasundergonelargepilotscaletestingusingactual
fluegascompositionatascaleequivalenttoapproximately25,00062,500
scfm).
8 Actualsystemcompletedand Thetechnologyhasbeenproventoworkinitsfinalformandunder
qualifiedthroughtestand expectedconditions.Inalmostallcases,thisTRLrepresentstheendof
demonstrationinaplant truesystemdevelopment.Examplesincludestartup,testing,and
environment evaluationofthesystemwithina200600MWplantCCS/CCUSoperation
(e.g.,completeandfullyintegratedtechnologyhasbeeninitiatedatfull
scaledemonstrationincludingstartup,testing,andevaluationofthe
systemusingactualfluegascompositionatascaleequivalentto
approximately200MWorgreater).
9 Actualsystemoperatedoverthefull Thetechnologyisinitsfinalformandoperatedunderthefullrangeof
rangeofexpectedconditions operatingconditions.Thescaleofthistechnologyisexpectedtobe200
600MWplantCCS/CCUSoperations(e.g.,completeandfullyintegrated
technologyhasundergonefullscaledemonstrationtestingusingactual
fluegascompositionatascaleequivalenttoapproximately200MWor
greater).
IntheirPCCtechnologyassessmentefforts,EPRIusesavirtuallyidenticalTRLmethodologytorank
thecommercialdeploymentreadinessofatechnology,alsousingascaleof1to9.Asillustratedin
Figure 21 a TRL of 1 to 3 is indicative that the technology is only at its infancy, i.e., concept
development and laboratory testing; with a TRL of 4 to 7, it may have gone through benchscale
testing; and only at a TRL of 8 to 9 has the technology proved itself with a largescale pilot plant
testingandisdeemedcommerciallydeployable.
Figure21EPRIAssessmentofPCCTechnologies
In its assessment of over 129 PCC technologies, at various levels of development, EPRI concluded
that: (a) most of the technologies are only at a TRL scale of 2 to 4, and (b) only a handful of the
technologiesevaluatedarerankedataTRL7,meaningthatthesearepotentiallydeployableinthe
nearterm.AsshowninFigure22,thehigherTRLrankedtechnologiesarepredominantlyadvanced
aminebased absorption processes. In their assessment, it is noted that few mineralization and
biofixationtechnologiesalsohaveaTRLof7;butitisNexantsopinionthatthesetechnologiesare
notreadyforneartermcommercialdeployment.
Figure22EPRIsPCCTRLRanking
Intheir2012report7,theGlobalCCSInstitute(GCCSI)definedneartermPCCtechnologiesasthose
thathavebeentestedat scaleofslipstreamsnolargerthan525MWe.Itreported that allnear
term PCC technologies are predominantly solventbased absorption processes involving either
ammonia or proprietary amines. The distinction between these technologies is specific capture
chemistry and, to some extent, the process configuration and integration into the power plant. It
specificallypointedoutFluorsEconamineFG+,MitsubishiHeavyIndustriesKSsolvent,ShellCansolv
Technologies, Aker Clean Carbon, and Alstoms Chilled Ammonia Process (CAP) as nearterm
technologies.Allofthese useeitheraqueouspureaminesoramine blends,with theexceptionof
AlstomsCAP,whichusesaqueousammonia.
2.3 SELECTIONOFPCCTECHNOLOGIESFORDETAILEDPROCESSEVALUATION
Onthebasisof(a)Section2.2stechnologyassessmentandprescreeningbackground,(b)Nexants
ownassessmentofthecurrentstateoftheartPCCtechnologies,and(c)theinterestoftheWorld
BankandtheGoMteamtobuildandcompleteoperationofthePozaRicaNGCCpilotplantby2019,
based on commerciallyavailable PCC technology for nearterm deployment, the Nexant team
recommendedtotheWorldBankthattheprefeasibilitydesignshouldbefocusedonsolventbased
absorptionprocesses.ThisrecommendationwasdiscussedandacceptedbytheWorldBank,SENER
and Comisin Federal de Electricidad (CFE) representatives at the Project Kickoff meeting in June
2015. Potential advanced solventbased absorption PCC technology developers/licensors were
collectivelyidentified,selectedandaskedtoparticipateinthestudy.Theseincluded:

7GlobalCCSInstitute.CO CaptureTechnologies,PostCombustionCapture(PCC),January2012
2
Alstom
AkerSolutions
BASF/Linde
CO2Solutions
Fluor
Hitachi
HTCPurenergy
MHI
ShellCansolv
Siemens

2.4 PARTICIPATINGPCCTECHNOLOGYLICENSORS
OfthetenPCClicensorscontacted,sixrespondedpositivelyandwerewillingtoparticipate,while
fourdeclined,forvariousreasons.Table22summarizesthePCClicensorsresponses:
AllofthelicensorswhoindicatedinterestinparticipatingrepresentedaminebasedPCC
technologies.ItshouldbenotedthatalthoughAlstomdoesoffertheCAPtechnologyforPCC,which
usesammoniaasthesolventinsteadofamines,italsooffersanadvancedaminebasedPCC
technology(AlstomAAP).FortheparticularPCCapplicationatthePozaRicaNGCC,Alstomproposed
usingtheaminebasedAAPtechnologyoveritschilledammoniaprocess.
Table22ListofPCCLicensorsParticipationResponses
AcceptedtoParticipate DeclinedtoParticipate
Alstom(AdvancedAmineProcess) AkerSolutions
BASF CO2Solutions
Fluor Hitachi
HTC Siemens
MHI
ShellCansolv
2.5 QUESTIONNAIRETOPARTICIPATINGPCCLICENSORS
ToobtaindatafromthePCClicensorsontheirtechnologiessothatNexantcouldproceedwiththe
integration of the fullscale PCC into the Poza Rica plant to assess its potential impact, a
questionnaire was created requesting information from each of the technology providers. The
informationrequestedincludes:
Commercial,demonstration,andpilotplantoperatingexperience
TreatedgasandCO2productgasflowrates,conditionsandcomposition
PCCreboilingsteamimportandcoolingdutyrequirements
PCCauxiliarypowerconsumption
Makeupandwastewaterdemands/production
Plotarearequirements
Solventmakeupcosts
Estimatedcapitalcosts

ThefulllistofquestionscanbefoundinAppendixC.
A design basis document was also issued as part of the questionnaire to the PCC technology
licensors interested in participating in the study. This document contained key Poza Rica NGCC
battery limit (B/L)interfaceinformation,which defined thefeedand productspecifications,utility
and offsite interface commodity specifications. The purpose of issuing a design basis with B/L
information to the PCC licensors was to ensure that these licensors designed their systems
consistently and specifically to the Poza Rica NGCC for integration into the retrofit design.
InformationonthedesignbasiscanbefoundinSection3andAppendixD.
2.6 QUESTIONNAIRERESPONSESBYPCCLICENSORS
Nexant is grateful to all the participating PCC licensors for taking time out of their schedules to
respondtotheNexantsquestionnaire,providinginformationontheirtechnologyatnocost.
The PCC licensors indicated to Nexant that their questionnaire responses were proprietary and
confidential,andNexanthadtosignanondisclosureagreement(NDA)witheachofthelicensorsin
ordertohaveaccesstotheirdata.However,theWorldBankandtheMexicanentitiesinvolvedin
thisprojectdonothaveanyNDAsineffectwiththelicensors.Thus,onlylimitedinformation(e.g.
informationfromopenpublicationsand/orconferencepresentationsthatthelicensorspresentedas
theirquestionnaireresponses)canbedivulgedinthisreport.
AsummaryofthevariouslicensorsresponsesisshowninAppendixE.Noneofthedatafromthe
licensors is reported directly due to the confidentiality issues stated above. Any responses, if
provided by the licensors, are stated as Y, indicating they have disclosed information to a
particular question. If the opposite is true i.e. the licensors did not provide an answer to the
question,thenanNisindicated.
Furthermore,Nexanthadtointerpretthedataprovidedbythelicensorsforconsistencyinorderto
use it in the integration exercise to evaluate the overall cost and performance of retrofitting the
Poza Rica plant with PCC. Thus, the results are only Nexants interpretation of the various
technologies performances and are reported in a format such that no confidential information
directlyfromthequestionnaireisdivulged.
3. DESIGNBASIS
3.1 OBJECTIVE
The design basis pulls together information on a variety of project parameters. Its objective is to
establishthecriteriawhichtheretrofittedPozaRicaNGCCwithPCCshouldbedesignedto.
Nexantgeneratedanoveralldesignbasisdocumentbasedonthedesignandoperatingdataofthe
PozaRicaNGCCplantprovidedbyCFE.TheinitialdraftofthisdocumentwassubmittedtoCFEfor
reviewpriortoNexantsvisitofthePozaRicaNGCCplantinOctober2015.FollowingNexantsvisit
tothePozaRicaplant,thedesignbasiswasupdatedbasedonNexantsbetterunderstandingofthe
plants operation. Information from the overall design basis was used to model the existing Poza
RicaNGCCperformanceandsubsequentlytheintegrationofthevariousPCCtechnologiesintothe
retrofittedPozaRicaNGCCtodeterminetheiroverallperformances.
A separate design basis document was issued as part of the questionnaire to the PCC technology
licensors interested in participating in the study. This document is a subset of the overall design
basis and contains key Poza Rica NGCC B/L interface information, which defined the feed and
productspecifications,utilityandoffsiteinterfacecommodityspecifications.Thiswastoensurethat
the PCC licensors designed their systems consistently and specifically to the Poza Rica NGCC for
integrationintotheretrofitdesign.
Thissectionlistssomeofthekeydesignbasisinformationused inthestudy. Thefulldesignbasis

documentanditslistofreferencescanbefoundinAppendixD.
3.2 OVERVIEWOFRETROFITTINGPOZARICANGCCFORPCC
The existing Poza Rica NGCC plant consists of one natural gasfired Siemens/Westinghouse model
W501F gas turbine (GT) producing a nominal 160 MWe of electricity. It is equipped with a heat
recovery steam generator (HRSG) to recover waste heat from the GT exhaust and generate
superheatedsteamfeedingthree27MWesteamturbinestoproduceadditionalpower.Thepower
plantstotalgeneratingcapacityis243MWenominal.
ThePCCplantwasdesignedasanaddontothePozaRicaNGCCpowerplant.Newprocess/utilities
tieinsandretrofittotheNGCCpowerplantwereaddedasrequired.Projectedlargestsingletrain
size equipment was used to maximize economyofscale. Equipment was designed for a 30year
plantlife.Rotatingequipmentcriticaltothecontinuousplantoperationwassparedtosupportthe
high availability required of the NGCC operations. Where sparing was not feasible, alternate PCC
operationwasidentifiedtomaintaincontinuousNGCCpowerplantoperation.Figure31showsthe
interface between the existing NGCC power plant and the addon PCC and CO2
compression/dehydrationplants.
Figure31PozaRicaNGCCFlowConfiguration(withPCCandCO2Compression/Dehydration)
CO2 Compressed
Purification CO2 toEOR
POZARICANGCCPlant Vent Pipeline
CoolingWaterReturn
Natural CO2 Compression&

Gas SteamCondensateReturn Dehydration
W501FGas
Turbine
160MWe
Cooling Water ToInterstage
Air Nominal
Cooling
LPSteam
ToCO2
Compression
IPSteam
HPSHSteam
BFW Power
CO2
IPSH Steam Compression
HearRecovery Condensate
Steam
Generator Return
(HRSG) LPSHSteam
SiemensSteam SiemensSteam Treated

SiemensSteam
TurbineNo.1 TurbineNo.2 TurbineNo.3 FlueGasVent
(27MWeNominal) (27MWeNominal) (27MWeNominal)
PCCPlant
Condensate
CO2
NNF
SolidWaste
louvers
(added)
CO2 Solvent WasteWater
Absorber Regen
eration
LPSteam
FGFans
Stack
3.3 SITERELATEDCONDITIONS
Table31liststhesiterelatedconditionsofthePozaRicaNGCCplantforretrofitwithPCC.
Table31SiteConditions
Location PozaRica,Veracruz,Mexico
Elevationabovesea
50m(164ft)
level
Topography Level
SeismicZone 0
Transportation RoadandRail
Water FromCanaldeLlamada
Access Accessbyroadandrail
85%recoveryandcompressedto152.7bara(2,215psia)for
CO2Specification EnhancedOilRecovery(EOR).(Studyscopelimitedtodeliveryat
compressionsystembatterylimitonly)
3.4 METEOROLOGICALDATA
Summer design ambient conditions were used for the NGCC and PCC design and performance
evaluation.TheseconditionswereprovidedbyCFEandareshowninTable32.
Table32MeteorologicalData
Description SummerDesign
BarometricPressure 1.013bara(14.69psia)
DryBulbTemperature 32C(90F)
WetBulbTemperature 25.3C(77.5F)
RelativeHumidity,% 57%
3.5 PCCFEEDANDPRODUCTPROPERTIES
3.5.1 PCCFeed(NGCCFlueGas)Properties
FluegasfromthePozaRicaNGCCpowerplantHRSGoutletisroutedthroughablowertoboostits
pressurebeforedeliveringtothenewPCCplant.TheestimatedPCCfluegasfeedcompositionand
flow rate for the nominal 160 MWe gas turbine gross outputs operating at 32 C (90 F) ambient
temperatureand57%relativehumidityareshowninTable33.
ThefluegascompositionandconditionsshownareattheNGCCHRSGoutletfordeliverytothePCC
batterylimit.Thisisafterthefluegashasundergoneapressureboostthroughthenewblower.Any
additionalfluegasconditioningrequiredbythePCClicensor,suchasfeedtemperature,sulfurand
moisture control to meet PCC process requirements, are to be provided by the PCC licensor, as
needed.
For the purpose of absorbent or solvent degradation estimation, the NOx concentration shown is
assumedtobe95%NOand5%NO2.


Table33PozaRicaNGCCFlueGasCompositionandFlowRate
PCCDesignFlueGascomposition,mole%
CO2 3.81
O2 12.32
N2 73.26
Ar 0.89
H2O 9.72
SO2 11ppmv
NOx 60ppmv
Total 100.00
Conditions:
PressureatPCCB/L,bara(psia) 1.15(16.7)
TemperatureatPCCB/L,C(F) 107.8(226)
MassFlow,kg/s(lb/hr) 447.9(3,554,770)
MolarFlow,kgmol/hr(lbmol/hr) 57,080(125,828)
3.5.2 RecoveredCO2Properties
ThefullscalePCCplantisdesignedtorecover85%ofCO2intheNGCCfluegas.RecoveredCO2from
the PCC unit is sent to a separate CO2 compression unit, where it is compressed and dehydrated
before being delivered to the NGCC/PCC plant battery limit for EOR applications. CO2 gas pipeline
specificationsareshowninTable34andarebasedonU.S.NETL/DOEEORspecifications.
TheCO2productleavingthePCCplantbatterylimitisexpectedtomeetallspecificationsinTable34
except for H2O content, pressure and temperature. These are adjusted in an external CO2
compressionunitbasedonNexantsdesign.
Table34RecoveredCO2Properties
ProductCO2Specification(forEOR,NETL/DOE)
CO2 95.0wt%(min)
N2 1.0vol%(max)
O2 100ppmV(max)
H2O* 800ppmV(max)
Ar 1.0vol%(max)
CH4 1.0vol%(max)
CO 35ppmV(max)
H2 1.0vol%(max)
Pressure,bara(psia)* 152.8(2215)
o o
Temperature, C( F)* 37.8(100)
*TheH2OcontentandtherecoveredCO2pressureandtemperatureshownin Table34aretheCO2productconditions
exitingtheCO2compression/dehydrationunit.
3.6 PCCUTILITYREQUIREMENTS
3.6.1 PozaRicaNGCCPlantSteamPressureLevels
The Poza Rica NGCC plant uses three (3) Siemens steam turbines, each nominally generating 27
MWeofpowerforatotalof81MWenominal.IthasasingleHRSGthatgeneratessteamatthree
pressurelevels,highpressure(HP),intermediatepressure(IP),andlowpressure(LP).Thesaturated
steam from the HRSG evaporators is superheated and distributed to the three steam turbines for
power production. Figure 32 shows a simplified process flow diagram (PFD), which illustrates the
configurationofthePozaRicaNGCCplantsHRSGandsteamturbinearrangement.
Figure32PozaRicaNGCCHRSG/SteamTurbineConfiguration
STG #1
CW
IP LP
STG #2
CW
IP LP
STG #3
HP Steam CW
Vented
Flue Gas
IP Steam LP Steam
Stack
Hot Flue Gas
HRSG
Condensate

Table35showstheconditionsofthesteamgenerationlevelsinthePozaRicaNGCCplantsHRSG
unit.
Table35PozaRicaNGCCPlantSteamConditions
Case Design
PowerPlantType NGCC
SteamTurbine Siemens(3x27MWenominal)
HRSGSaturatedSteamConditions
FromHRSGEvaporators
HPSteam,bara/C(psia/F) 90.0/303(1,305/578)
IPSteam,bara/C(psia/F) 14.6/197(212/387)
LPSteam,bara/C(psia/F) 6.0/159(86.5/318)
DeaeratorOperatingPressure,bara(psia) 6.1(88.6)
BoilerFeedWaterSupplyTemperature,C(F) 159(318)
SuperheatedSteamtoSTG
LPSteam,bara/C(psia/F) 4.8/178(69/352)
CondenserPressure,psia(range) 1.3(0.8to1.3)
3.6.2 LowPressureSteam
LPsteamconditionsfromtheNGCCplantareshowninTable35.ThePCClicensorswereaskedto
specify their LP steam demands (quantity and battery limit conditions such as pressure and
temperature)tomeettheirspecificprocessrequirements.Nexantwasresponsiblefordetermining
howthePCCLPsteamdemandattherequiredconditionswasmet.
3.6.3 IntermediatePressureSteam
IPsteamconditionsfromtheNGCCplantareshowninTable35.ThePCClicensorswereaskedto
specify their IP steam demands (quantity and battery limit conditions such as pressure and
temperature)tomeettheirspecificprocessrequirements.Nexantwasresponsiblefordetermining
howthePCCIPsteamdemandattherequiredconditionswasmet.
3.6.4 HighPressureSteam
HP steam conditions from the NGCC plant are shown in Table 35. Typically, aminebased PCC
operationdoesnotrequiretheuseofHPsteam.However,duetothelimitedavailabilityofLPandIP
steaminthePozaRicaNGCCplantsHRSGunit,itmaybenecessarytowithdrawaportionofthe
main HP steam, let down its pressure through a back pressure turbine (BPT) to recover power,
beforesendingthenowlowpressuresteamtothePCC.
3.6.5 SteamCondensateReturn
The PCC reboiler and reclaimer steam condensate is pumped back to the power plant hot at the
followingPCCB/Lconditions:
MinPressure,bara(psia) 9.0(130)**
Temperature,C(F) PCCLicensortoSpecify
**Basedondeaeratorpressureof89psia+40psiPallowanceforheadandlinedrops
3.6.6 CoolingWater
ThePozaRicaNGCCplantutilizesthreemechanicaldraftandevaporativerecirculatingwetcooling
towers(CT).EachCT,whichconsistsofthreecoolingcells,isdedicatedtooneofthethreesteam
turbine surface condensers, as illustrated in Figure 33. The cooling water (CW) supply and return
conditionsatthePCCB/LconditionsareshowninTable36.
Figure33PozaRicaNGCCPlantExistingCoolingTowerArrangement
Existing Cooling Tower #1
STG #1
Surface Condenser
STG #2
Surface Condenser
STG #3
Surface Condenser

Table36PozaRicaCoolingTowerDesignConditions
MaximumCWSupplyTemperature,oC(oF) 27.5(81.5)
WaterCirculationRate,gpm(lpm) 11,000(41,600)/cell
33,000(124,800)/tower
CTDesignDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 311.8(295.5)
EstimatedMaximumCWReturnTemperature,oC(oF) 37.5(99.5)

There is a configuration for the postPCC retrofit Poza Rica NGCC plant operation, whereby it is
possible to shut off one of the three steam turbines due to a large quantity of HP steam being
extractedforPCC,leavingonlytheothertwosteamturbinesinoperation.Thiscouldpotentiallyfree
uponeofthethreeexistingCTstoprovidesomeofthePCCcoolingduty.
However,afterNexantsvisittothePozaRicaNGCCplant,itwasunderstoodthatCFEwouldliketo
retain maximum operational flexibility after PCC retrofit by keeping all three steam turbines and
theirrespectiveCTsavailable.ItisthereforeestablishedthatthePCCcoolingdutywillbesupplied
bynewCTssimilarindesigntothatdescribedinTable36.
3.6.7 ProcessWater
ProcesswaterforPCCwaterwashandsolventreclamationisavailablefromtheNGCCplantsteam
condensatesystematthefollowingconditionsshowninTable37.
Table37PozaRicaProcessWaterSupplyConditions
Temperature,oC(oF) 43.3(110)
Pressure,bara(psia) 13.2(191.7)
Quantity LicensortoSpecify
3.7 PROCESSWASTESTREAMS
3.7.1 ProcessCondensates
The PCC plant is designed to minimize purging of solventcontaining process condensates. Any
solventcontainingprocesscondensateisrecycledwithinthePCCasmakeupwaterforreplacement
solventsolutions.NonsolventcontainingpurgewaterisusedasmakeuptotheCT.
3.7.2 ReclaimerByproducts
Aminebased PCC plants sometimes produce a sludge byproduct from the amine reclaimer. The
materialisconsideredhazardous,andisassumedthatitistruckedoffsiteforincinerationbyathird
party.Anallowanceisusedtoaccountforthecostofdisposingthereclaimingwaste.
3.8 ENVIRONMENTALANDEMISSIONSREQUIREMENTS
Table38liststheassumedemissionslimitsforthePozaRicaNGCCplant.PCCLicensorswereasked
iftheycouldmeettheseemissionscriteria.
Table38EnvironmentalTargets
Pollutant NOM085SEMARNATLimit(Mexico)
NOx 110mole/mole(ppmV)
SO2 N/A
ParticulateMatter(PM) N/A
VOC 0.0025lb/MMBtu(0.0011gm/MJ)[EPAlimitsfor
PCBoilers]
4. TECHNOLOGYDESCRIPTIONOFINTERESTEDPCCLICENSORS
AsstatedinSection2.5,eachofthesixinterestedPCClicensorswereissuedaquestionnaire,shown
in Appendix C, requesting information pertaining to their PCC technology. The licensors were also
provided a copy of the Design Basis, similar to that presented in Section 3, in which the feed and
productspecifications,utilitiesandotherB/Linterfacespecificationswereclearlydefined.Thiswas
done to ensure that all licensors would provide the necessary process design information in
accordancetothePozaRicaNGCCsspecificationsandminimizeanyinconsistenciesamongthem.
Withinthequestionnaire,NexantalsorequestedthePCClicensorstoprovidepublishedarticleson
their technology, complete with process descriptions, in order to better understand their design
operation. A separate section of the questionnaire also asked the PCC licensors to list their
technologys operating experience, ranging from process design package preparation to actual
commercialoperation.Thelicensorswerealsoaskedspecificallytoprovideoperatingexperience,if
any,ofcapturingCO2fromNGCCfluegas.
This section provides a brief description of each participating PCC licensors technology, based on
publiclyavailablearticlespublishedbythelicensor.Alsoshowninthissectionisasummaryofthe
operatingexperienceachievedbyeachtechnology.
4.1 ALSTOMADVANCEDAMINEPROCESS(AAP)
4.1.1 Introduction
AlstomPowerandTheDowChemicalCompanyhavejointlydevelopedanAdvancedAmineProcess
(AAP)8,9,10with UCARSOLTM FGC3000 amine solvent for the capture of CO2 from fossil fuel power
plantgeneratedfluegas.TheAAPhasbeenoptimizedforapplicationtowardscombustionfluegas
underatmosphericpressurefrom powerplantoperations.Alstom claims thatitsprocess presents
less solvent degradation compared to conventional MEA and is designed for stringent emissions
mitigationandcontrol.
4.1.2 OperatingExperience
Note:ND=NotDisclosedbylicensorotherthancitingthetotalpackagesreferencedbelow.
8Baburao,B.,etal.AdvancedAmineProcessTechnologyOperationsandResultsfromDemonstrationFacilityatEDFLe
Havre.GreenhouseGasControlTechnologies(GHGT)12
9Chopin,F.ResultsoftheCO CaptureDemonstrationFacilityatEDFsLeHavrePowerPlant:StatusofALSTOMs
2
AdvancedAminesProcess.PowerGenEurope2014,Cologne,Germany
10Vitse,F.,Baburao,B.,etal.Technologyandpilotplantresultsoftheadvancedamineprocess.GHGT10
Table41AlstomAAPOperatingExperience
NGCC CoalFired Others Total
CommercialPlants 0 0 0 0
DemonstrationPlants 0 0 0 0
PilotPlants 0 2 2 4
FEEDPackagesPrepared ND ND ND 2
ProcessDesignPackagesPrepared ND ND ND 6

LargestPilotPlantOperatingExperience
Location: LeHavre,France
Fluegassource: Coal
CO2recoveryrate: 90%
3
CO2recovered,Nm /hr: 0.75
Currentoperatingstatus: Shutdown

LargestFEEDPackagePrepared
Location: Belchatow,Poland
Fluegassource: Lignitecoal
CO2recovered,Nm3/hr 117,000
Currentstatus: FEEDcompleted;Projectterminatedbyclient

LargestProcessDesignPackagePrepared
Location: Karlsruhe,Germany
Fluegassource: Coal
Currentstatus: Packagecompleted;Noactualproject
4.1.3 ProcessDescription
Alstoms Advanced Flow Scheme (AFS) process configuration tested at the CO2 Capture
DemonstrationFacilityatlectricitdeFrances(EDF)LeHavrePowerPlantisaproprietarydesign,
developedtoprovideminimalenergyconsumptionleadingtoreducedoperatingcosts.Thecarbon
capturefacilityisbasedonAlstomsAAPtechnology,whichAlstomhasjointlydevelopedwithThe
DowChemicalCompany.TheprocessusesUCARSOLFGC3000,anaminebasedsolventsupplied
by Dow. Alstom plans to offer the AAP technology for large scale commercial fossil fuel power
plants, based upon successfully demonstrated experience at the Charleston pilot plant in West
Virginia,USAandthecurrentLeHavreprojectinFrance.
The process features an absorber column equipped with an integrated water wash section, a
regeneration column equipped with an integrated direct contact cooler (DCC), associated heat
managementequipment,anoxygenstripperandanelectrodialysisreclaimerunit.Figure41shows
asimplifiedschematicoftheAAPprocess.
Figure41SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheAlstomAAP
Exhaust gas after flue gas conditioning to reduce the SOx content below 20 ppmv and cooling is
introducedtotheabsorbercolumnatbelow40C.Aboosterfan(notshowninFigure41)provides
thepressurenecessarytodrivethegasthroughtheCO2absorber.Intheabsorber,theCO2inthe
fluegasreactswiththeleanaminesolutionflowingcountercurrentfromthetop.Thetreatedgas
exits the top of the column after flowing through a water wash section to minimize amine vapor
losses. The absorber columns contain structured packing layered in several beds and selected for
optimal mass transfer and hydraulic characteristics. Within the absorber section, there is heat
managementequipmentinplacetocontrolthetemperaturetomaximizetheCO2loadingintherich
solvent,hencereducingsolventflowrate.
The rich amine exiting the CO2 absorber is sent to the regenerator column via a heat exchanger
network.Intheregeneratorcolumn,theCO2isdesorbedandtheamineisregeneratedtobesent
back to the absorber for further absorption. The regenerator is a packed column and is thermally
driven with stripping steam. The rich solution flows down the regenerator countercurrently to
rising steam produced by boiling the lean solution exiting the bottom of the column in a reboiler
unit fed with saturated steam. The regenerator includes heat integration features that minimize
saturatedsteamconsumption.
Afterflowingthroughtherichleansolventcrossheatexchanger,theleansolutionreturningfrom
thebottomoftheregeneratorisfurthercooledinaleancoolerbeforeitisintroducedtothetopof
theabsorber.
The exiting CO2 gas product is saturated with water and is cooled in a top section located in the
regeneratorwheremostofthewateriscondensed.Thecondensedwateristhensentbacktothe
amine loop or to the makeup water system to ensure neutral water balance. The CO2 product is
suitableforfurthercompressionandpipelinetransportation.
Amine solvent management is achieved via the use of mechanical filters and an activated carbon
bedfilter.Heatstablesalts(HSS)areformedfromtraceacidgasproductsinthefluegasandfrom
oxidation degradation products. These have to be removed to prevent buildup within the amine
loop.Causticsodaisusedduringtheaminereclamationprocesstoneutralizeanyheatstablesalts
duringthefiltrationprocess.
Theaminesolventloopisalsoequippedwithanoxygenstripper(notshowninFigure41)toreduce
amineoxidativedegradationduetooxygenabsorbedfromthefluegas.Theoxygenstrippertreats
the rich amine solvent exiting the CO2 absorber, where it is exposed to a reduced pressure
environmenttopromotedesorptionofoxygengas.Theoxygenstripperisdesignedtoextractmost
of the absorbed oxygen from the amine solvent stream with minimal impacts on solvent
compositionorCO2loadingofthesolvent.
4.2 BASFOASEBLUEPROCESS
4.2.1 Introduction
OASEblue11,12,13,14,15wasjointlydevelopedbyBASFandLinde,specificallyasanoptimizedlarge
scalePCCtechnology.BASFbelievesthatitstechnologycanoffersignificantbenefitscomparedto
othersolventbasedprocessesasitaimstoreducetheregenerationenergyrequirementsbyusing
novel solvents that are very stable under coalfired power plant feed gas conditions. With low
11Stoffregen,T.,Rigby,S.,etal.Pilotscaledemonstrationofanadvancedaqueousaminebasedpostcombustioncapture
technologyforCO2capturefrompowerplantfluegases.GHGT12
12Krishnamurthy,K.SlipstreampilotplantdemonstrationofanaminebasedpostcombustioncapturetechnologyforCO
2
capturefromcoalfiredpowerplantfluegas.2012NETLCO2CaptureTechnologyMeeting,Pittsburgh,PA
13Moser,P.,Sieder,G.,etal.EnablingPostCombustionCaptureOptimizationThePilotPlantProjectatNiederaussem.
GHGT09
14Moser,P.,Sieder,G.,etal.ThepostcombustioncapturepilotplantNiederaussemResultsofthefirsthalfofthetesting
programme.GHGT10
15Moser,P.,Sieder,G.,etal.Enhancementandlongtermtestingofoptimizedpostcombustioncapturetechnology
ResultsofthesecondphaseofthetestingprogrammeattheMiederaussempilotplant.GHGT11
energyconsumption,lowsolventlossesandanexceptionallyflexibleoperatingrange,BASFclaims
thattheOASEbluetechnologyistheparamounttechnologyforuseinfluegascarboncapturefrom
sourcessuchasfossilpowergenerationplants.
Note:ND=NotDisclosedbylicensor
Table42BASFOASEblueOperatingExperience
PilotPlants 0 1 0 1
FEEDPackagesPrepared 0 1 0 1

LargestDemonstrationPlantOperatingExperience
Location: NCCCatWilsonville,Alabama,USA
Fluegassource: Coal
CO2recovered,Nm3/hr: 380810
Currentoperatingstatus: Inoperation

Location: Niederaussem,Germany
3
CO2recovered,Nm /hr: 160

Location: Germany
3
CO2recovered,Nm /hr 363,000
Currentstatus: Projectcancelled

Location: Texas,USA
Fluegassource: Coal
Currentstatus: Underevaluationbyclient

A simplified PFD of a PCC plant utilizing BASF OASE blue technology is shown in Figure 42. It
utilizes a series of advanced equipment and process design options incorporated into the Linde
BASF PCC plant design, with the ultimate goal of minimizing the energy requirements for CO2
recoveryandcompression.Noticeableprocessconfigurationvariationsandimprovementsincludea
column that integrates the DCC, CO2 absorption, and water wash processes, as well as a flue gas
blowerlocateddownstreamoftheabsorberandwaterwashunits.
Figure42SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheBASFOASEblueProcess
AsillustratedinFigure42,thenovelPCCdesignfullyintegratestheDCCunitwiththeabsorberand
water wash units within a common tower. The DCC has a dual function of: (1) cooling down the
incomingfluegasstreamtoatemperaturesuitableforefficientCO2absorption;and(2)reducethe
SO2concentrationtoaslowalevelaspossiblebyutilizinganaqueoussolutionofsodiumhydroxide
(NaOH)toneutralizetheSO2.ThisminimizessolventdegradationduetotheformationofSO2amine
complexes,whichismoreimportantforacoalfiredfluegasthanforNGCCapplication.
ThefluegasfeedstreamtothePCCplantistypicallyatatmosphericpressureandwatersaturated.
AnaqueoussolutionofNaOHisinjectedintothewaterNaOHcirculationloop,andthensprayedat
thetopoftheDCCunit.TheliquidfromthebottomoftheDCCbedisfedtoacirculatingpump;the
excesswater,condensedfromthefluegas,andalongwithdissolvedNa2SO3,iswithdrawnfromthe
loopandsenttoanacidneutralizationandwatertreatmentfacility.Itisexpectedthatanintegrated
coolingwatersystemisusedtosupplycoolingwatertoallprocessunits,includingthePCCandCO2
compressionplants.
TheCO2leanBASFOASEblueaminebasedsolventsolutionflowsdownthroughtheabsorberbed
and absorbs CO2 from the flue gas, which flows countercurrent to the solvent flow and into the
water wash unit. The absorption process of CO2 with aminebased solvents is exothermic and
increasesthetemperatureofthefluegas,whichconsequentlyreducestheequilibriumcontentof
CO2 in the liquidphase. It is important to maintain a low, relatively constant temperature
throughout the entire absorber. This is achieved by cooling the CO2lean amine solvent solution
withinanexternalcoolerbeforeitisinjectedtothetopoftheabsorber.
Additionally,thetemperaturerisewithinthecolumncanbesuppressedviainterstagecooling,as
shown in Figure 42. Linde has developed a patentprotected, gravitydriven interstage cooler
designthateliminatestheneedforanexternalpumpandconsequentlyleadstoasimplifieddesign
andreducedcostfortheabsorberwithinterstagecooler.
The LindeBASF PCC technology utilizes advanced structured packing for the absorber to promote
efficient hydraulic contact of gas and liquid phases. The packing increases CO2 reaction rates with
BASF'sOASEbluesolvent,whilealsofacilitatingafastapproachtoequilibriumCO2concentration
in the liquidphase. The capacity of the absorber is consequently increased. In addition, the
advancedstructured packingreducesthepressure dropacrossthecolumn, whichin turnleadsto
reducedfluegasblowerrequirements.
TheCO2richsolvent,heatedupintherich/leanheatexchanger,isinjectedatthetopofthesolvent
stripper columnsectionconsistingof twopacked beds.Thereboilerat thebottomof thestripper
columnusestheheatofcondensationofLPsteamtovaporizeCO2andwaterfromtheconcentrated
solvent,whichisdirectedtothelean/richsolventheatexchanger.Asmallfractionofcarriedsolvent
from the top of the stripper bed is removed from the CO2 stream in the wash section above the
stripper bed. The CO2 stream leaving the top of the stripper column is saturated with water and
cooled in the condenser. The vapor phase, containing more than 95% CO2, is separated from the
liquidphaseinsidetheseparatorandroutedtotheCO2compressionsection.
ThemostenergyintensiveaspectofaminebasedCO2captureisLPsteamconsumptionwithinthe
reboiler for solvent regeneration. BASF's OASE blue solvent claims to reduce significantly the
energydemandforsolventregeneration.Thisminimizespowerplantefficiencylossandultimately
decreases the cost of produced electricity. The LindeBASF advanced PCC technology also
incorporatesanoptiontoheatthesolventwithinthestripperbyemployinganinterstageheater.
Theheatercanuselowertemperaturesteamthanthereboiler,andthusreduceLPsteamdemand
fromthesteamturbines.
4.3 FLUORECONAMINEFGPLUSSM
4.3.1 Introduction
Ascited,Fluorhasbuiltorlicensed29amineplantsworldwidebasedonitsproprietaryEconamine
FGPlusSM(EFG+)16,17,18,19technology.TheEFG+technologyisaproven,costeffectiveprocessforthe
removal of CO2 from low pressure gases containing oxygen, such as flue gases derived from coal,
fueloil,naturalgasboilers,andgasturbineexhaust.
TheEFG+technologywasoneofthefirstprocessestogainextensiveprovenoperatingexperiencein
theremovalofCO2fromhighoxygencontentfluegases.TheEFG+technologyiswellknownfromits
successattheBellinghamplantinBellingham,Massachusetts.TheBellinghamplantoperatedwitha
90%CO2recoveryfromaverychallengingfluegas:3.5vol%(dry)CO2andupto15vol%(dry)O2.
Table43FluorsEconamineFGPlusSMOperatingExperience
CommercialPlants ND ND ND 29
DemonstrationPlants ND ND ND ND
PilotPlants ND ND ND 2

LargestCommercialPlantOperatingExperience
Location: Bellingham,Massachusetts
Fluegassource: NGCC
CO2recoveryrate: 80%85%
CO2recovered,Nm3/hr: 7,000
Currentoperatingstatus: Shutdown(Inoperationfrom19912005)

16Radgen,P.,RodeH.,Reddy,S.,Yonkoski,J.:LessonsLearnedfromtheOperationofa70TonneperDayPostCombustion
PilotPlantattheCoalFiredPowerPlantinWilhelmshaven,Germany.GHGT12
17Reddy,S.,Bhakta,M.,Gilmartin,J.,Yonkoski,J.:CostEffectiveCO CapturefromFlueGasforIncreasingMethanolPlant
2
Production.GHGT12
18Scherffius,J.,Reddy,S.,Klympyan,J.,Armpriester,A.LargeScaleCO CaptureDemonstrationPlantUsingFluors
2
EconamineFGPlusSMTechnologyatNRGsWAParishElectricGeneratingStation.GHGT11
19Scherffius,J.,Reddy,S.,Yonkoski,J.,Radgen,P.InitialResultsfromFluorsCO CaptureDemonstrationPlantUsing
2
SM
EconamineFGPlus TechnologyatE.ONKraftwerkesWilshelmshavenPowerPlant.GHGT11
Location: Wilhelmshaven,Germany
Fluegassource: Coal

Location: Texas,USA
Fluegassource: Coal
Currentstatus: Completed

AtypicalPFDofFluorsEFG+processforCO2captureisshowninFigure43.Thefluegasentersthe
DCCtoreducethewatercontentofthefluegasandtofurtherreducetheSO2concentrationofthe
gastoprotectthesolventfromformingHSS.TheSO2concentrationaftertheDCCis<5ppm.
Figure43SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheFluorEconamineFGPlusSMProcess
The EFG+ technology uses a chemical solvent for the capture of the CO2 from the flue gas. In the
absorber column, CO2 is absorbed into the solvent. This is an exothermic reaction and causes the
temperature inside the column to increase as the CO2 is absorbed from the flue gas. This
temperature increase lowers the equilibrium CO2 loading in the solvent, which lowers the rich
solventloadingandincreasesthesolventcirculationrate.
Absorberintercoolingisincludedforsolventflowrateoptimization.Withtheabsorberintercooling
configuration,heatisremovednearthebottomoftheabsorbercolumnviaanexternalcooler.The
locationoftheintercoolerwasselectedtomaintainhighreactionratesnearthetopandmiddleof
the absorber, while maximizing the solvent CO2carrying capacity near the absorber bottom. By
removingmuchoftheheatofreactioninthislocation,higherrichsolventloadingsareachievedi.e.
the amount of CO2 carried by a given amount of solvent can be increased. This results in a lower
solvent circulation rate requirement. Besides reducing the solvent pump power demands, since
some of the regeneration energy demand for solvent stripping is the sensible heating of the
circulatingsolvent,alowersolventcirculationratealsoresultsinalowerenergyrequirementforthe
plant.Theremovaloftheheatofreactionandthereducedsolventflowratealsomeanthatthesize
oftheabsorbercanbereduced,whichtranslatestoeitherlowercapitalcostforafixedCO2capture
rateorahighercapturerateforafixedabsorptioncolumndiameter.Forabsorptioncolumnsthat
handlelargeflowsfromcoalorNGCCbasedfluegas,reductionsincolumndiameterarecriticalto
avoidtheuseofmultipleabsorbertrains.
In the regeneration column, lean vapor compression is implemented to reduce the overall energy
demandforstrippingCO2fromtherichsolvent.Inthisconfiguration,leansolventfromthebottom
of the regeneration column is flashed at near atmospheric pressure. The resulting steam that is
flashedofftheleansolventiscompressedbytheLeanVaporCompressorandreturnedtothesump
ofthecolumnasadditionalstrippingsteam.Inthisway,moreheatisappliedtothebottomofthe
column,whichreducesthesteamextractedfromthepowerplantssteamsystemandincreasingthe
efficiencyofthestrippingprocess.
TheEFG+solvent,likeallchemicalsolvents,formsHSSinthepresenceofstrongacids,suchasSO2.
When the solvent is degraded, its ability to bind CO2 from the flue gas is reduced, effectively
loweringtheconcentrationandCO2carryingcapacityofthecirculatingsolvent.Furthermore,high
concentrationsofHSSareknowntocauseincreasedratesofcorrosioninthecaptureplant.Assuch,
theHSSproductsmustberemovedfromsolution.
The EFG+ process achieves this by the reclaiming process, whereby the solvent is heated in the
presence of a base to free the solvent from the strong acid, thus recovering and returning to the
process a majority of the solvent. For the EFG+ solvent, it is reclaimed at a relatively low
temperature, making reclaiming a good solution for the removal of HSS. Furthermore, Fluor has
developed an advanced reclaiming configuration that reclaims at a lower pressure and lower
temperaturethantypicalreclaimingsystems.Withthisconfiguration,thesolventdegradationand
lossesthatareassociatedwiththereclaimingprocedurearereduced,asarethewasteproduction
anddisposalcosts.
4.4 HTCPURENERGY
4.4.1 Introduction
Ascited,HTCPurenergyoffersanadvancedamineCO2capturetechnology,whichembracesseveral
newconceptsinpostcombustioncapture.Thesystemhasbeenengineeredtoreducecapitaland
operating costs while at the same time delivering superior performance; reducing energy usage,
loweringemissions,andimprovingthequalityofCO2productcaptured.
HTChastakenallofitsknowledgefromdesigninglargecoalfired,mediumsizedsteamgenerators
andsmallerindustrialgradeCO2capturesystems,andcombinedthemintoaproductthathasthe
capabilitytomeettheproductioncapacityandtheemissionstoatmosphereatreducedcapitaland
operatingcosts.TheLowCostDesign(LCDesign)20,21,22includesseveralfeaturesthatcontributeto
loweringthecostssuchasmodulardesignapproach,optimizedprocessflow,formulatedsolvents,
andoptimizedoperatingparameters.
Table44HTCPurenergyPCCOperatingExperience
DemonstrationPlants ND ND ND 3

Location: FerrybridgePowerStation,UK
Fluegassource: Coal
Currentoperatingstatus: Shutdown
20ElMoudir,W.,Aboudheir,A.,Fairchild,J.:HTCSolventReclaimerSystematSearlesValleyMineralsFacilityinTrona,
California.GHGT12
21ElMoudir,W.,Aboudheir,A.:DesignParametersAffectingtheCommercialPostCombustionCO2CapturePlants.GHGT
11
22ElMoudir,W.,Aboudheir,A.:PerformanceofFormulatedSolventinHandlingofEnrichedCO FlueGasStream.GHGT10
2

Location: ASCOTestCenter,Switzerland
Fluegassource: NaturalGasBoiler

Location: Norway
Fluegassource: NGCC

Figure44showstherecommendedoverallHTCLCDesignTMPFDforlargescaleCO2captureplants.
Figure44SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheHTCLCDesignTM
The flue gas rate is handled in the PCC unit consisting of three major sections: DCC, absorption
column,andstrippercolumn.DCCismainlyrequiredtoconditionandcoolthefluegastemperature
before entering to the absorber section. The DCC will produce excess water from water
condensation during the cooling process, which can be used for water makeup after filtration
processtoremoveanyflyashorsolidfineparticles,asinthecaseforacoalfiredfluegas.Inthe
currentHTCLCDesignTMprocessconfiguration,theexcesswaterfromtheDCCissenttothetopof
thewashingsectionasawatermakeupandtowash/cooltheoffgasinordertoreducethesolvent
lossconsiderably(>98%)andtomaintaintheplantinwaterbalance.Therefluxwaterisdirectedto
the bottom of the absorber. This imparts some benefits on the overall energy utilization and the
capital/operationcostreduction.
Not shown in Figure 44 is HTCs delta Reclaimer (Reclaimer) system, which is a patented
technology based on a simple vacuum unit operation. HTC claims that the Reclaimer has the
capabilitytoreclaimsingleandmixedaminesorglycolsolventsmoreefficientlyatminimumcapital
and operating costs. It is designed to remove all highboiling degradation products, ionic species,
impurities and fine suspended solids from the chemical solvents. It is also designed to operate
continuouslybyfeedingthecontaminatedsolventtothedeltaReclaimerasaslipstreamorfroma
storagetank.
Figure 45 depicts the Reclaimer process unit operation. It consists of an inline mixer unit for
mixing the feed solvent with chemical solutions, solvent evaporator unit with sidearm heater to
maintainthesolventatspecifiedtemperature,condenserunitwithliquid/gasseparatortorecover
the solvent, vacuum pump unit to maintain the required operating pressure, and solvent
condensatepump.
Sodiumhydroxide,50%NaOH,andsodiumcarbonate,28%Na2CO3,havebeenusedasthebasesto
successfully liberate the amines from the accumulated HSS in the feed solvent. The amount of
chemicalinjectionintheinlinemixerdependsontheHSSconcentrationandthefeedrate.Themain
utilitiesusedtooperatethereclaimerareasmallslipstreamofsaturatedsteamat2.8barg(40psig),
coolingwaterataveragetemperatureof25C(77F),processwater,andinstrumentair.
In the evaporator of the Reclaimer, the concentration of the salts and the highboiling organic
compounds (degradation products) increases as reclaimed solvent is evaporated, condensed and
thenreturnedtotheCO2plantforreuse.Whenthewastesreachahighconcentration,darkening
the accumulated fluid, part of the accumulated waste is withdrawn from the bottom of the
evaporator, while the reclaimer remains in continuous operation. Any noncondensable gases,
whichareinverysmallamounts,areremovedbythevacuumpump.
Figure45SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheHTCdeltaReclaimerSystem
4.5 MHIKMCDRPROCESS
4.5.1 Introduction
MHIisknowntoofferlargescale,highperformanceandreliableCO2recoveryplantsforapplication
inawidevarietyofindustries.MHIhasdevelopedanadvanced,commerciallyavailableCO2recovery
process: the Kansai Mitsubishi Carbon Dioxide recovery (KM CDR) Process23,24,25,26, which delivers
economicperformanceforplantsofwiderangingcapacities.
TheMHICO2recoveryprocessutilizes"KS1",anadvancedhinderedaminesolvent,inconjunction
with a line of special proprietary equipment. The technology was developed through cooperation
between MHI and Kansai Electric Power Company, Inc. (KANSAI). It is based on an advanced and

23Tsujiuchi,T.,Yonekawa,T.,Miyamoto,O.,etal.:ProjectUpdateoftheDevelopmentoftheKMCDRProcess.3rdPost
CombustionCaptureConference(PCCC3)
24Iijima,M.,Nagayasu,T.,etal.:MHIsEnergyEfficientFlueGasCO CaptureTechnologyandLargeScaleCCS
2
DemonstrationTestatCoalFirePowerPlantsinUSA.MitsubishiHeavyIndustriesTechnicalReviewVol.48No.1(March
2011)
25Hirata,T.,Yonekawa,T.,Tsujiuchi,T.,etal.:CurrentStatusofMHICO CapturePlanttechnology,500TPDCCS
2
DemonstrationofTestResultsandReliableTechnologiesAppliedtoCoalFiredFlueGas.GHGT12
26Endo,T.,Kajiya,Y.,Nagayasu,H.,Iijima,M.,etal:CurrentStatusofMHICO CapturePlanttechnology,LargeScale
2
DemonstrationprojectandRoadMaptoCommercializationforCoalFiredFlueGasApplication.GHGT10
proven technology for recovering CO2 from various flue gas sources. MHI claims that users who
adopt the KM CDR process will see tangible benefits such as lower energy consumption, lower
solventdegradationandlowcorrosionrates.
Table45MHIKMCDRProcessOperatingExperience
CommercialPlants ND ND ND 11

Location: NRGWAParishPowerPlant,Thompsons,Texas,USA
Fluegassource: Coal
Currentoperatingstatus: Startupduein4thquarter2016

Location: Mobile,Alabama,USA
Fluegassource: Coal

Location: Osaka,Japan
Fluegassource: SimulatedNGCC

Location: NotDisclosed
Fluegassource: NGCC
3
CO2recovered,Nm /hr 75,000
Location: Houston,Texas,USA
Fluegassource: Coal
CO2recovered,Nm3/hr NotDisclosed
Currentstatus: Completed;plantisunderconstructionandduetostartupin
4thquarter2016
Figure46showsasimplifiedPFDoftheMHIKMCDRProcess.
Figure46SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheMHIKMCDRProcess
IntheMHIKMCDRProcess,theCO2containingfluegasisintroducedintothefluegasquencher,
whereitisfirstcooledthenpressurizedbytheblowerinstalleddownstreamofthequencher.The
fluegasisthendeliveredintotheCO2absorberthatisfilledwithpacking.Thefluegasentersthe
bottom section of the absorber and reacts with the alkaline absorption solvent, KS1TM, on the
surfaceofthepacking.TheKS1TMabsorbstheCO2whiletheremainingfluegasisventedatthetop
of the absorber and into the atmosphere. The KS1TM solvent, now rich in CO2, is pumped and
transferred to the regenerator where the CO2 is separated from the KS1TM solvent via steam
stripping,resultinginregenerationoftheKS1TMforreuseintheabsorberagain.
Thecostofthesteamusedtoregeneratetheabsorptionsolventcomprisesthegreatestportionof
operating costs of CO2 recovery plants. MHI and KANSAI constructed a pilot test plant with a
capacityof2metrictonsofCO2perdayattheNankoPowerPlantofKansaiElectricPowerCo.,Inc.
nearOsaka,withtesting commencing in1991.Theseactivitiesconductedat thispilot plantledto
thedevelopmentandcommercializationoftheKS1absorptionsolvent.Moreover,MHIhasbeen
workingtodevelopnewabsorptionsolventsandoptimizetheprocessoperationinordertofulfilits
goaloffurtherreducingPCCenergyconsumption.
With regards to emissions and the generation of waste streams, MHI, through numerous amine
emission test campaigns in its small pilot plant and laboratory scale test, discovered that solvent
emissionsincreasedsignificantlywithSO3concentrationinthefluegasattheCO2absorberinlet,a
problemthatismorerelevanttocoalfiredfluegas.
MHI has since developed an amine emission reduction system for the KMCDR process and the
system was evaluated at its demonstration plant at Plant Barry in Mobile, Alabama. At the
demonstrationplant,asulfurburnerwasinstalledtosupplySO3tothefluegas.Inthecaseofusing
the conventional washing and demister system in the CO2 absorber, the test data showed that
amine emissions clearly increased with SO3 concentration at the quencher inlet. However, when
MHIsamineemissionreductiontechnologywastested,amineemissionsweresignificantlyreduced
tolessthan1/10comparedwiththeconventionalsystem.MHIalsomeasuredtotalVolatileOrganic
Compound (VOC) emissions and verified that the emissions level of the commercial scale CO2
captureplantusingKMCDRProcesswereacceptable.
4.6 SHELLCANSOLVCO2CAPTURETECHNOLOGY
4.6.1 Introduction
TheShellCansolvPCCprocessutilizesCansolvDC20127,28,29,30astheabsorbent.Itisaregenerable
solvent,whichShellclaimstohavehigherloadingcapacityandrequireslowersteamconsumption
comparedtoconventionalabsorbentsinPCCapplications.
The Shell Cansolv technology is ideal for use in coalfired and natural gas power plants, where
enormousamountsofCO2aregenerated.ItisalsosuitableforcapturingCO2fromboilerfluegasin
smallerscaleapplicationsintheminingandchemicalindustries.ThepureCO2productoutputbythe
ShellCansolvtechnologyenablesEORorCCUSdownstreamoftheplant.
27Stephenne,K.:StartUpofWorldsFirstCommercialPostCombustionCoalFiredCCSProject:ContributionofShell
CansolvtoSaskPowerBoundaryDamICCSProject.GHGT12
28Singh,A,Stephenne,K.:ShellCansolvCO capturetechnology:AchievementfromFirstCommercialPlant.GHGT12
2
29Campbell,M.:TechnologyInnovation&AdvancementsforShellCansolvCO capturesolvents.GHGT12
2
30Shaw,D.:CansolvCO Capture:TheValueofIntegration.GHGT9
2
Table46ShellCansolvCO2CaptureTechnologyOperatingExperience
DemonstrationPlants ND ND ND ND
PilotPlants 1 4 4 9

Location: Estevan,Saskatchewan,Canada
Fluegassource: Coal

Location: Aberdeen,Scotland
Fluegassource: NGCC
Currentstatus: PreFinalInvestmentDecision

Figure47showsapreliminarysimplifiedPFDof theShellCansolvcaptureplant.TheCansolvCO2
captureplantiscomprisedofthefollowingmajorcomponents:(1)Prescrubber:tosubcoolfluegas
anddecreasetheSO2leveltobelow5ppmv;(2)CO2Absorber:toabsorbtheCO2inCansolvDC201
solvent; (3) CO2 Stripper: to regenerate the solvent and release CO2, producing a highpurity CO2
productstream;and(4)Aminepurificationunit:toremoveHSSanddegradationproductsfromthe
Cansolvsolventandminimizesolventmakeup.
Figure47SimplifiedProcessSchematicoftheShellCansolvPCCPlant
PriortoenteringtheCO2absorber,thefluegasispassedthroughtheprescrubbertobecooledina
coolingcolumnanddecreasethefluegasSO2content.Thisisachievedbyacooledwatercirculation
loop entering at the top of the cooling column and caustic injection equipped with packing and
countercurrentlycoolingthefluegas.
The flue gas is then ducted to the CO2 absorber, where CO2 is absorbed from the flue gas by
countercurrentcontactwiththeCansolvDC201solventinaverticalmultilevelpackedbedtower.
Thegasenteringtheabsorptionsectionofthecolumnwillhavesufficientpressuretoovercomethe
pressuredropinthepacking.ThetreatedfluegasleavingthetopoftheCO2absorptionsectionwill
pass through an advanced wash section to maintain water balance and control emissions to the
atmospherebeforebeingreleasedthroughthestack.
LeanabsorbentpumpsdeliverCO2leanabsorbentfromtankagethroughtheleanabsorbentcooler
to the top of the CO2 absorber. The lean absorbent is cooled to enhance the CO2 removal
performanceoftheabsorbent.
TherichabsorbentiscollectedinthebottomsumpoftheCO2absorberandispumpedbytherich
absorbentpumpsandheatedintheCO2lean/richheatexchangerstorecoverheatfromthehotlean
absorbentfromthestripperbottoms.Richabsorbentispipedtothetopofthestrippingsectionof
theCO2stripperforabsorbentregenerationandCO2recovery.Therichabsorbententersthecolumn
undertheCO2refluxrectificationpackingsectionandflowsontoagallerytraythatallowsforvapor
disengagement from the rich absorbent before it flows down to two stripping packing sections.
Steamgeneratedinthestripperreboilers,flowingcountercurrentlytotherichabsorbent,isusedto
striptherichabsorbentofCO2.
Steaminthestripper,carryingthestrippedCO2,flowsupthestrippercolumnintotherectification
packingsectionatthetop,whereaportionofthevaporiscondensedbyrecycledrefluxtoenrich
the overhead CO2 gas stream. The CO2 stripper overhead gas is partially condensed in the CO2
stripper overhead condensers. The twophase mixture then flows to the CO2 reflux accumulator
where the CO2 is separated from water. The reflux water is collected and returned to the CO2
stripper,whiletheCO2productgasissenttotheCO2compressionunit.
The Cansolv absorbent can accumulate HSS, as well as various degradation products over time,
whichmustberemovedfromtheabsorbenttomaintaintheguaranteedsystemperformance.The
Shell Cansolv process uses an ion exchange package, thermal reclaimer unit, and CO2 absorbent
filterstoremovethecontaminants.
Asmallfractionoftheleansolventflowiscirculatedthroughtheionexchangepackagetoremove
ionicdegradationproducts.Forthenonionicspecies,thethermalreclaimerunitisusedtoseparate
themfromtheactiveabsorbent.Itdistillstheabsorbentundervacuumconditionstoseparatethe
principleconstituentsoftheabsorbent;waterandabsorbent,leavingthedegradationproductsand
other contaminants in the bottom. Finally, cartridge type filter units are used depending on the
amountofparticulateandtracemetalcontaminantspresentintheabsorbent.
5. INTEGRATIONMETHODOLOGYFORFULLSCALEPCCWITHPOZARICA
NGCC
5.1 INTRODUCTION
An objective of the Task 1 study is to select the top three candidates from the six nearterm
commercialreadyPCCtechnologiesidentifiedinthePreScreeningexercise(describedinSection2)
for pilot plant testing within the next 3to5 years, followed by fullscale PCC demonstration
implementationinthePozaRicaNGCCpowerplant5to10yearsafterpilottesting.Boththepilot
andthefullscalePCCretrofitswillbefullyintegratedintotheexistingPozaRicaNGCCoperation.
The technology selection criterion is to be based on minimum impact on the overall power plant
economics,includingbothperformanceandcostimpacts,fromretrofittingafullscalePCCintothe
NGCC.ThefullscalePCCistorecover85%oftheCO2from100%ofthefluegasleavingtheNGCC
HRSG.ThePCCretrofitscopeincludesallnewsystemsandmodificationsofexistingNGCCsystems
necessarytodeliverthecapturedCO2tothepowerplantB/Lat152.7bara(2,215psia)forpipeline
transport to an EOR enduser. The transport pipeline and the EOR designs will be done by other
partiesandareoutsidethescopeofthisstudy.
Figure 51 is a simplified block flow diagram showing the major new systems, as well as
modifications to the existing Poza Rica plant, resulting from the PCC retrofit. The major changes
includethefollowing:
1. Newfluegasboostercompressionsystem
2. NewpostcombustionCO2capturesystem
3. NewCO2compressionanddehydrationsystem
4. Modificationstotheexistingplant:
a. HRSGstackmodificationsforfluegasextraction
b. Modificationsforsteamextractionandpowerrecovery
c. NewPCCcoolingtower
d. NewPCCcoolingwaterpumpandcirculationsystem
e. NewPCCdeionizedwatersystem
f. Modifiedrawwatersupply&treatmentsystems
g. Additionalinterconnectingductingandpiping
Ideally,processH&Mbalances,equipmentdesigns,performanceestimations,operatingandcapital
costs development for process selection purpose should be done by a single party to ensure
consistency in design and cost estimation philosophy and methodology. This philosophy is carried
out to the maximum extent possible for the Task 1 study. With the exception of the PCC system
(Item2inthelistabove),thedesignandcostestimatesforallothersystemslistedwerecarriedout
byNexantonaconsistentbasis.ThePCCsystemsareproprietary,andtheircorrespondingdesigns
andcostestimationsarecarriedoutbytheindividualPCClicensors.
Figure51PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCSimplifiedBFD
De-Superheater
Post-PCC Retrofit
Poza Rica NGCC BP Power
CO2-Lean Flue
Gas Vent from
Recovery Absorber top
Turbine
LP Sat
Condensat Steam
CO2-Rich
Flue Gas
HP SH PCC Plant
Steam Flue Gas CO2 Recovery
3 Identical Single Booster Blower
LP
CO2
S/C
CO2
PCC Plant Super-Critical
Three Identical Siemen Stm Turb: GT/HRSG: CO2 CO2 to EOR Via
1. 192,000 #/Hr HP SH Stm Each 1. 163 MW Siemen/Westinghouse GT Compression Pipeline
4. 580,000 #/Hr HP Stm
Existing NGCC, No Change Other NGCC Plant Modifications:

Design & Cost by Nexant 1. CW/CT Systems
Design & Cost by PCC Licensor 2. Raw & Filtered Water Systems
Design & Cost by Others 3. RO/De-Ionized Water System
4. Electrical Distribution Systems
5. Inter-Connecting Pipings
5.2 EVALUATIONMETHODOLOGY
The evaluation methodology used to determine the overall NGCC economic impact from the
additionofthefullsizePCCconsistedofthefollowing:
1. DevelopedaThermoFlexmodeloftheexistingPozaRicaNGCCtoserveasthebasisforall
PCCintegrationcasestobeevaluatedagainst.ThepredictedoverallNGCCperformanceis
benchmarked against the performance provided by Poza Rica to ensure accuracy of the
model.
2. Developed overall balances on power generation/consumption, cooling water loads, and

deionized water/filtered water/raw river water demands to define existing NGCC plant
support facility capacities. These served as the bases to determine postPCC retrofit
modifications,andnewsystemadditionsrequirements.
3. Developed a common PCC plant design basis to be used by all licensors to design their
respective PCC packages. The design basis identified the following metrics, which are
identicalforalllicensors:
fluegasfeedflow,composition,pressureandtemperatureconditions,
degreeofCO2recovery,
treatedfluegasventemissionspecifications,
interfaceutilityandoffsitecommoditysupplyandreturnconditions,and
timeframeandlocationoftheprovidedPCCcapitalcost.
4. Developedapreliminarygeneric30%MEAbasedPCCdesigntoserveasabenchmarkfor
comparison to ensure PCC licensor replies are reasonable. The preliminary generic 30%
MEAbased PCC design includes heat and material balances (HMB), equipment sizing,
majorequipment(ME)factoredcostestimates,andestimatedPCCchemicalconsumptions
andcosts.
In view of a) the short amount of time available for the PCC licensors to respond to the
questionnaire, b) the fact that their responses were provided voluntarily without
compensation,andc)theproprietarynatureofthePCClicensordata,Nexantanticipated
that some of the licensors may not be able to provide all of the interface information
necessaryforNGCCintegrationevaluation.ThegenericMEAdesignthusprovidesameans
toestimatethemissinglicensordataneededforNGCCintegration.
5. Developed designs and ME factored cost estimates for the new flue gas booster
compressor,andtheCO2compressionanddehydrationsystemstofullydefinetheoverall
NGCCinterfacerequirementsofthe30%MEAbasedPCCprocesssystems.
6. RevisedtheexistingPozaRicaNGCCThermoFlexmodeltointegratethegeneric30%MEA
PCC process interface steam/condensate demands to determine post PCCretrofit overall
steamcycleoperationandpowergeneration.
7. Developed overall balances for the postPCC retrofitted Poza Rica power generation/
consumption, cooling water loads, and deionized water/filtered water/raw river water
demandstodefineplantmodifications,andnewsystemadditionsneededtosupportfull
sizegeneric30%MEAPCCtechnology.
8. Developed designs and cost estimations of plant modifications and additions needed to
supportpostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaoperations.
9. PreparedpreliminaryplotlayoutstodeterminePCCplantlocationsandtoestimateinter
connectingpiperunsandcosts.
10. EstimatedincrementaloveralloperatingcostsbetweenpreandpostPCCretrofittedNGCC
operations.
11. Determinedtheimpactonoverallcostofelectricity(COE)afterintegratingthefullsize30%
MEAPCCoperationsintothePozaRicaNGCCpowerplantbasedonthedefinedcapitaland
operatingcosts.
12. Repeated above Steps 5 through 11 for each PCC technology based on capital cost and
interfacerequirementsprovidedbytherespectivePCCtechnologylicensororsupplier.
13. Determined therelativeeconomicsof thePCC technologiesbasedonleastimpacttothe

overallPozaRicaCOE.
5.3 EXISTING(PREPCCRETROFIT)POZARICANGCCMODELPERFORMANCE
5.3.1 SteamCyclePerformance
Keeping the same firing rate of 1,680 GJ/hr [LHV31] (1,595 MMBtu/hr [LHV]) of natural gas, the
ThermoFlexmodeled,singleSiemens/WestinghouseW501FGTgeneratesapproximately166MWe
of power. Exhaust from the GT goes through a single HRSG and produces roughly 261,300 kg/hr
(576,000lb/hr)of79bara/525C(1,152psia/977F)HPsteam,19,400kg/hr(42,800lb/hr)of14
bara/298C(198psia/569F)IPsteam,plus14,900kg/hr(32,800lb/hr)of5bara/179C(72psia/
354F)LPsteam.SteamfromthesingleHRSGgoestothreeidenticalSTGstogenerate82.5MWeof
power, or 27.5 MWe from each STG. Exhaust from each STG goes through an individual surface
condenser. Each condenser is cooled with cooling water (CW) from one dedicated cooling tower.
Figure 52 summarizes the prePCC retrofit Poza Rica NGCC design operation as predicted by the
ThermoFlexmodel.
31LHV=LowerHeatingValue
Figure52ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOperation
POWER GENERATION:
G104 A/B
kW
CW Pump Generation:
CW Return from Gas Turb Generation 166,570
704 CW Return
701 34 STG Train 3 STG 2 & STG 3 Stm Turb Generation 82,500
Total Generation 249,070
RFI RFI Calc
Natural Filtered GT CW Supply to
Gas Amb Air Exhaust STG 2 & STG 3 CW Supply
Mol Wt Vol % Vol % Vol %
N2 28.01 1.01 75.99 73.26 from STG 3
G102 A/B
O2 32.00 0.00 20.39 12.32 STG Train 2 One of Three Identical STG Units Surf Cond Pump G103 A/B
CO2 44.01 0.81 0.03 3.81 from STG 2 DIW Pump
Argon 39.95 0.00 0.92 0.89 645,273 PPH
H2S 34.08 0.0330 0.00 0.00 1.29 psia 1.29 psia
De-ionized
CH4 16.04 89.97 0.00 0.00 110 oF 110 deg F
Water
C2H6 30.07 6.65 0.00 0.00 32,588 PPH
Tank
C3H8 44.10 1.04 0.00 0.00 51 90 deg F
iC4 58.12 0.22 0.00 0.00
nC4 58.12 0.20 0.00 0.00 E102 52
C5's 72.15 0.08 0.00 0.00 Surface
C6's 86.18 0.00 0.00 0.00
Condenser
SO2 64.06 0.00 0.00 0.0011 192,055 PPH
Steam 18.02 0.00 2.67 9.72 1,117 psia 210.4 MMBtu/Hr
Total Vol % 100.00 100.00 100.00 975 deg F 200 PPH
Total MPH 4,355 121,261 125,840 84 psia
Total LB/Hr 77,694 3,477,073 3,554,768 1 316 deg F
LHV, MMBtu/Hr 1,595 0 0 Deaerator Vent
ppmW Sulfur 592 0 13 K102 Stm Turbine
Steam Turbine Generator
28.1 MW Gross
NGCC Design Basis: 0.6 MW Gen Loss
1. Gas Turbine (GT) Exhaust Gas Temperature (EGT) of 1141 F, flue gas flow of 3,554,734 lb/hr, 27.5 MW Net
and gross output of 162.8 MW are from HRSG Case 1 Specifications.
25
2. GT Air Compressor (AC) pressure ratio of 15.78 and discharge temperature of 788 F are from Siemen GT
Startup Load Curve. These are used to back-calc the AC polytropic efficency.
3. HRSG steam & condensate flows are estimated from HRSG Case 1 heat and material balance (H&MB).
4. Steam drum blowdowns are assumed to be 5% of steam generation. Deaerator vent is assumed to be 200 lb/hr.
5. Natural gas and ambient air composition are taken from Request For Information (RFI) table filled by CFE. Exhaust composition are calculated. 32,786 PPH 32,786 PPH
12 72 psia 84 psia 84 psia
354 deg F 316 deg F 316 deg F
19 22
39
42,802 PPH C103
198 psia LP Stm Drum
569 deg F
/ Dearator
677,860 PPH
110 deg F
1,302 psia 32
649,916 PPH
84 psia
316 deg F
24
C105
6 C101 BD Flash
23 Drum
HP Steam Drum HP BD
37 28,808 PPH
MP BD
1,556 2003 GT Des Spec Sht 7 2,140 PPH
1,595 MMBtu(LHV)/Hr
15
218 psia 45 84 psia
77,694 lbs/hr HRSG-1 316 deg F
BD To WWT
474.7 psia 701 576,165 PPH 579,961
38
77 oF 1,152 psia 1172 604,974 PPH G102 A/B
GT Nat Gas
977 deg F 976 C102 MP BFW 3,554,768 Lbs/Hr
MP Steam Drum Pumps 14.7 psia
195.1 deg F
1023 lb/sec Est @ 59 F Amb T from Flue Gas flow
20 Flue Gas
3,477,073 lb/hr @ Actual Amb T 34
14.7 psia Amb Pressure 14.5 psia Inlet Pressure 9,570 2003 GT Des Spec
DesuperHt BFW
89.6 oF Amb Temp 89.6 o
F GT Combustor 9,570 Btu/kW-Hr GT Ht Rate 17 26
57.0 % RH 44,942 PPH HRSG
Ambient Air Flue Gas
G101 A/B
704 232 psia 229 psia 0 lbs/hr Mol Wt MPH Mol% Wet Mol% Dry
GT Generator HP BFW
787 deg F 2229 deg F Pumps N2 28.01 92,188 73.26% 81.15%
AC Inlet
Filter 166.6 MW O2 32.00 15,504 12.32% 13.65%
8 V-101
162.8 HRSG-1 CO2 44.01 4,793 3.81% 4.22%
K101 2
Air Comp Stack Argon 39.95 1,121 0.89% 0.99%
Gas Turbine 13 29 30 Steam 18.016 12,232 9.72%
9
------------------- -------- -------- --------
Total MPH 125,838 100.00% 100.00%
Total LB/Hr 3,554,768
HRSG-1
4 5
3,554,734 3,554,388 lbs/hr
15.14 15.39 psia
1,141 1,138 oF MP SH1 MP EVAP
33 MP ECON
HP EVAP
HP SH3 HP SH2 HP SH1 LP SH LP EVAP MU WATER
PREHTR 0 2/19/2016 Issued for Task 1 Report RC
Rev. Date Revision BY
HP ECON 1 HP ECON 2 HP ECON 3 Nexant, Inc.
San Francisco, California
World Bank Mexican NGCC PCC Study
Existing (Pre-PCC Retrofit) POZA RICA NGCC Operation
Natural Gas Combine Cycle (NGCC) Process Flow Diagram
HP Econ 2 & 3 Bypass Poza Rica HRSG Design Case (HRSG Case 1) : 32 C Amb T & 57% RH
11
1xW501F with 3,554,670 Lb/Hr 1141 F Flue Gas at 90 F Amb T & 57% RH
908 MMBtu/Hr (Flue Gas Cooling) Total
E101 5 MMBtu/Hr (Loss) Total Job Rev.
Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) 904 MMBtu/Hr (Absorbed) Total No. DRAWING No. No.
1 Total Number of HRSGs
66' H x 21' W x 49' L Dimensions per HRSG A02484 Figure 5-2 0

5.3.2 OverallNGCCBalanceandPerformance
Theoverallpowerbalance,CWandCTloadsfortheexistingPozaRicaNGCCaresummarizedin
Table51.
Table51ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance
PrePCC
OverallPozaRicaPowerBalance: Retrofit
OutputatGeneratorOutlet,kW:
ExistingSiemens/WestinghouseGT 166,570
ExistingSiemensSteamTurbine(Totalfor3operating) 82,500
NewBPPowerRecoveryTurbine 0
TotalGrossGeneration 249,070
ParasiticLoads,kW:
ExistingHP&IPBFWPumps 1,047
ExistingCondensate&HotCondRecyclePumps 101
ExistingRawWater&FilteredWaterPumps 159
ExistingCoolingWaterPumps 3,626
ExistingCoolingTowerFans 1,350
TransformerLossAllowance 730
MiscExistingNGCCLossAllowance 200
NewFlueGasBoosterBlower 0
NewPCCCO2Capture&CompressionLoads 0
NewPCCCoolingWaterPumps 0
NewPCCCoolingTowerFans 0
MiscNewPCCLossAllowance 0
TotalNGCC/PCCElectricalLoads 7,213
NetPozaRicaPowerExport,kW 241,857
PrePCC
PozaRicaCW/CTDutyBreakdown:(Generic30%MEA) Retrofit
ExistingNGCCCW/CTDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 666(631)
NewPCCCW/CTDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 0
TotalPozaRicaCW/CTDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 666(631)
Overall water balances for the existing Poza Rica NGCC are summarized in Figure 53. The total
estimatedrawriverwaterwithdrawisabout345m3/hror1,500gallonsperminute(gpm).About
90%ofthewaterisusedformakeuptotheexistingCT.OfthetotalCTmakeup,80%islostthrough
evaporativecooling,and20%islosttoblowdown,whichrepresentsa5cycleofconcentrationfor
theCT.
Figure53ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance
Pre PCC Retrofit NGCC Simplified

Overall Water Balance Diagram
1. Existing river water pumps and

supply pipeline max capacity is
is 1550 gpm.
CT Evaporation Loss for
dissipating Surface Cond
Loads
1,080 GPM
Feed Water Existing CT Blowdown

River 1,516 GPM 1,485 GPM 1,350 GPM Cooling Tower 270 GPM
Treatment:
(5 Cycles of
Water Clarifier & Filter
Conc.) CT
Blowdowns to
Feed Water Treat 30 GPM WWT &
Condenser Duty = Purge Disposal
631 MMBtu/Hr
Existing NGCC
ACF/RO/ED System
85 GPM Avg Exist ACF/RO/ED 20 GPM
1x200 GPM ACF/RO
+ Purge
2x88 GPM ED
Misc NGCC
50 GPM 0 1/21/2016 Initial Estimate for Task 2 RC
Makeup Rev. Date Revision BY
Allowance POZA RICA 240 MW NGCC
PCC RETROFIT STUDY
OVERALL WATER BALANCE DIAGRAM
Pre-PCC Operation at 100% GT Output
Job Rev.
No. DRAWING No. No.
A02484 PFD-Water Bal-101 0

5.4 PCCDESIGNBASISANDQUESTIONNAIRETOSELECTEDLICENSORS
These were discussed previously in Sections 2 and 3. The Design Basis and the request for
informationQuestionnaireareprovidedforreferenceinAppendicesDandCrespectively.
5.5 FULLSIZE30%GENERICMEABASEDPCCANDCO2COMPRESSIONDESIGN
The simplified PFDs for the fullsize generic 30% MEA PCC and CO2 compression design, together
withthemajorstreamHMBsarepresentedinAppendixF.
The30%MEAPCCPlantincludesthefollowingmajorequipment:
FeedBlower
FeedScrubber(directcontactcooler)
Absorber
Regenerator/Reboiler/CondenserSystem
Rich/LeanExchanger
LeanMEACooler
RichandLeanMEAPumps
MEAFiltrationandReclaimingPackages
MEAStorageTank

TheCO2CompressionPlantincludesthefollowingmajorequipment:
CO2CompressionwithInterstageandAfterCoolersandKODrums
SupercriticalCO2Pump,SurgeDrum,&AfterCooler
CO2DehydrationPackage

Major equipment lists for the MEA PCC Plant and CO2 Compression Plant are also presented in
AppendixF.
5.6 POSTPCCRETROFITPOZARICANGCCMODELPERFORMANCE
Figure 54 summarizes the postPCC retrofit Poza Rica NGCC steam cycle operation and
performance, based on using fullsize generic 30% MEA PCC technology, as predicted by the
ThermoFlexmodel.
The single Siemens/Westinghouse W501F GT is operating at the same throughput as the prePCC
retrofitcase,firing1,680GJ(LHV)/hr(1,595MMBtu[LHV]/hr)ofnaturalgas.Basedonthemodel,it
generatesapproximately166MWofpower.ExhaustfromtheGTgoesthroughthesingleHRSGand
produces roughly 261,000 kg/hr (577,000 lb/hr) of 78 barg/525 C (1150 psig/975 F) HP steam,
18,000kg/hr(40,000lb/hr)of12barg/300C(170psig/570F)IPsteam,plus13,000kg/hr(28,000
lb/hr)of2barg/170C(30psig/340F)LPsteam.
ForpostPCCretrofitoperation,roughly50%oftheHPsteamfromtheHRSGisroutedtothePCC
plantforamineregenerationuses.Asaresult,thethreeexistingSTGsnowonlyreceiveroughlyhalf
oftheprePCCretrofitHPsteamflow.BasedonslidingpressureSTGoperation,HPsteampressure
after each STGs inlet control stop valve (CSV) drops from the prePCC retrofit value of 76 barg
(1,100 psig) down to roughly 50 barg (730 psig). Power production from each STG drops from 27
MWdowntoabout13MW.Eachofthethreeexistingsurfacecondenserdutiesanditsassociated
CWloadalsodropstoroughly50%oftheprePCCretrofitvalue.
SinceHRSGHPsteamgenerationisthesameasprePCCretrofitoperation,thepressureexitingthe
HRSG HP superheater is essentially the same as prePCC retrofit. The existing STG CSV serves as
backpressure controller between the HRSG outlet and the STG inlet, which should provide
protection against potential excessive differential pressure damage within the HRSG HP steam
generationcircuitduringpostPCCretrofitoperations.TheHRSGIPandLPsteampressurefloatson
theSTGpressureandwilldropslightlyfromtheprePCCretrofitlevelduetolowerSTGpressure.
Becausethegeneric30%MEAPCCregenerationonlyrequiressaturatedsteamat3barg(45psig),
the extraction steam is routed through a new Back Pressure Turbine (BPT) generator to recover
somepowerfromHPsteamdepressurization.Roughly50%ofthepowerlossfromthethreeexisting
STG is recovered by the BPT. Exhaust from the BPT is desuperheated with condensate to near
saturationtemperaturebeforethesteamissenttoPCCregeneration.
Figure54PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOperation
POWER GENERATION:
G104 A/B
kW
CW Pump Generation:
CW Return from Gas Turb Generation 166,550
704 CW Return
701 34 STG Train 3 STG 2 & STG 3 Stm Turb Generation 39,625
BP Turb Generation 21,617
RFI RFI Calc Total Generation 227,792
Natural Filtered GT CW Supply to
Gas Amb Air Exhaust STG 2 & STG 3 CW Supply
Mol Wt Vol % Vol % Vol %
N2 28.01 1.01 75.99 73.26 from STG 3
G102 A/B
O2 32.00 0.00 20.39 12.32 STG Train 2 One of Three Identical STG Units Surf Cond Pump G103 A/B
CO2 44.01 0.81 0.03 3.81 from STG 2 DIW Pump
Argon 39.95 0.00 0.92 0.89 342,997 PPH
H2S 34.08 0.0330 0.00 0.00 0.83 psia .83 psia
De-ionized
CH4 16.04 89.97 0.00 0.00 96 oF 96 deg F
Water
C2H6 30.07 6.65 0.00 0.00 110,143 PPH
Tank
C3H8 44.10 1.04 0.00 0.00 51 90 deg F
iC4 58.12 0.22 0.00 0.00
nC4 58.12 0.20 0.00 0.00
Exist
E102 52
C5's 72.15 0.08 0.00 0.00
STG Surface
C6's 86.18 0.00 0.00 0.00
CSV Condenser
SO2 64.06 0.00 0.00 0.0011 92,671 PPH
Steam 18.02 0.00 2.67 9.72 742 psia 114.8 MMBtu/Hr
Total MPH 4,355 121,261 125,840 60 psia
Total LB/Hr 77,694 3,477,073 3,554,768 1 292 deg F
65,380 PPH
13.5 MW Gross 96 deg F
PCC Makeup Water
NGCC Design Basis: 0.3 MW Gen Loss PCC Wash Water Makeup
2. GT Air Compressor (AC) pressure ratio of 15.78 and discharge temperature of 788 F are from Siemen GT 25
Startup Load Curve. These are used to back-calc the AC polytropic efficency. PCC Regeneration
3. HRSG steam & condensate flows are estimated from HRSG Case 1 heat and material balance (H&MB). 285,044 PPH
4. Steam drum blowdowns are assumed to be 5% of steam generation. Deaerator vent is assumed to be 200 lb/hr. 175 psia
PCC Regeneration
5. Natural gas and ambient air composition are taken from Request For Information (RFI) table filled by CFE. 28,053 PPH 28,053 PPH 256 deg F
Return Condensate
Exhaust composition are calculated. 12 46 psia 60 psia 60 psia
342 deg F 292 deg F 292 deg F
BPT 19 22
CSV 39
De-Superheater 297,418 PPH 40,375 PPH C103
LP Sat Steam to PCC 1,131 psia 185 psia
Regeneration LP Stm Drum
976 deg F 569 deg F
PCC Regeneration / Dearator
453,140 PPH
96 deg F
BP Power
1,295 psia 32
Recovery
646,598 PPH
Turbine 60 psia
Process
Condensate 21.8 MW Gross 292 deg F
0.2 MW Gen Loss
21.6 MW Net 24
C105
6
BD Flash
C101
23 Drum
HP Steam Drum HP BD
37 28,772 PPH
MP BD
7 2,019 PPH
1,595 MMBtu(LHV)/Hr
15
205 psia 45 60 psia
77,694 lbs/hr 292 deg F
BD To WWT
474.7 psia 701 575,432 PPH
38
77 oF 1,145 psia 604,204 PPH G102 A/B
GT Nat Gas
977 deg F C102 MP BFW
MP Steam Drum Pumps
No Vent to Atm
20 Flue Gas
3,477,073 lb/hr @ Actual Amb T
14.7 psia Amb Pressure 14.5 psia Inlet Pressure
DesuperHt BFW
F GT Combustor 9,571 Btu/kW-Hr GT Ht Rate 17 26
57.0 % RH 42,394 PPH HRSG
Ambient Air Flue Gas
G101 A/B Flue Gas
704 232 psia 229 psia 0 lbs/hr Mol Wt MPH
GT Generator HP BFW
787 deg F 2229 deg F Booster N2 28.01 92,188
AC Inlet Pumps
166.6 MW Blower O2 32.00 15,504
Filter 8 V-101 CO2 44.01 4,793
K101 2
Air Comp Stack 3,554,768 Lbs/Hr Argon 39.95 1,121
Gas Turbine 13 29 30 14.7 psia Steam 18.016 12,232
9 Flue Gas to PCC
195.1 deg F ------------------- --------
Total MPH 125,838
34 Total LB/Hr 3,554,768
4 5
3,554,383 lbs/hr
15.39 psia
1,138 oF MP SH1 MP EVAP
33 MP ECON
HP EVAP
PREHTR 0 2/19/2016 Issued for Task 1 Report RC
Post-PCC Retrofit POZA RICA NGCC Operation
11
908 MMBtu/Hr (Flue Gas Cooling) Total 30 Wt% Generic MEA-Based PCC
E101 5 MMBtu/Hr (Loss) Total Job Rev.
Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) 904 MMBtu/Hr (Absorbed) Total No. DRAWING No. No.
1 Total Number of HRSGs
66' H x 21' W x 49' L Dimensions per HRSG A02484 Figure 5-3 0
The overall power balance, CW and CT loads for the postPCC retrofit Poza Rica NGCC are
summarized in Table 52 for the generic 30% MEA PCC operation. Existing prePCC retrofit
performancesareshownforcomparisonpurposes.
Table52PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance
PrePCC PostPCC
OverallPRNGCCPowerBalance:(Generic30%MEA) Retrofit Retrofit
OutputatGeneratorOutlet,kW:
ExistingSiemen/WestinghouseGT 166,570 166,550
ExistingSiemenSteamTurbine(Totalfor3operating) 82,500 39,625
NewBPPowerRecoveryTurbine 0 21,617
TotalGrossGeneration 249,070 227,792
ParasiticLoads,kW:
ExistingHP&IPBFWPumps 1,047 1,060
ExistingCondensate&HotCondRecyclePumps 101 53
ExistingRawWater&FilteredWaterPumps 159 206
ExistingCoolingWaterPumps 3,626 3,626
ExistingCoolingTowerFans 1,350 1,350
TransformerLossAllowance 730 667
MiscExistingNGCCLossAllowance 200 200
NewFlueGasBoosterBlower 0 8,768
NewPCCCO2Capture&CompressionLoads 0 11,902
NewPCCCoolingWaterPumps 0 3,292
NewPCCCoolingTowerFans 0 900
MiscNewPCCLossAllowance 0 0
TotalNGCC/PCCElectricalLoads 7,213 32,025
NetPozaRicaPowerExport,kW 241,857 195,768

PozaRicaCW/CTDutyBreakdown:(Generic30%MEA) PrePCC PostPCC
ExistingNGCCCW/CTDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 666(631) 363(344)
NewPCCCW/CTDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 0 466(441)
TotalPozaRicaCW/CTDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 666(631) 829(786)
The overall water balance for postPCC Poza Rica NGCC operation based on generic 30% MEA is
summarizedinFigure55.Thetotalestimatedrawriverwaterwithdrawisabout430m3/hror1,900
gpm.Approximately80%ofthewaterisusedformakeuptotheexistingCTandthenewPCCCT.Of
thetotalCTmakeup,80%islostthroughevaporativecooling,and20%islosttoblowdownwhich
representsa5cycleofconcentrationfortheCT.
Compared to the existing water usage shown in Figure 53, the generic 30% MEA retrofit will
increasetheoverallPozaRicarawwaterimportbyabout90m3/hror400gpm.Sincetheexisting
riverwaterwithdrawisalreadynearthemaximumallowed,anewriverwaterwithdrawpermitmay
berequiredbeforePCCretrofitcanproceed.
Figure55PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance
PCC CT Evaporation
Post PCC Retrofit NGCC Loss for dissipating
Simplified Overall Water PCC Cooling Loads
Balance Diagram
1. Existing river water pumps and 755 GPM

supply pipeline max capacity is
is 1550 gpm.
PCC Cooling PCC CT Blowdown
809 GPM Towers (5 189 GPM
Cycles of
Conc)
135 GPM
River
Water CT Evaporat'n Loss for
PCC Cooling Duty =
dissipating Surface
441 MMBtu/Hr
Condenser Cooling
L d
1,922 GPM
589 GPM
336 GPM
Existing CT
Feed Water Existing Blowdown
Treatment: Cooling
Clarifier 1,883 GPM 1,545 GPM 737 GPM Tower (5 147 GPM
CT
& Filter Cycles of
Conc.) Blowdowns
to WWT &
Feed Water 38 GPM
Disposal
Condenser Duty = Treat Purge
344 MMBtu/Hr
Exist ACF/RO/ED 20 GPM
Purge
PCC MEA-free
Cond Purge
48 GPM
PCC MEA
135 GPM
Feed New PCC ACF/RO/ED Purge
Scrubber
New PCC Makeup Wash Water

Existing NGCC 204 GPM ACF/RO/ED 156 GPM 131 GPM
PCC MEA Absorber
AFC/RO/DM System Systems
84 GPM Avg DM Water
1x200 GPM RO (77% Recovery)
+
2x88 GPM ED
Incremental 0 1/21/2016 Initial Estimate for Task 2 RC
BFW MU for
PCC Stm Rev. Date Revision BY
25 GPM Injection 1/0/1900
30% MEA PCC RETROFIT STUDY
Misc NGCC
50 GPM OVERALL WATER BALANCE DIAGRAM
Makeup
Post-PCC Operation at 100% GT Output
Allowance
Job Rev.
No. DRAWING No. No.

5.7 NGCCPLANTMODIFICATIONSREQUIREDFORPCCRETROFIT
TheNGCCplantmodificationsmajorequipmentlistispresentedinAppendixF.Themajorunitsand
summariesoftheirfunctionsarepresentedbelow:
Louvers to the Existing HRSG Stack Two sets of these flaptype dampers are installed in the
existingstack.Oneset,installednearthetopofthestack,isdesignedtobeclosedwhenthePCCis
inoperationtopreventtheuntreatedfluegasfromexiting.Thesecondsetisinstalledatthebaseof
the HRSG in the ducting that leads to the absorber. This damper will be opened during PCC
operationtoallowthefluegasflowtotheabsorber.Acostallowanceforanadditional(third)louver
isincludedforHRSGlowpressureprotection.
Flue Gas Ducting New ductwork is required to route the flue gas leaving the HRSG to the PCC
facilities.Thetreatedfluegasisventedtotheatmospherefromthetopoftheabsorberandisnot
routedbacktotheexistingstack,sonoreturnductingisnecessary.
LetdownSteamTurbineAportionofthesuperheatedHPsteamisextractedfromthemainsteam
line to supply the PCC regeneration steam demand. Since the HP steam pressure is much higher
thanwhatthePCCplantrequires,aBPTgeneratorisinstalledupstreamofthePCCplanttorecover
somepowerfromtheHPextractionsteambeforeitisexhaustedatthepressurerequiredforthe
PCCplant.
DesuperheaterTheexhauststeamleavingtheBPTisstillsuperheatedandtoohotforPCCreboiler
operation.AwaterspraydesuperheaterisinstalledtocooltheBPTsteamexhausttonearsaturation
beforefeedingtothePCC.
PipingModificationsPipingisinstalledtoroutethesuperheatedHPsteamtotheBPTandfrom
theBPTtotheCO2regeneratorcolumnsreboiler.Thereboilercondensateisalsopipedbacktothe
deaeratorlocatedinthesteamplant.
PCCCooling TowerAfterNexantsvisittothePozaRicaNGCCplant,itwasunderstoodthatCFE
would like to retain maximum operational flexibility after PCC retrofit by keeping all three steam
turbinesandtheirrespectiveCTsavailable.OnenewCT,consistingofsix(6)coolingcells,isrequired
to handle the 30% MEA PCC plants additional cooling loads. Underground concrete CW piping
associatedwiththenewCTisincludedtoroutetheCWtoandfromthePCCCWconsumers.
New Deionization Unit Due to additional deionized (DI) water requirements for MEA absorber
waterwashandlargerBFWmakeupwaterdemand,anewreverseosmosis(RO)/DIunitisaddedto
theexistingRO/DIsystem.
MiscellaneousPumpsThesearethepumpsassociatedwiththenewCT,newRO/DIunit,DIwater
flowingtothewaterwashsectionoftheCO2absorber,andtheadditionalrawriverwaterrequired
tobepumpedfromCanaldeLlamada.
5.8 PRELIMINARYPOST30%MEAPCCRETROFITPLOTLAYOUTS
5.8.1 PreliminaryPCCPlotLayouts
The 30% MEAbased PCC plant is divided into 5 sections: Flue Gas Blower, MEA tankage, CO2
absorption, CO2 regeneration, and CO2 compression. Figure 56 shows a preliminary layout of the
flue gas blower, MEA tankage and CO2 absorption sections, while Figure 57 shows the CO2
regenerationandCO2compression/dehydrationsections.Theestimateddimensionsforeachofthe
majorprocessareasare:
FlueGasBoosterBlower: 30ftx30ft(~9mx9m)
CO2Absorption: 190ftx100ft(~58mx31m)
CO2Regeneration: 150ftx320ft(~46mx98m)
CO2Compression: 150ftx130ft(~46mx40m)
MEATankage: 100ftx80ft(~31mx24m)

Based on these figures, the total estimated plot space required for the 30% MEAbased PCC
including flue gas blower and CO2 compression/dehydration but excluding plant modifications is
about 9,000 m2 (96,000 ft2). Plant modification included a new cooling tower, which adds
approximately1,594m2(17,000ft2)intotheoverallplotspacerequired.
5.8.2 PCCEquipmentPlacement/IntegrationGuidelines
The flue gas blower and PCC absorber tower locations are most critical due to the significant and
sizeablefluegasductinginterconnectionandexhaust/stackfeatures.Thesecomponentsneedtobe
located as close as possible to each other and to the existing stack to minimize the ductwork
requirementsandtheassociatedpressuredrop.
The PCC regeneration facilities and CO2 compressors, while being significant components with
sizeablefootprints,canhavemoreflexibilityforplacementanddistancesincetheinterconnection
with the absorber towers are piping connections and not ductwork. The regeneration and
compressor facilities are located so as to make best use of available plot area while providing for
suitableconstruction,operationsandmaintenanceaccess.
PerthedescriptioninSection5.7,anewcoolingtowerisrequiredforthePCCfacilities.Thecooling
towerrequirementsforthePCCfacilitiesarenotinsignificant,ascanbeseenbytherelativesizeof
theproposedPCCcoolingtowershownonthesitelayout.Thecoolingtowerisplacedinavailable
space while respecting their need to be oriented with the prevailing wind directions for proper
performance.
Figure58showsthepreliminary,aerialviewofthePozaRicaNGCCafter30%MEAPCCretrofit.The
white boxes represent the plot areas that are available for the retrofit PCC equipment and NGCC
plantmodifications.Thisfigureclearlyshowsthatthereissufficientplotspacerequiredfora30%
MEAbasedPCCretrofit.Themajorinterconnectingpipelengthswereestimatedbasedonthisplot
plan.
Figure5630%MEAPCCPlotLayoutFlueGasBlower,MEATankageandCO2AbsorptionSections
CO2 ABSORPTION
MEA Absorber
C-101
46' ID
MEA TANKAGE
G-101 A & B
PIPEWAY
E-105
G-103 A & B MEA Storage Tank
D-101
58' ID
FG Blower
Feed Scrubber
K-101 FLUE GAS DUCT C-100

44' ID
To Amine Regeneration
G-106
G-100 A & B
E-100
Figure5730%MEAPCCPlotLayoutCO2RegenerationandCompression/DehydrationSection
MEA REGENERATION CO2 COMPRESSION
K-301
Lube & Seal
Oil Skid
E-102 A
E-104A K-301 K-301

E-102 B Motor CO2 Compressor
C-304
PIPEWAY
E-102 C
PIPEWAY
E-104B
E-102
E-102DA
PIPEWAY
E-102
E-102
EB G-302 A & B
BPT
E-104C C-303
E-102
E-102
F C
E-102
E-102 GD
E-104D E-301 A / E-302 A

E-101 A
C-302
E-101 B E-301 B / E-302 B
E-101 C
Stripper E-303 A / E-304 A

E-101 D
C-301
E-101 E E-303 B / E-304 B
C-106
E-104H
E-104F
E-104G
E-104E
E-106
C-102
11' ID (Top) x
16' ID (Btm)
E-103
G-102 A & B
D-102 C-103
&
G-107
Dehydration Skid
G-104 A & B G-301 A & B
PIPEWAY PIPEWAY
Figure58RetrofittedPozaRicaNGCCwith30%MEAPCCPlotPlan
AvailablePlotSpace FlueGasBlower CO2 AbsorptionPlant CO2 RegenerationPlant CO2 CompressionPlant MEAStorageTank
MakeupWaterLine NewCTCWLine PCCSteam/Condensate
PCCPipeRack
(AboveGround) (BelowGround) Line
CW
NewCoolingTower Pumphouse
175ft
90ft
600ft
240ft
150ft 75ft
150ft
250ft
150ft BPT
900ft
5.9 POZARICANGCCPCCRETROFITECONOMICEVALUATIONBASIS
5.9.1 IncrementalCapitalCost
Each PCC licensor provided the design and the capital cost of the CO2 absorption/regeneration
plants associated with their respective proprietary PCC technology. Nexant developed the design
and capital cost of the CO2 absorption/regeneration plants for the generic 30% MEAbased PCC
plant.Inaddition,Nexantalsodevelopedthedesignsandthecapitalcostsforalloftheothernon
solventrelatedsystemsthatareintegraltoNGCCPCCretrofitting,forthegenericMEAtechnology,
andforallofthelicensedPCCtechnologies.Thesenonsolventrelatedsystemsinclude:thefluegas
feedboostercompressionunit,CO2compression/dehydrationunit,andNGCCplantmodifications.
In doing so, each PCC licensors responsibility/input is limited specifically to its technology,
minimizing any potential nonPCC technology related interferences and inconsistencies associated
withtechnologycomparison.
Capital costs for the Nexantdesigned systems were majorequipment (ME) factored estimates for
U.S.GulfCoast(USGC)locationswithatargetaccuracyof30percent.ForMEfactoredestimates,
equipment material and labor costs were developed from equipment sizes, quantities, and other
applicabledesignparameters.BulkmaterialandlaborcostswerefactoredfromtheMEcosts.The
sumoftheMEandbulkmaterialcosts,includingshippingcosts,formstheTotalDirectCost(TDC).
Constructionindirectcost,factoredfromtotaldirectlaborcost,isaddedtotheTDCtoarriveatthe
Total Field Cost (TFC). Vendor startup support cost (factored from ME cost), Home Office cost
(factoredfromTFC),andcontingency(factoredfromTFC)areaddedtotheTFCtocomeupwiththe
TotalPlantCost(TPC).TheCAPEXreportedinthisstudyisattheTPClevel.FortheNexantdesigned
systems,acontingencyof30%wasaddedtocoveruncertaintiesassociatedwithscaleup,missing
equipment and facilities associated with turndown, startup, normal/emergency shutdown, and
othertransientoperationsnotyetdefinedwithaconceptualdesign.
Table 53 summarizes the estimated capital cost for the generic MEAbased PCC plants. The
estimated capital cost of the existing NGCC is included for comparison and to facilitate economic
evaluationviacalculationofcostofelectricity,describedingreaterdetailinSection6.3.Capitalcost
oftheexistingNGCCisestimatedassuminganinstalledcostof$1000/kWgrossoutput.
ValueslistedinTable53areJanuary2015capitalcostsforUSGClocations.BasedonNexantsin
househistoricaldata,theinstalledcostforMexicolocationcanvaryanywherefrom80%to120%of
the USGC cost. For this study, it is assumed that Mexico installed costs are the same as USGC
installedcosts.ForthosenonUSGCcapitalcostsprovidedbyPCClicensors,theywereadjustedto
USGCcostsusingNexantsinhousehistoricallocationcostfactors.
Table53Generic30%MEAbasedPCCRetrofitCapitalCosts
PrePCC PostPCC
TotalPozaRicaNGCCCapitalCosts,$MMJan2015:(Generic30%MEA) Retrofit Retrofit
ExistingPozaRicaNGCC* 249 249
FlueGasBoosterBlower 0 14
PCCCO2Capture&Compression/Dehydration 0 181
NGCCPlantModifications 0 33
TotalNGCC/PCCCapEx,$MMJan2015atPR 249 477
TotalIncrementalCapEx,$MMJan2015atPR Base 228
* AssumedexistingPozaRicaNGCCCapExat$1000pergrosskW
5.9.2 IncrementalOperatingCost
Operatingandmaintenance(O&M)costsforretrofittingthePozaRicaNGCCwithPCCisallocatedas
eitherfixedandvariableoperatingcosts.
Fixedoperatingcostsareessentiallyindependentofactualcapacityfactor,numberofhoursofplant
operation,oramountofkilowattsproduced.Itconsistsmainlyofcostsforemployeesalaries,taxes
andinsurances.Forthisstudy,thefollowingareassumedforallcases:
1. 3new24/7(operator)positionsat4.66shifts/positionfor14totaladditionalemployeesat
$40,000/yearsalaryplusbenefits
2. 3new8/5(administrative)employeesat$40,000/yearsalaryplusbenefits
3. Maintenancematerialandlaborequalto2.5%ofCAPEX
4. Annualoperatingcostallowanceforinsuranceat1%ofCAPEX
5. Annualoperatingcostallowanceforpropertytaxat1%ofCAPEX.

Variable operating costs are directly proportional to the power plant throughputs, and include
purchase costs for process consumables, catalysts and chemicals. Process consumables are feeds
directlyusedforpowergenerationsuchasnaturalgasandrawwaterimports,plusdisposalcostfor
wastewaterdischarges.Processconsumablesalsoincludesalerevenue(ordisposalcost)associated
with the captured CO2 product. Catalysts and chemicals are primarily used for water treatments
(feed water, BFW, CW and waste water treatments), plus PCC amine, additive and filters
replacementanddisposalcosts.Forthisstudy,variablecostsareestimatedassuming:
Naturalgasispricedat$2.37/GJ(LHV)or$2.50/MMBtu(LHV)
Rawriverwaterispricedat$74/1000m3or$0.28/1000gallons
Treatedwastewaterisdischargedbacktotheriverat$7.4/1000m3or$0.028/1000gallons
Annualonstreamfactor(AOF)of8,000hoursperyear(91.3%)
CO2haszeroworth(norenewablecreditsnorsaleofCO2forEORpurposes)
Aminemakeup/disposal,aswellasfilterreplacement/disposalcostsforallcasesarethe
sameasthatfor30%genericMEA.
DuetothelackofPCClicensorsresponsesrelatingtomakeupcostsfortheirproprietarysolvents,
identical amine makeup costs are assumed for this study. While licensors are claiming significant
reduced solvent degradation losses compared to generic MEA, past Nexant studies on advanced
amines for PCC services had shown that the higher solvent prices tend to offset the savings on
reducedsolventlosses,hencetheoverallaminemakeupcostsareaboutthesame.
Table54summarizestheestimatedannualoperatingcostsforthePozaRicaNGCCbeforeandafter
fullsize generic 30% MEAbased PCC retrofit. It should be noted that the actual chemical
consumptions and costs information are not available from the Poza Rica plant. Values shown in
Table54aretypicaltreatingrequirementsfrompastprojects.ComparedtothePCCcontributions
of roughly $6.89 MM/year, these estimated water treating chemical costs highlight the relatively
minorcontribution(roughly$0.58MM/yearor10%)totheincrementalcatalysts&chemicalcosts
forPCCretrofit.
Table54Generic30%MEAbasedPCCOperatingCosts
PrePCC PostPCC
ANNUALOPERATINGCOSTS,$MM/Year:(Generic30%MEA) Retrofit Retrofit
PROCESSCONSUMABLECOSTS(VARIABLE):
NaturalGasFeed 31.85 31.85
RiverWaterImport 0.28 0.35
CO2ProductExport
ProcessWasteWaterDisposal 0.01 0.01
TOTALPROCESSCONSUMABLES 32.13 32.21
CATALYSTS&CHEMICALCOSTS(VARIABLE):***
WaterTreatingChemicals 2.56 3.14
PCCAmine/AdditivesMakeup&Disposal* 6.47
PCCCarbon/Filters/DessicantReplace&Disposal* 0.42
TOTALCAT&CHEMICALS 2.56 10.03
FIXEDCOSTS:
OperatingLabor** 2.79 3.35
MaintenanceLabor 3.74 7.16
MaintenanceMaterial 2.49 4.77
OverheadCharges 2.40 2.52
Insurance&PropertyTax 4.98 9.55
TOTALFIXEDCOSTS 16.40 27.35
TOTALOPERATING&MAINTENANCECOST 51.09 69.59

*Costincludesdisposalallowance.
**Assumed3additionaloperatingpositionsat4.65shiftsperposition.
***ChemicalusagesaretypicalfrompastprojectsanddonotnecessaryrepresentactualPozaRicausages
5.9.3 EconomicEvaluationFigureofMerit
ThePCCprocesseconomicevaluationwasconductedbasedontheoverallperformance(netpower
export) of the Poza Rica NGCC with PCC retrofit, total capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operating
expenditure (OPEX). The overall economic performance of the Poza Rica NGCC with PCC was
evaluated using two figuresofmerit that took into account the abovementioned parameters. The
figuresofmeritare:
CAPEX+7YearOPEXBreakevenElectricityPrice;
CostofElectricity(COE)

CAPEX+7YearOPEXBreakevenElectricityPrice(BEP)

This was the evaluation method recommended in the original study proposal. It is the required
electricitysellingpricerequiredtorecoupthecapitalexpenditureplus7yearsworthofoperating
expense.Theformulaforthisbreakevenprice(BEP)is:
whereAOFistheAnnualOnstreamFactor.InordertocalculatetheBEP,itisnecessarytoinclude
theCAPEXandOPEXoftheexistingPozaRicaNGCCplant.ThesecostswereshownunderthePre
PCCcolumnsinTable53andTable54.Usingthesameformula,NexantestimatedtheCAPEX+7
yearOPEXBEPoftheexistingPozaRicaNGCCwithoutPCC.ThecalculatedprePCCCOEwasthen
used as the baseline cost in order to calculate the incremental BEP. The incremental BEP is the
differencebetweenthepostPCCBEPandtheprePCCBEP.
Table55summarizestheestimatedBEPforthegenericMEAbasedPCCplants.TheimpactofCO2
productpriceonBEPisalsoshown.RevenuefromthesaleofCO2decreasestheelectricitysaleprice
neededtobreakevenoncosts.ThegreatertheCO2productprice,thelowertheBEP.Itisshownin
Table 55 that a CO2 sale price of around $99 per metric ton (MT) or $90 per short ton (ST) is
requiredinorderforthepostPCCretrofitBEPtobethesameastheprePCCBEP.
Table55Generic30%MEAbasedPCCRetrofitCAPEX+7YearOPEXBEP
CostofElectricity(COE)
The COE is the metric used by the U.S. DOE to evaluate power plants with CO2 capture. It is the
revenuereceivedpernetMWhthatprovidesthestipulatedinternalrateofreturnonequityover
theentireeconomicanalysisperiod.AsimplifiedformulafortheCOEappliesacapitalchargefactor
(CCF)totheCAPEX,whichisbasedonacertainsetofeconomicassumptions.Theseassumptionsare
listedinTable57.
TheformulaforcalculatingtheCOEis:
CCFxCAPEX+[OPEXFix +AOFx(OPEXVariable+FuelCosts)]
AOFxAnnualMWhGenerated

wheretheCCF=0.111forNGCCplantswithCO2capture.
Again, Nexant estimated the prePCC Poza Rica NGCCs COE and used it as the baseline cost to
calculate the incremental COE. The incremental COE is the difference between the postPCC COE
and the prePCC COE. Table 56 summarizes the estimated COE for the generic MEAbased PCC
plant:
Table56Generic30%MEAbasedPCCRetrofitCOE
PrePCC PostPCC
CostOfElectricity(COE),$/MWh:(Generic30%MEA) Retrofit Retrofit
CapitalChargeFactor(CCF) 0.111 0.111
AnnualOnstreamFactor(AOF)@8,000hrs/yr 91.3% 91.3%
CapEx,$MM 249 477
FixedOpEx,$MM/yr 16.4 27.4
AOF*VariableOpEx,$MM/yr 2.8 10.4
AOF*NGCost,$MM/yr 31.8 31.8
AOF*AnnualNetPowerExport,MWh/yr 1,934,860 1,566,141
CalcCOE,$/MWh 40.7 78.3
IncrementalCOE,$/MWh Base 37.6
*COE=(CCFxCapEx+FixOpEx+AOF*VariableOpEx+AOF*NGCost)/(AOF*AnnualNetPowerExport)
Table57EconomicAssumptionsUsedtoDetermineCCF
TAXES
IncomeTaxRate 38%EffectiveTaxRate
CapitalDepreciation 20years,150%decliningbalance
InvestmentTaxCredit None
TaxHoliday None
FINANCINGTERMS
RepaymentTermofDebt 30years
GracePeriodonDebtRepayment None
DebtReserveFund None
TREATMENTOFCAPITALCOSTS
CapitalCostEscalationDuringConstruction(nominalannualrate) 3.60%
ConstructionPeriod 3years
DistributionofTotalOvernightCapitalovertheCapitalExpenditure
10%,60%,30%
Period(beforeescalation)
WorkingCapital Zeroforallparameters
%ofTotalOvernightCapitalthatisDepreciated 100%
INFLATION
RSP,O&M,FuelEscalation(nominalannualrate) 3.00%
FINANCIALSTRUCTURE(HIGHRISKINVESTOROWNEDUTILITY)
TypeofSecurity PercentofTotal
Debt 45
Equity 55
5.9.4 PozaRicaNGCCEconomicsforFullSizeLicensorPCCRetrofit
Theeconomicevaluationmethodologydescribedinthissectionwasrepeatedforeachofthe
licensedPCCtechnologyusingdatasuppliedbytherespectivePCClicensor.Theresultsare
discussedinfurtherdetailinSection6.
6. RESULTSOFFULLSCALEPCCINTEGRATIONWITHPOZARICANGCC
6.1 POZARICANGCCPREANDPOST30%MEAPCCRETROFITPERFORMANCE
AsmentionedintheevaluationmethodologypresentedinSection5,Nexantmodeledtheexisting
(i.e. prePCC retrofit) Poza Rica NGCC performance based on its operation information/data
provided by CFE. Nexant then developed a conceptual design of a fullscale PCC plant based on a
generic30wt%MEAprocess,andmodeledthefullscaleeffectofretrofittingitontothePozaRica
plant.The30wt%MEAPCCdesignwasbasedonNexantsinhousedata,andretrofittingitontothe
PozaRicaplantservesthepurposeofprovidingapreliminaryindependentassessmentoftheimpact
ofCO2captureonthePozaRicaplantperformance.Italsohelpstoestablishareferencedesignfrom
whichtoevaluateandcomparethesixselectedPCCtechnologies.
TheprePCCretrofitPozaRicaNGCCCO2emissionrateisestimatedtobe2,297mTPD(2,532STPD),
foranetpoweroutputof242MW.TherequiredCO2capture,asstatedinthedesignbasis,is85%,
or1,952mTPD(2,152STPD)ofCO2.
Table61summarizesandcomparesthePozaRicaplantperformancebeforeandafterretrofitting
for CO2 capture, based on the generic 30 wt% MEAprocess design. As shown, significant plant
performancepenaltyisexpected.Theplantexperiencesanetpowerexportreductionofabout46
MW,or19%,from242MWto196MW.Thiscorrespondstoanetplantefficiencydropfrom51.8%
to42.0%,alossofalmost10percentagepoints.Themajorityofthepowerreductionisduetothe
reducedoutputfromthesteamturbinesandtheauxiliarypowerrequirementstorunthePCCplant.
Table61PozaRicaNGCCPrePCCvsPost30%MEAPCCRetrofitPerformanceSummary
PostPCC
PrePCCRetrofit
Retrofit
NGCCCO2Emissions,MTPD(STPD) 2297(2532) 345(380)
RecoveredCO2Product,MTPD(STPD) 0(0) 1952(2152)
%CO2Capture 0 85%
PowerBalance,MW
Generation
GasTurbineGrossOutput 166.6 166.6
SteamTurbineGrossOutput 82.5 39.6
BackPressureTurbine 0 21.6
TotalGrossOutput 249.1 227.8
ExistingNGCCPlantParasiticLoads 7.2 7.2
FlueGasBlower 0 8.8
PCC+CO2Compression+PlantMods 0 16.1
TotalNewPCCParasiticLoad 7.2 32.0
NetPowerPlantExport,MW 241.9 195.8

DeltaPlantExport,MW 46.1
%PlantExportReduction 19%
NetPlantHeatRate,MJ/kWh(Btu/kWh) 6.94(6584) 8.57(8134)

NetPlantEfficiency,%LHV 51.8 42.0
DeltaPlantEfficiency,percentagept 9.9
IncrementalWaterImport,lpm(gpm) 0(0) 1537(406)
6.2 POZALICENSORRESPONSESCHECKAGAINSTGENERIC30%MEA
ThedifferentPCCtechnologylicensorswereresponsibleforprovidingthePCCB/Lperformanceand
cost data in order for Nexant to perform the overall Poza Rica fullscale retrofit evaluation. As a
checkagainstpostingorinterpretationerrors,selectedlicensorresponsesarecomparedagainstthe
generic30%MEAdesign.ThesearesummarizedinTable62.Duetotheproprietarynatureofthe
data, the information is expressed as a percentage relative to the Nexant inhouse 30% MEA
ReferenceDesignvalues,sothattheactualdatawouldremainconfidential.
Asshownin Table62,alladvancedaminebased PCCtechnologylicensorsdesignwere basedon

85%CO2recoveryexceptforFluorwhichwasbasedon90%CO2recovery.Duetotimeconstraints,
Fluorwasnotabletoprovidethedesignfor85%CO2recovery.
RelativeheatofregenerationperunitCO2capturedfromPCClicensorsindicateabout2025%lower
thanthatforgeneric30%MEA,whichisconsistentwithtypicalclaimsbyadvancedamineproviders.
Withinthegroup,thedifferencescitedarerathersmall.
Relative cooling loads (total for amine plus CO2 compression) are generally higher than that for
generic30%MEAdesign.WhileonewouldexpectlowercoolingloadsfortheadvancedPCCdueto
lower regeneration heat input, the higher cooling loads could be a result of lower absorber feed
temperaturescomparedtothegeneric30%MEAdesign.
RelativePCCauxiliarypowerconsumptionvariesbetween50%and150%ofthe30%MEAdesign.
These variations are inherent to the values provided by the licensors themselves. It is noted that
HTC did not provide the auxiliary power consumption of their PCC unit. In order to calculate the
HTCs PCC performance, Nexant assumed that the auxiliary power consumption is 80% of the
genericMEAPCCpowerconsumption,proportionatetothePCCregenerationheat.
Except for Alstom, all of the PCC licensorquoted CAPEXs are within about 10% of the estimate
CAPEX for the generic MEA design. This is remarkably consistent considering the potentially
different design philosophies, estimation details and methodology used among the PCC licensors.
Thequoted CAPEXswereuseddirectlyinthe economicevaluations.Relativerankingsensitivityto
PCCCAPEXswascarriedoutandresultsarediscussedinSection6.6.
Table62SelectedSummaryofPCCLicensorResponsesRelativetoNexant30%MEAPCCCase
Reference Alstom Fluor
SeeNote1 30%MEAPCC Advanced BASF/Linde Econamine MHIKS1
Design Amine PCC Plus HTCPurenergy Process ShellCanSolv
CO2CaptureRate 85% 86% 85% 90% 85% 85% 85%
PCCRegenerationHeatRelativeto 100% 74% 74% 77% 80% 75% 73%

30%MEA
CoolingLoadRelativeto30%MEA 100% 134% 107% 115% 88% 120% 115%
PCCAuxiliaryPowerConsumption 100% 155% 54% 109% N/A 59% 45%

Relativeto30%MEA (assume~80%)
ReportedCAPEXReference USGC Western USGC USGC Canada USGC USGC

Location Europe
CAPEX(USGC)Relativeto 100% 141% 107% 102% 112% 98% 112%

30%MEA
Note 1: Values presented here are Nexants interpretation of the data provided by the PCC licensors and relative to
Nexantsinhouse30%MEAdesign.
6.3 POZARICANGCCPOSTPCCRETROFITPERFORMANCEEVALUATIONFORALL
LICENSORS
Forthisstudy,NexantwasresponsibleforintegratingthePCCplantintotheexistingPozaRicaNGCC
plantinordertoevaluatetheoverallPozaRicaNGCCperformanceafterPCCretrofitforeachofthe
CO2 capture technologies. Each respective PCC technology providers responsibility was limited to
providingtheirPCCB/Lperformanceandcostestimation.Nexantprovidedthedesignofotherunits
integraltoretrofittingthePozaRica NGCCwithPCC.Theseinclude: thefluegasfeedblower,CO2
compression and dehydration unit, and NGCC plant modifications for PCC retrofit. By providing a
consistentdesignforeachofthesenonproprietaryunitsforallsixretrofitcases,Nexantminimized
therelativeoveralldesignandcostestimationinconsistencyanduncertainty.
Table63summarizesandcomparesthePozaRicaNGCCperformancebeforeandafterPCCforeach
of the CO2 capture technologies. With regards to auxiliary power consumption, the PCC power
consumption provided by each PCC licensor is combined with Nexants CO2
compression/dehydration and plant modifications power consumption. This ensures that the
proprietary,PCClicensorprovidedauxiliarypowerconsumptiondataremainsconfidential.
FromTable63,itcanbeseenthatallsixPCCtechnologiesclaimimprovementinefficiencyoverthe
30%MEAdesign,rangingfrom8.4to9.3percentagepointloss,comparedto9.9percentagepoint
lossinefficiencyforthe30%MEAdesign.Itshouldbenotedthatthereisnopeerrevieweddatain
the public domain to compare the claims of the various technologies in comparison to the 30%
generic amine case. Pilot plant testing would be required to confirm any efficiency claims.
Table63PozaRicaNGCCPrePCCvsPostPCCRetrofitPerformanceSummary
Generic30% HTC
SeeNote1 PrePCC Alstom BASF Fluor MHI ShellCanSolv
MEAPCC Purenergy
NGCCCO2Emissions,MTPD(STPD) 2297(2532) 345(380) 328(362) 344(379) 229(252) 346(381) 346(381) 342(377)
RecoveredCO2Product,MTPD(STPD) 0(0) 1952(2152) 1969(2170) 1953(2153) 2068(2280) 1951(2151) 1951(2151) 1955(2155)
%CO2Capture 0 85% 86% 85% 90% 85% 85% 85%
PowerBalance,MW
Generation
GasTurbineGrossOutput 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6 166.6
SteamTurbineGrossOutput 82.5 39.6 49.6 49.4 46.0 46.7 49.2 49.4
BackPressureTurbine 0 21.6 17 17 18 18 17 16.7
TotalGrossOutput 249.1 227.8 232.8 232.7 231.0 231.3 232.6 232.7
ExistingNGCCPlantParasiticLoads 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2
FlueGasBlower 0 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8
PCC+CO2Compression+PlantMods 0 16.1 17.3 14.1 16.6 14.0 15.7 14.2
TotalNewPCCParasiticLoad 7.2 32.0 33.3 30.1 32.5 29.9 31.7 30.1
NetPowerPlantExport,MW 241.9 195.8 199.5 202.6 198.4 201.4 200.9 202.5

DeltaPlantExport,MW 46.1 42.4 39.3 43.4 40.5 41.0 39.3
%PlantExportReduction 19% 18% 16% 18% 17% 17% 16%
NetPlantHeatRate,MJ/kWh(Btu/kWh) 6.94(6584) 8.57(8134) 8.42(7984) 8.28(7860) 8.46(8025) 8.33(7907) 8.35(7926) 8.29(7862)

NetPlantEfficiency,%LHV 51.8 42.0 42.7 43.4 42.5 43.2 43.1 43.4
DeltaPlantEfficiency,percentagept 9.9 9.1 8.4 9.3 8.7 8.8 8.4
IncrementalWaterImport,lpm(gpm) 0(0) 1537(406) 3058(808) 1718(454) 1618(427) 1328(351) 2561(676) 1580(417)
Note1:ValuespresentedhereareNexantsinterpretationofthedataprovidedbythePCClicensors.
6.4 POZARICANGCCPCCRETROFITECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTS
Table64showstheeconomicevaluationresults,includingincrementalCAPEX+7yearbreakeven
electricitypriceandincrementalCOEforeachofthePCCtechnologiesretrofittedintothePozaRica
NGCCplant.WithregardtoPCCcostestimates,thePCCplantCAPEXthatwasprovidedbyeachPCC
licensoriscombinedwithNexantsCO2compression/dehydrationplantCAPEX.Thisensuresthatthe
licensorprovidedPCCplantcapitalcostdataremainconfidential.
Based on the economic figuresofmerit, the various PCC licensors technologies are ranked for
comparative purposes. The lower the incremental CAPEX + 7 year breakeven electricity price/
incremental COE, the higher the ranking. As shown in Table 65, for both methodologies, the PCC
licensors rankings are in the same order. Hence, we can use COE as the sole figureofmerit in
rankingthevariousPCCtechnologies.
Figure 61 shows a graphical representation of the COEs for the six PCC technology licensors. It
should be noted that with the exception of Alstom all other PCC technologies have very similar
COEs,beingwithinarangeof$1.3/MWh,or4%ofoneanother.
Table64IncrementalPCCCostsforVariousLicensors
IncrementalCoststoPozaRica Generic30%
NGCCwithoutCO2Capture[Note MEAPCC HTC
1] Design Alstom BASF/Linde Fluor Purenergy MHI ShellCanSolv
PCCPlant+CO2Compression
[Note2] 181.4 234.7 187.7 181.9 194.5 178.8 194.9
FlueGasBlower 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2
TOTAL 228.4 281.4 232.3 228.0 237.8 223.9 239.5
O&MEstimate,$MMUS
FixedCosts 11.0 13.3 11.1 10.9 11.4 10.8 11.6
TOTAL 18.5 21.0 18.7 18.5 18.7 18.3 19.1
CAPEX+7YrOPEXBreakeven
ElectricityPrice,$/MWh[Note4]: 43.2 47.9 40.7 42.0 41.7 40.4 41.5
RankingbasedonBreakevenPrice N/A 6 2 5 4 1 3
EstimatedCostofElectricity(COE),
$/MWh[Note5] 37.6 41.4 35.3 36.5 36.2 35.1 36.0
Note2AllfiguresexceptNexants'Generic30%MEADesign'arebasedonvendorprovideddata,whichareconsideredproprietary.
Note4IncrementaltoestimatedexistingPozaRicaNGCCCAPEX+7YearOPEXBreakevenPriceof$44.79/MWh
Figure61IncrementalPCCCOEsforVariousLicensors
45
41.4
40
36.5
36.0 36.2
35 35.3
35.1
30
25
MHI BASF ShellCanSolv HTCPurenergy Fluor Alstom

6.5 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSAFTERCO2CAPTURERATEADJUSTMENTS
WhileNexantsquestionnairespecifiedforPCCdesigntocapture85%ofthePozaRicaplantsCO2,
Fluorprovideddatabasedonacapturerateof90%.ThedesignforhigherCO2captureraterequires
alargerreboilingduty,whichresultsinalargersteamextractionrateandconsequentlylowerpower
output from the steam turbine. The larger quantity of CO2 captured also increases the CO2
compressionhorsepowerandcosts.ItisrecognizedthatFluorsdatawouldneedtobeadjustedto
ensureanapplestoapplescomparisonwiththeothertechnologies.
Nexant made the estimated adjustments by: firstly, prorated Fluors total CO2 regeneration duty
from90%to85%.ThePCCauxiliarypowerconsumption,CO2compressionpowerrequirementsand
coolingduty werealsoreviseddownaccordingly.Finally,FluorsPCCplantCAPEXwasreducedby
5%toaccountforthesmallerabsorbersize.
Table 65 shows the estimated PCC costs and ranking after adjusting for Fluors CO2 capture rate.
Rankvaluesingreenindicatethatthetechnologyhasmovedupinrankingwhilevaluesinredmean
thatthetechnologyhassliddownfromtheinitialevaluation.Rankingsinblueareunchangedfrom
theinitialeconomicevaluation.Figure62isthegraphicalrepresentationoftheCOEs,adjustedfor
Fluors85%CO2capturerate.
Based on the adjustments made to account for 85% CO2 capture rate for Fluor, its COE is now
$35.0/MWh,orabouta$1.5/MWhdecreasefromtheinitialevaluation.
Table65IncrementalPCCCostsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustmentforFluor
Generic30%
IncrementalCoststoPozaRicaNGCC MEAPCC HTC
withoutCO2Capture[Note1] Design Alstom BASF/Linde Fluor Purenergy MHI ShellCanSolv
PCCPlant+CO2Compression[Note
2] 181.4 234.7 187.7 174.0 194.5 178.8 194.9
FlueGasBlower 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2
TOTAL 228.4 281.4 232.3 219.7 237.8 223.9 239.5
O&MEstimate,$MMUS
FixedCosts 11.0 13.3 11.1 10.9 11.4 10.8 11.6
TOTAL 18.5 21.0 18.7 18.4 18.7 18.3 19.1
EstimatedCostofElectricity(COE),
$/MWh[Note4] 37.6 41.4 35.3 35.0 36.2 35.1 36.0
Note2AllexceptNexant'Generic30%MEADesign'arebasedonvendorprovideddata,whichareconsideredproprietary.
Figure62IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2CaptureRateAdjustmentforFluor
45
IncrementalCOEAdjustedfor85%CO2CaptureforFluor
41.4
40
36.5
36.0 36.2
35 35.3
35.0 35.1
30
25

6.6 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTOPCCCAPEX
AsmentionedinSection6.3,thePCCcapitalcostswereprovidedbyeachofthePCClicensorsasa
singlevaluebasedonpotentiallydifferentdesignphilosophies,estimationdetailsandmethodology.
WhilethequotedCAPEXsarefairlyconsistentagainstthegenericMEACAPEX,eachcaneasilyvary
by10%.
To determine the sensitivity of the relative economic ranking to potential CAPEX variations, the
COEs were reevaluated for each PCC at 90% and 110% of the quoted PCC CAPEX. The Nexant
designed systems (flue gas blower, CO2 capture and compression, and NGCC plant modifications)
CAPEXswerenotchangedbecausetheyweredesignedandestimatedonaconsistentbasis.
ThebarchartinFigure63showstheCOEsforthesixPCCtechnologiesatthebaselineand10%
PCC plant costs, for CO2 capture rates of 85%. The first bar (in blue) represents incremental COE
basedon100%ofthelicensorquotedCAPEXforthelicensedamineplant.Thesecondbar(intan)
representsincrementalCOEbasedon110%ofthelicensorquotedCAPEX.Lastly,thethirdbar(in
green)representsincrementalCOEbasedon90%ofthelicensorquotedCAPEX.
Thedatashowthatatthislevelofaccuracy,it cannot be determined if any one of the top 5 (all

except Alstom) technologies stands out among the rest.Forexample,Fluormayhavethelowest
COE (blue bar) based on its quoted CAPEX (after adjustment to 85% CO2 capture), but just a 10%
increase in its PCC CAPEX would cause its COE (tan bar) to go up to $36.4/MWh, which would be
higherthanthehighestCOEbasedonquotedCAPEXbyHTC(bluebar,$36.2/MWh).Conversely,the
Fluor COE of $35.0/MWh (blue bar) at the licensorquoted CAPEX is higher than the highest COE
basedon90%ofHTCsquotedCAPEX(greenbar,$34.6/MWh).
WithinthelicensorsprovidedCAPEXaccuracy,itwouldthereforebedifficulttoestablisharelative
rankingofthetopfivePCCcandidateswithcertainty.
Figure63IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorswith10%PCCCAPEX
45 IncrementalCOEBasedonLicensors'Data(adjustedfor85%CO2CaptureforFluor)
IncrementalCOEfor+10%PCCCAPEX
IncrementalCOEfor10%PCCCAPEX 43.3
41.4
40
39.4
37.5 37.7
36.5 36.8
36.4 36.2
36.0
35 35.3
35.0 35.1
34.4 34.6
33.7 33.8 33.8
30
25

6.7 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTOREBOILINGDUTY
InthequestionnairetothePCClicensors,besidesaskingfortheCO2regenerationdutiesfortreating
the fullsize Poza Rica NGCC flue gas, the licensors were also requested to provide a typical
regeneration duty per unit of CO2 captured for both NGCC and coalfired flue gases, from either
their pilot or demonstration plant units. With the exception of Shell, all the licensors provided
typical duties from processing coalfired flue gases. A few of these licensors provided data from
pilottestingonNGCCfluegases.
BasedonNexantsexperiencefrompaststudies,thelowconcentrationofCO2inanNGCCfluegas
(around 4%) can adversely affect the CO2 pickup of the amine solvent, resulting in increased CO2
regenerationduty,intheorderofabout1520%morethanthecorrespondingdutyforCO2capture
from coalfired flue gas, which typically contains about 12% CO2. Part of the higher duty can be
reducedthroughprocessdesignadjustmentssuchascolderfeedgasorabsorberinterstagecooling,
buttheseadjustmentstendtoresultintradeoffsintheformofhighercapitalcosts.
Fromthelicensorsresponses,itwasnotedthatsomeofthequotedCO2regenerationdutiesforthe
PozaRicaNGCCwereunexpectedlylowcomparedtotheirstatedresultsfromcoalfiredfluegastest
runs.Onanormalizedbasis,BASF,FluorandHTCeachshowedCO2regenerationdutiesforthePoza
RicaNGCCthatareonly57%morethanwhattheirtestdataforcoalfiredfluegasshowed.Since
the amine plant designs were proprietary, it was not possible to determine the extent of process
adjustmentsandcosttradeoffsthatwereincludedintheselicensorquotes.
Nexantthusperformedasensitivitychecktodeterminetheimpactonrelativerankingincasethe
regenerationdutyishigherthanstated.NexantreevaluatedtheCOEbyadjustingBASF,Fluor,and
HTCs NGCC CO2 regeneration duties to 115% of their stated coalfired flue gas test data duties.
Figure64showstheCOEsforthevariousPCCtechnologiesattheirreportedreboiling dutiesand
aftertheaforementionedadjustmentstoBASF,Fluorand HTCsduties.DifferencesinCOEamong
thetopfivecandidatesarestillsmallandwithintheaccuracyofthestudy.
Figure64IncrementalCOEsforVariousLicensorsafterCO2RegenerationDutyAdjustments
45
IncrementalCOEBasedonLicensors'Data(adjustedfor85%CO2CaptureforFluor)
IncrementalCOEBasedonAdjustedCO2RegenerationDuties
41.4
40
36.7
35.9 36.0 36.2
35 35.7
35.3
35.0 35.1
30
25

6.8 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTONATURALGASPRICES
Figure65showsthesensitivityoftheCOEsforthesixPCCtechnologiestonaturalgaspriceranging
from $1/GJ ($1.06/MMBtu) to $10/GJ ($10.55/MMBtu). The baseline gas price used for all PCC
technologiesintheevaluationsis$2.37/GJ($2.50/MMBtu).
ConsistentwiththeresultspresentedinSection6.6,theCOEsforthetopfivetechnologiesarevery
closetooneanotheranditcannotbedeterminedifanyoneofthemstandsoutamongtherest,be
itathigh($10/GJ)orlow($1/GJ)gasprices.However,itshouldbenotedthattheCOEforFluors
PCC technology increases at a greater rate than the other technologies due to its lower net plant
efficiency.Atabout$5/GJ($5.28/MMBtu),theMHIandBASFPCCtechnologies,whichhaveslightly
higherefficiencies thanFluor,nowhaveanequalCOEwithFluor.Atthehighest natural gasprice
($10/GJ)evaluatedinthissensitivityanalysis,BASFstechnologyhasthelowestCOE($45.6/MWh)of
thesixlicensors.
6.9 ECONOMICEVALUATIONRESULTSSENSITIVITYTOANNUALONSTREAMFACTOR(AOF)
Figure66showsthesensitivityoftheCOEsforthesixPCCtechnologiestothepowerplantsAOF
ranging from 75% to 100%. The baseline AOF used for all PCC technologies in the evaluations is
91.3%,or8,000hoursperyear.
ConsistentwiththeresultspresentedinSection6.6and6.8,theCOEsforthetopfivetechnologies
arebunchedverycloselytogetherandnoonetechnologystandsoutamongtheothers,regardless
ofahighorlowAOF.
Figure65COESensitivitytoNaturalGasPricesforVariousPCCLicensors
52
Baseline NGpriceat$2.37/GJ
47
COE,$/MWh
42
37
Alstom BASF Fluor(85%Capture) HTCPurenergy MHI ShellCansolv

32
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
NaturalGasPrice,$/GJ
Figure66COESensitivitytoAnnualOnStreamFactorforVariousPCCLicensors
51
Baseline AOFof91.3%
(8,000hoursperyear)
46
COE,$/MWh
41
36
Alstom BASF Fluor(85%Capture) HTCPurenergy MHI ShellCansolv

31
75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0
AnnualOnStreamFactor,%
6.10 ESTIMATEDPCCPLOTSPACEREQUIREMENTS
Figure58inSection5.8.2showsthepreliminary,aerialviewofthePozaRicaNGCCafter30%MEA
PCCretrofit.ThefigureclearlyshowsthatthereissufficientplotspacerequiredforaPCCretrofit.In
the questionnaire to the PCC licensors, Nexant requested the dimensions of the different PCC
sections.Basedonthelicensorsresponses,togetherwithNexantsestimatefortheareaoftheCO2
compression section, the total plot space requirements for each technologys PCC plant, including
thefluegasblowerandCO2compression/dehydrationunitsbutexcludingplantmodifications,are
tabulatedinTable66.
Table66EstimatedPCCPlotSpaceRequirements
TotalPlotSpaceRequirements,including
FlueGasBlower&CO2
Compression/Dehydrationexcluding
PCCTechnology PlantMods,m2(ft2)
30%MEA 9,000(96,000)
Alstom 14,000(150,000)
BASF 11,000(120,000)
Fluor 6,300(68,000)
HTCPurenergy 17,000(180,000)
MHI 6,700(72,000)
ShellCansolv 6,900(74,000)

The estimated total available plot space at the Poza Rica plant, not including space available for
plantmodifications,is24,500m2(264,000ft2).Thisismuchlargerthanthecorrespondingplotspace
requiredbyanyoneofthePCCtechnologiesevaluatedinthisstudy.
The bulk of the plot space taken up by plant modifications, per the 30% MEA case, is the new
coolingtowerandCWpumphouse,asdepictedinFigure58.Theestimatedareaoccupiedbythese
units is about 1,950 m2 (21,000 ft2). Although several of the PCC licensors technologies require
larger CW flows than the 30% MEAbased PCC, they are expected to require no more than two
additionalcoolingcells.Figure58showsthatthereshouldbesufficientspacearoundthenewPCC
cooling tower to extend it by the two additional cooling cells required to accommodate the
increasedCWdemands.
Basedonthisanalysis,thePozaRicaplantisexpectedtohavesufficientareatosupportanyoneof
thesixPCCtechnologiesevaluated.
7. SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS
7.1 SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS
A preliminary carbon capture technology assessment and screening exercise was carried out with
the objective to identify the most appropriate, commerciallyavailable postcombustion carbon
capture (PCC) technology for NGCC power plants in Mexico. This was to be followed by a more
detailedevaluationoftheselectedtechnology,whichwouldserveasthebasisforthedevelopment
ofaconceptualdesignofacarboncapturepilotplanttobelocatedatPozaRicapowerstationin
Veracruz. The World Banks and GoMs desire is to design, build and operate the Poza Rica pilot
plantby2019.Againstthatneartermobjectiveandthepreliminaryassessmentperformed,Nexant
recommendsthatthetechnologyofinterestshouldbefocusedonaminesolventbasedabsorption
processes,ofwhich(1)CO2capturefromanNGCCfluegashasalreadybeenincommercialpractice,
albeit at a small scale, and (2) there are several wellrespected companies that are currently
developing secondgeneration amine absorption CO2 capture processes, which promise better
energy efficiency and lower costs when compared with current stateoftheart 30% MEA
technology.
The current stateoftheart amine PCC technology for NGCC application is represented by that of
theBellinghamplant,locatedinMassachusetts,intheUSA.Theplantwasengineered,constructed
and operated by Fluor Corporation. It was operated from 1991 to 2005, capturing CO2 not for
greenhousegasmitigationpurposes,butforindustrialusage.Duringitsoperation,itcapturedabout
350STPDofCO2fromaslipstreamoffluegasfroma320MWNGCCpowerplant.
SixwellknownaminesolventbasedPCCtechnologylicensorsparticipatedinthestudyandprovided
data for Nexant to perform a more detailed technology evaluation, based on a fullscale design
analysisofretrofittingthePozaRocaNGCCplantforCO2capture.Thesixadvancedaminecapture
processes were compared against a generic stateoftheart amine design that was developed by
Nexant,basedon30wt%MEA.
7.1.1 DesignAnalysisofRetrofittingPozaRicaPlantforGeneric30%MEABasedPCC
As would be expected, retrofitting Poza Rica for CO2 capture will significantly impact the plants
performanceandeconomics.TheretrofittedPozaRicaNGCCsnetpowerexportisexpectedtobe
reducedby46MW,or19%,from242MWto196MW.Thecorrespondingnetplantefficiencywould
decreasefrom51.8%to42.0%,alossofalmost10percentagepoints,asshowninTable61.
Withrespecttotheeconomicimpact,aCOEincreaseintheorderof$37.6/MWhistobeexpected.
This represents a 92.4% increase in COE, meaning that the COE of the retrofitted Poza Rica plant
withPCCisalmostdoublethatoftheexistingoperationwithoutcapture.
ItshouldalsobenotedthatretrofittingapowerplantforpostcombustionCO2captureisverymuch
site and configuration specific. This study is for Poza Rica with the configuration of a
Siemens/Westinghouse W501F gas turbine feeding into three small 27 MWe steam turbines.
Specificretrofitrequirementsmaynotbethesameunderdifferentconditions.
7.1.2 ComparisonofSixAdvancedAminebasedPCCTechnologies
Nexantreviewedandanalyzedthedataprovidedbythevarioustechnologylicensors.Tothebestof
itsabilitiesandusingsoundengineeringreasoning,Nexantadjustedandfilledinmissingdatainthe
evaluation process to ensure reasonable levels of consistency. Thus, the final assessment only
presents Nexants interpretation of the various technologies. Nexant makes no claims as to the
accuracyofthedataprovided(orlackthereof)asthebasisforthestudy,northerelativerankingas
atruerepresentationofthetechnologystatus.
All six advanced aminebased PCC technologies show a lower heat of regeneration compared to
generic30% MEA, byabout20to25%.Withinthe group,however,thedifference issmall,only
3%.Asaresult,allsixtechnologiesshowanimprovementinoverallefficiencyoverthegeneric30%
MEAbasedretrofittedPozaRicaplantalossofplantefficiencyrangingfrom8.4to9.3percentage
pointinstead,of9.9,showninTable62andTable63.
Pertheagreeduponmethodology,allsixtechnologieswererankedbasedonCOEastheeconomic
indicator, of which the licensorprovided PCC plant CAPEX have a significant contribution. The
CAPEXsprovidedforthestandalonePCCplantfromthevariouslicensors,aftermaking necessary
adjustmentstobringthecostbasistoacommonUSGClocation,arewithinareasonablerangeof
oneother.TheonlyexceptionisthePCCCAPEXfromAlstom,whichisabout41%higherthanthat
estimated for Nexants generic MEA design. The CAPEXs for the rest of the PCC technologies fall
within 98% to 112% of Nexants estimate. The Alstom provided cost was used, as is, in Nexants
economicevaluation.
BasedonthecalculatedincrementalincreaseinCOEastheeconomicindicator,alloftheadvanced
PCC technologies under development show an improvement over the generic Nexant reference
MEAdesign.TheonlyexceptionisAlstombecauseofitshighCAPEX.ThedifferencesinCOEamong
thetopfivelicensors,however,arewithin4%ofoneanother.
Withinthelevelofdataaccuracyforthestudy,itwouldbereasonabletoconcludethatthetopfive
PCC technologies all have similar economic performances and it cannot be determined, with
certainty, that one is clearly superior to the rest. If three top of its class candidates must be
chosenfromthelist,basedontheCOEresults,thenthesewouldhavetobeFluor,MHI,andBASF,
asshowninFigure63inSection6.5.
FinaltechnologyselectionforfuturePozaRicaPCCimplementationwould,mostlikely,needtotake
into other factors into consideration, such as process guarantee, technology licensing fee,
willingness to work with the GoM stakeholders to take on active role of participation into the
project,etc.,asrequired.
7.2 PCCTECHNOLOGYLICENSORSREVIEWANDCOMMENT
A copy of the drafted report, after the World Banks review and with its comments incorporated,
wasprovidedtoallsixofthePCCtechnologylicensorsfortheirreviewandcomment.Thiswasdone
onMarch16,2016witharequesttoreplynolaterthanApril1,2016.Ofthesixlicensors,onlyMHI
and Alstom replied. MHIs comments, mainly on Section 4.5, have been incorporated. Alstoms
commentsareincorporatedinAppendixG.

Task3PilotPlantFeasibilityDesign
107
Task 3 Pilot Plant Feasibility Design
8. INTRODUCTION
8.1 PROJECTBACKGROUND
The subject study was performed as part of an ongoing World Bank funded project to develop
capacity for carbon capture, utilization and storage technology (CCUS) in Mexico. This project has
theoverallobjectiveofsupportingMexicosSecretariadeEnergia(SENER)andotherGovernmentof
Mexico(GoM)stakeholderswiththeimplementationoftheMexicanCCUSroadmap.Theultimate
goalistosuccessfullydevelopanddeployCCUSintheelectricityandoilandgasindustriesinMexico
aswellasinothers,suchasironandsteel,cementandchemicalindustries.
AnintegralandcriticalpartofthisMexicanCCUSroadmapisthedesign,construction,andoperation
ofaCO2capturepilotplant,whichwoulddemonstratethepotentialandfeasibilityofcapturingCO2
from natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plants in Mexico. This endeavor will create a
knowledge base for the various stakeholders and the experience gained from this study will
CCUSintheMexico.
8.2 STUDYOBJECTIVES
The Nexantteamwas tasked to carry outa prefeasibilitystudy to:1)assessandrecommend the
most appropriate commerciallyavailable postcombustion capture technology for NGCC power
plantsin Mexico,and2) developaconceptualdesignofacapturepilotplanttobelocatedatthe
250 MW Poza Rica NGCC generating station in the State of Veracruz. The pilot plant conceptual
designwastobedevelopedwithsufficientprocessdetailsinordertoenablethepreparationofa
frontendengineeringdesign(FEED)packageaspartofaPhaseIIactivityfortheproject.TheFEED
preparationisnotpartofthecurrentprefeasibilitystudy.
Itshouldbenotedthatinitiallyanotherpowerplant,DosBocas32,wasalsoidentifiedasapotential
siteforthestudy.ButtheprojectteamwaslaterinformedthatDosBocaswouldnotbeasuitable
site,asthepowerplantisscheduledtobeshutdownin2018.
8.3 WORKSCOPE
Theprojectworkscopeconsistsoffivemajortasksasfollows:
Subtask1.1PlantandSiteDataRequisitionandPreparationofaStudyDesignBasis
32AlsolocatedintheStateofVeracruz.
Subtask1.3TechnologySurveyQuestionnairePreparation
Subtask1.4TechnologyScreening,EvaluationandSelection
Task2:InterimReportMeetingwithRecommendations
Task3:PilotPlantFeasibilityStudy
Task4:FinalReport
Task5:Workshop
AcopyoftheWorkScope/TermsofReference,asamendedonSeptember25,2015,isincludedin
AppendixB.
9. DELIVERABLES
The Interim Report of the results of Task 1 (delivered as part of Task 2) together with this Task 3
Reportconstitutethetwomaindeliverablesfortheproject.
The Interim Task 1 Report summarizes all work performed under Task 1. The Task 1 results were
presentedataprojectreviewmeetingandworkshop,whichwereorganizedbytheWorldBankand
SENER on January 2729, 2016. The Task 1 Report was first issued on February 26, 2016. It was
revised to incorporate (1) comments from the World Bank, 2) a suggestion from IIE to perform
additional cost of electricity (COE) sensitivity analyses, and 3) a review and comments from
MitsubishiHeavyIndustries(MHI)andAlstom,twoofthesixCO2capturetechnologylicensorswho
participatedinthestudy.
ThisTask3reportdescribestheworkperformedunderTask3PozaRicaPilotPlantFeasibilityStudy
Design.
10. PILOTPLANTDESIGNBASIS
10.1 OBJECTIVE
The pilot plant design basis follows that of the Task 1 fullscale Poza Rica PCC retrofit evaluation
study.Thissectionlistssomeofthekeydesignbasisinformationusedforthepilotplantconceptual
design.ThefulldesignbasisdocumentanditslistofreferencescanbefoundinAppendixD.
10.2 OVERVIEWOFRETROFITTINGPOZARICANGCCFORPCC
The existing Poza Rica NGCC plant consists of one natural gasfired Siemens/Westinghouse model
W501F gas turbine (GT) producing a nominal 160 MWe of electricity. It is equipped with a heat
recovery steam generator (HRSG) to recover waste heat from the GT exhaust and generate
superheatedsteamfeedingthree27MWesteamturbinestoproduceadditionalpower.Thepower
plantstotalgeneratingcapacityis243MWenominal.
The PCC pilot plant was designed as an addon to the Poza Rica NGCC power plant. New
process/utilities tieins and retrofit to the NGCC power plant were added as required. Rotating
equipment critical to the continuous plant operation was spared to support the high availability
required of the NGCC operations. Where sparing was not feasible, alternate PCC operation was
identified to maintain continuous NGCC power plant operation. Figure 101 shows the interface
betweentheexistingNGCCpowerplantandthepilotplant.
Figure101PozaRicaNGCCFlowConfiguration(withPCCPilotPlant)
POZARICANGCCPlant
CoolingWaterReturn
W501F
Gas
NaturalGas Turbine
Air
160MWe Cooling WaterSupply
Nominal
IPSteam
HPSHSteam
BFW
Power
IPSH Steam CO2toVent
HeatRecovery
SteamGenerator LPSHSteam
(HRSG)
Power Cooling Cooling PCCPilot Plant

Water Water
SiemensSteam SiemensSteam SiemensSteam Supply Return Treated
Turbine No.1 Turbine No.2 Turbine No.3 FlueGasVent
(27MWe (27MWe (27MWe
Nominal) Nominal) Nominal)
Condensate
Solid
Waste
Waste
CO2 Solvent
Absorber Regen Water
eration
FlueGasSlipstream Reboiler
Steam
FlueGasSlipstream
Stack Blower
10.3 SITERELATEDCONDITIONS
Table101liststhesiterelatedconditionsofthePozaRicaNGCCplantforretrofitwiththePCCpilot
plant.
Table101SiteConditions
Location PozaRica,Veracruz,Mexico
Elevationabovesea
50m(164ft)
level
Topography Level
SeismicZone 0
Transportation RoadandRail
Water FromCanaldeLlamada
Access Accessbyroadandrail
FlueGasQuantityto
1%oftotalpowerplantfluegas,or387mTPD(426STPD)33
PilotPlant
CO2Specification 85%recoveryandvented
10.4 METEOROLOGICALDATA
Summer design ambient conditions were used for the NGCC and PCC design and performance
evaluation.TheseconditionswereprovidedbyCFEandareshowninTable102.
Table102MeteorologicalData
Description SummerDesign
BarometricPressure 1.013bara(14.69psia)
DryBulbTemperature 32C(90F)
WetBulbTemperature 25.3C(77.5F)
RelativeHumidity,% 57%
10.5 PCCFEEDANDPRODUCTPROPERTIES
10.5.1 PCCFeed(NGCCFlueGas)Properties
A1%slipstreamofthefluegasfromthePozaRicaNGCCpowerplantHRSGoutletisroutedthrough
ablowertoboostitspressurebeforeitsdeliverytothePCCpilotplant.TheestimatedPCCfluegas
feedcompositionandflowrateforthenominal160MWegasturbinegrossoutput,operatingat32
C(90F)ambienttemperatureand57%relativehumidity,areshowninTable103.
33mTPD=metrictonsperday;STPD=shorttons(U.S.tons)perday
ThefluegascompositionandconditionsshownareattheNGCCHRSGoutletfordeliverytothePCC
pilotplantbatterylimit(B/L).Thisisafterthefluegashasundergoneapressureboostthroughthe
fluegasblower.
For the purpose of absorbent or solvent degradation estimation, the NOx concentration shown is
assumedtobe95%NOand5%NO2.
Table103PozaRicaNGCCFlueGasSlipstreamCompositionandFlowRate
PCCDesignFlueGascomposition,mole%
CO2 3.81
O2 12.32
N2 73.26
Ar 0.89
H2O 9.72
SO2 11ppmV
NOx 60ppmV
Total 100.00
Conditions:
PressureatPCCB/L,bara(psia) 1.15(16.7)
TemperatureatPCCB/L,C(F) 107.8(226)
MassFlow,kg/s(lb/hr) 4.48(35,548)
MolarFlow,kgmol/hr(lbmol/hr) 571(1,258)
10.5.2 RecoveredCO2Properties
ThePCCpilotplantisdesignedtorecover85%ofCO2intheNGCCfluegasslipstream.Recovered
CO2fromthePCCunitisexpectedtomeetCO2gaspipelinespecifications.Table104showstheU.S.
DOE CO2 specifications34for EOR purposes. The CO2 product leaving the PCC plant battery limit is
expectedtomeetallspecificationsinTable104exceptforH2Ocontent,pressureandtemperature.
In a fullsize PCC plant, the recovered CO2 is sent to a separate CO2 compression unit, where it is
compressedanddehydratedbeforebeingdeliveredtotheplantbatterylimitforEORapplications.
ForthePCCpilotplant,aCO2compressionunitisnotincludedandtheseparatedCO2isventedto
theatmosphere.
34QualityGuidelinesforEnergySystemStudies(QGESS)CO
2ImpurityDesignParameters,DOE/NETL
341/011212,January2012,pp45
Table104RecoveredCO2Properties
ProductCO2Specification(forEOR,NETL/DOE)
CO2 95.0wt%(min)
N2 1.0vol%(max)
O2 100ppmV(max)
H2O 800ppmV(max)
Ar 1.0vol%(max)
CH4 1.0vol%(max)
CO 35ppmV(max)
H2 1.0vol%(max)
Pressure,bara(psia)35 152.8(2215)
o o
Temperature, C( F)36 37.8(100)
10.6 PCCUTILITYREQUIREMENTS
10.6.1 PozaRicaNGCCPlantSteamPressureLevels
The Poza Rica NGCC plant uses three (3) Siemens steam turbine generators (STG), each nominally
generating27MWeofpowerforatotalof81 MWenominal.It hasasingleHRSGthatgenerates
steamatthreepressurelevels,highpressure(HP),intermediatepressure(IP),andlowpressure(LP).
ThesaturatedsteamfromtheHRSGevaporatorsissuperheatedanddistributedtothethreesteam
turbines for power production. Figure 102 shows a simplified process flow diagram (PFD), which
illustratestheconfigurationofthePozaRicaNGCCplantsHRSGandsteamturbinearrangement.
35The H O content and the pressure and temperature of the recovered CO shown in Table 34 are the CO product
2 2 2
conditionsattheexitoftheCO2compression/dehydrationunit.
36Ibid.

Figure102PozaRicaNGCCHRSG/SteamTurbineConfiguration
STG #1
CW
IP LP
STG #2
CW
IP LP
STG #3
HP Steam CW
Vented
Flue Gas
IP Steam LP Steam
Stack
Hot Flue Gas
HRSG
Condensate

Table105showstheconditionsofthesteamgenerationlevelsinthePozaRicaNGCCplantsHRSG
unit.
Table105PozaRicaNGCCPlantSteamConditions
Case Design
PowerPlantType NGCC
SteamTurbine Siemens(3x27MWenominal)
HRSGSaturatedSteamConditions
FromHRSGEvaporators
LPSteam,bara/C(psia/F) 6.0/159(86.5/318)
DeaeratorOperatingPressure,bara(psia) 6.1(88.6)
BoilerFeedWaterSupplyTemperature,C(F) 159(318)
SuperheatedSteamtoSTG
LPSteam,bara/C(psia/F) 4.8/178(69/352)
CondenserPressure,bara(psia) 0.09(1.3)
CondenserPressureRange,bara(psia) 0.06to0.09(0.8to1.3)
10.6.2 SteamCondensateReturn
The PCC pilot plant reboiler and reclaimer steam condensate will not be returned to the NGCC
condensate system, but used as process water makeup to the pilot plant instead. Excess
condensate is sent to the NGCC cooling tower as makeup water together with the pilot plant CW
return.Steamcondensatequalitywillbemonitoredduringthepilottesttoverifyitssuitabilityfor
return for reuse in the existing NGCC condensate system as required for future fullsize
demonstrationPCCimplementationinPozaRica.ThePCCpilotplantreboilerandreclaimersteam
condensateissentonlytothecoolingtowertobeusedascoolingtowermakeup.
10.6.3 CoolingWater
ThePozaRicaNGCCplantutilizesthreemechanicaldraftandevaporativerecirculatingwetcooling
towers(CT).EachCT,whichconsistsofthreecoolingcells,isdedicatedtooneofthethreesteam
turbinesurfacecondensers,asillustratedinFigure103.Thecoolingwater(CW)supplyandreturn
conditionsatthePCCB/LconditionsareshowninTable106.
The new pilot plant will not have its own CT. It will extract its CW needs from the three existing
NGCCCTbasinsviaadedicatednewtrenchedsupplyheader.TheCWsupplywillflowbygravityto
newsetsofCWpumpsinthepilotplant,wheretheCWpressureisboostedtocirculatethroughthe
new pilot plant coolers before returning to the top of the NGCC CT via a dedicated new return
header.
Figure103PozaRicaNGCCPlantExistingCoolingTowerArrangement
STG #1
Surface Condenser
STG #2
Surface Condenser
STG #3
Surface Condenser

Table106PozaRicaCoolingTowerDesignConditions
MaximumCWSupplyTemperature,oC(oF) 27.5(81.5)
WaterCirculationRate,L/m(gpm) 41,600(11,000)/cell
124,800(33,000)/tower
CTDesignDuty,GJ/hr(MMBtu/hr) 311.8(295.5)
EstimatedMaximumCWReturnTemperature,oC(oF) 37.5(99.5)
10.6.4 ProcessWater
ProcesswaterforPCCwaterwashandsolventreclamationisavailablefromtheNGCCplantsteam
condensate system at the following conditions shown in Table 107. The new pilot plant normally
willnotimportprocesswaterfromtheNGCCplant.Instead,itwilluseitsreboilersteamcondensate
asprocesswatermakeup.
Table107PozaRicaProcessWaterSupplyConditions
Temperature,oC(oF) 43.3(110)
Pressure,bara(psia) 13.2(191.7)
Quantity LicensortoSpecify
10.7 PROCESSWASTESTREAMS
10.7.1 ProcessCondensates
ThePCCpilotplantproducesawashwaterpurgestreamcontainingsmallamountsofsolventplus
traceamountsofotherdegradationcontaminantsthathaveyettobedefined.Partofthissolvent
containing process purge water is recycled within the PCC pilot plant as makeup water for
replacement solvent solutions. Depending on the contaminants and concentrations, the excess
solventcontainedpurgecaneitherbe:
RoutedbacktotheNGCCCTasCTmakeupswiththepilotplantreturnCW,or
SenttodisposaltogetherwithotherNGCCwastewater,includingtheNGCCCTblowdown,
whichisover30timeslargerthanthepilotpurge.
In addition to the solventcontaining wash water purge, testing of selected proprietary advance
amines may also generate a small amount of purge from feed flue gas desulfurization (FGD). The
mostlikelycontaminantsinthispurgewillbecausticplustraceamountofsodiumsulfate.ThisFGD
purge should be suitable for returning with the pilot plant CW back to the NGCC CT as makeup
water.
Anadditionalsmallamountofpurgefromtheabsorberoverheadvolatileorganiccompounds(VOC)
washmaybeproduced,iftheVOCcontentofthetreatedfluegasafterthewaterwashistoohigh
foremission.Contaminantsin thisVOCwash purgearenotknownandwillbedefined duringthe
pilottesting.
Ifnecessary,theexcesssolventcontainingpurgeandtheVOCwashpurgemayberoutedthrough
newactivatedcarbondrumsbeforewastewaterdisposal,orreturnedtotheNGCCasCTmakeup.
Nonsolvent containing purge water from the pilot plant feed scrubber, as well as excess steam
condensate,isroutedbacktotheNGCCCTwiththepilotplantreturnCWasCTmakeup.
10.7.2 ReclaimerByproducts
Aminebased PCC plants sometimes produce a sludge byproduct from the amine reclaimer. The
materialisassumedtobehazardousandistruckedtooffsiteforincinerationbyathirdparty.An
allowanceisusedtoaccountforthecostofdisposingthereclaimingwaste.
10.8 ENVIRONMENTALANDEMISSIONSREQUIREMENTS
Table108liststheassumedemissionslimitsforthePozaRicaNGCCplant.
Table108EnvironmentalTargets
Pollutant NOM085SEMARNATLimit(Mexico)
NOx 110mole/mole(ppmV)
SO2 N/A
ParticulateMatter(PM) N/A
VOC 0.0011g/MJ(0.0025lb/MMBtu)[EPAlimitsfor
PCBoilers]

Therearetwocontinuousandtwointermittentatmosphericemissionpointsinthepilotplant:
Acontinuoustreatedfluegasventfromthetopoftheabsorber,
AcontinuousCO2productventfromthestripperoverheadrefluxdrum
Anintermittentatmosphericventfromtheaminestoragetank,and
Anintermittentatmosphericventfromtheaminesump.
Thepilottestswillverifyifalloftheseventscanmeettheemissionrequirementsspecifiedabove.
11. PILOTPLANTSIZERECOMMENDATION
11.1 INTRODUCTION
Task 1 evaluated a number of licensor aminebased PCC processes, as well as a Nexantdesigned
genericMEAprocess,appliedatfullscaletothePozaRicaNGCCinordertocapture85%oftheCO2
in the flue gas. The results from Task 1 showed that all the licensedPCC technologies have very
similarperformances.Atthelevelofaccuracythattheevaluationwasperformedat,itcouldnotbe
determined if any one of the PCC licensor technologies performs above and beyond other
technologies.
While the licensor aminebased PCC technologies do show about a 25% lower heat of CO2
regenerationcomparedtothegenericMEAprocess,intermsofthecostofelectricity(COE),which
wastheeconomicfigureofmeritusedtoevaluatethevarioustechnologies,thegenericMEAPCC
waswithin7%ofthetopPCCtechnologylicensor.
Based on Nexants discussion with the World Bank, SENER, and Instituto de Investigaciones
Elctricas(IIE),thePCCpilotplantwastobedesignedbasedoncurrentgenericstateoftheart30%
MEA technology, with enough design flexibility to allow for the testing and validating of the
performanceofthetechnologiesparticipatinginthepilotprogram.
One of the projects Phase I goals is to deliver a PCC pilot plant process design package ready for
FEED preparation during Phase II. The PCC pilot plant design will include only the CO2 capture
facility, plus modifications needed for the existing Poza Rica NGCC plant to support the PCC pilot
plantoperation.CapturedCO2istobevented,soaCO2compressionfacilitywillnotbeincluded.
Inordertoproceedwiththepilotplantdesign,aninitialprojecttaskwastocomeupwithapilot
plantsizeagreeabletoallparties.Tofacilitatethateffort,Nexantpresentedanalysisresultsshowing
theimpactsofPCCpilotplantsizeonthePozaRicaNGCCplantperformanceanditsvarioussupport
facility demands during the Oct 5, 2015 meeting at CFEs office in Mexico City. Since the general
consensusisthatMEAbasedPCCistheleastefficientoptionoutofallthecurrentnearcommercial
PCC technologies, which are all aminebased, therefore a pilot plant designed for MEA should be
abletoaccommodatetestingtheothertechnologieswithminimalpreinvestmentmodificationsto
thecaptureplantdesign.ThissectionsummarizesNexantsrecommendationandrationaleonthe
PCCpilotplantsizeforthePozaRicaNGCCpowerplant.
11.2 PILOTPLANTINTEGRATIONARRANGEMENTANDSIZESELECTIONCRITERIA
Figure111showstheconceptualintegrationoftheMEAbasedPCCpilotplantwiththeexisting
PozaRicaNGCCpowerplant.AslipstreamoffluegasisextractedfromtheHRSGstackandrouted
throughablowertoprovideenoughpressuretodriveitthroughthePCCpilotplant.Thefluegasslip
streamisfirstcooledthroughawaterscrubberbeforeenteringanaqueousamineabsorberinthe
PCCpilotplant.CO2isremovedfromthefluegasbychemicalreactionwithCO2depletedleanamine
solutionintheabsorber.Thetreatedfluegasisventedtoatmospherefromtopoftheabsorber.
CO2loadedrichaminesolutionfromtheabsorberbottomisthenroutedtoaregeneratorwherethe
CO2isremovedfromtheaminebystrippingsteamgeneratedwithinareboilerheatedby
condensingsteamthatisextractedfromtheNGCCHRSG.TheCO2depletedleanaminesolution
fromtheregeneratorbottomiscooledviaheatexchangeandrecycledbacktotheabsorbertopto
repeattheCO2removalprocessagain.RecoveredCO2fromtopoftheregeneratorwillbeventedto
theatmosphere,soaCO2compressionfacilitywillnotbeincludedinthepilotplantdesign.
Inadditiontothefluegasslipstream,otherNGCCfacilityneedstosupporttheintegratedPCCpilot
plantoperationincludesteamtoheatthestripperreboilerandaminereclaimer;coolingwater(CW)
tocoolthefeedwaterscrubber,leanamineandstripperoverheadcondenser;rawwatertomake
upforadditioncoolingtower(CT)evaporationlossesduetoaddedCWloads;andparasiticpower
consumptiontodrivethefeedblower,leanandrichaminepumps,andnewCWpumps.
Figure111ConceptualPCC/NGCCIntegrationScheme
IP LP
STG #1
CW
IP LP
STG #2
Main Steam CW
IP LP
Steam to STG #3
PCC Reboiler CW
Vented
Flue Gas
Desuperheating IP Steam LP Steam
Condensate
Stack
Flue Gas Blower
Hot Flue Gas Flue Gas
HRSG Slipstream
Flue Gas to PCC
Condensate

Thecriteriaexaminedforpilotplantsizeselectionincludethefollowing:
1) PCCsteamextractionrequirementvs.HRSGIPandLPsteamgenerationcapacities;
2) NewCWloadneededvs.excesscapacityinexistingCT/CWsystems;
3) NetpowerexportlossduetoaddedPCCparasiticpowerdemands;
4) Incrementalrawwaterimportneededvs.capacityavailable;
5) PCCpilotplantabsorberdiametervs.transportationlimitations;
6) Pilotplantcapitalcost;
7) ReasonablepilottofullsizePCCplantscaleupratio;and
8) PotentialCO2productofftakeoptions.
11.3 DISCUSSIONS
Pilotplantsizeisdefinedbytheamountoffluegasbeingtreated,andisexpressedasapercentage
ofthetotaldesignfluegasflowfromtheHRSG,whichisalsotheGTexhaustflow.Figure112isa
plotoftheamountofCO2recoveredcorrespondingtopilotplantsizesrangingfrom1%toupto25%
ofthetotalHRSGfluegasflow.TheamountofCO2recoveredrangesfrom18mTPD(20STPD)fora
1%pilotplanttoabout490mTPD(540STPD)fora25%pilotplant.Treating5%ofthetotalHRSG
fluegascorrespondstoroughly91mTPD(100STPD)ofCO2captured.
Figure112CO2RecoveryvsPilotPlantSize
CO2Recoveryvs.PilotPlantSize
PreliminaryforPozaRicaMtgDiscussionPurpose
600
550 Basis:
1.85%CO2Recovery
500 2.CO2Recovery(FullSize)=2,532STPD
450
400
RecoveredCO2,STPD
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
PilotFeed,%ofFullSize
CO2Prod
11.3.1 PilotReboilerSteamDemandsvs.HRSGIPandLPSteamGenerationCapacity
Consideration
Figure 113 is a plot of the PCC reboiler steam demand vs. the size of the pilot plant. The size
selectioncriterionistolimitthepilotplantreboilersteamdemandtonomorethanthetotalHRSG
IPplusLPsteamgenerationcapacity. Preferably,pilotplantsteamextraction shouldbe lessthan
theHRSGLPsteamgenerationcapacitytominimizetheimpactonexistingNGCCSTGoperationand
powerproduction.

HRSGLPsteamgenerationcapacityisroughly14,000kg/hr(31,000lb/hr),equivalenttoroughly5%
ofthetotalmassflowthroughtheSTGat297,000kg/hr(654,000lb/hr).ExtractingalltheLPsteam
forPCCreboilingcouldhypotheticallysupportapilotplantthattreatsuptoabout9%oftheNGCC
fluegas,asshowninFigure113.Themaximumpilotplantsizeislimitedtoabout23%oftheNGCC
fluegasflowinordernottoexceedthetotalHRSGIPplusLPsteamgenerationcapacityof34,000
kg/hr(74,000lb/hr),equivalenttoroughly11%ofthetotalmassflowthroughtheSTG.
Figure113ReboilerSteamExtractionvsPilotPlantSize
ReboilerSteamExtractionvs.PilotPlantSize
100,000
90,000
80,000
MaxIP+LPSteamAvailable
70,000
PCCReboilerSteam,LB/Hr
Basis:
60,000
1.85%CO2RecoverywithoutCO2Compression
2.MEAat1,670Btu/LBCO2ReblrQ
3.HRSGIP+LPSteamGen=74,400LB/Hr
50,000 IPSteam=43,200LB/Hr@200psia
LPSteam=31,200LB/Hr@75psia
40,000
MaxLPSteamAvailable
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
ReblrSteam
11.3.2 IncrementalPilotPCCCWLoadsvs.ExistingNGCCCW/CTCapacityConsideration
Figure114isaplotoftheincrementalPCCCWloadagainstthepotentialsizeofapilotplant.The
size selection criterion is to limit the incremental pilot plant CW load to no more than the excess
capacity available in the three existing NGCC CW/CT systems. Each of the three existing CW/CT
systems is dedicated to servicing one STG and each system has about 95 GJ/hr (90 MMBtu/hr) of
excesscapacity.ThisexcesscapacityisneededtocondensethesteamtotheassociatedSTG,when
the STG is shut down. To allow continued STG shutdown operations, the incremental CW load
shouldbelessthantheexcesscapacityavailableinoneexistingNGCCCW/CTsystem.
As shown, the maximum pilot plant size can be about 20% of the NGCC flue gas flow, while still
keeping the incremental CW load below 26 MW (90 MMBtu/hr). However, by extracting
incremental CW flow from the existing CW circulation pumps, it is possible to avoid adding new
pumps. The pilot plant incremental CW load probably should not exceed 5% of each of the three
existing CW systems. This would limit the incremental CW load to about 8.8 MW (30 MMBtu/hr),
correspondingtoapilotplantsizethattreatsroughly10%oftheNGCCfluegas.
Figure114CWLoadsvsPilotPlantSize
ApproximateCW/CTLoadsvs.PilotPlantSize
800
Maximum TotalCWLoadwithoutinstallingnewCWpumps
700
Baseline TotalCWLoad
600
CWLoads,MMBtu/Hr
500
400 Basis:
300 3.CTLoad(100%)=208MMBtu/HrperCT
4.CTDesignLoad=295MMBtu/HrperCT
200
100
0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
SurfCondDuty PilotPltCoolingDuty TotalNGCC/PCC Series4 Series5
11.3.3 NetPowerExportLoss
Figure 115 is a plot of the estimated net power export losses for the Poza Rica NGCC due to the
additionofaPCCpilotplant.Exportpowerlossisroughly0.55MWeforeach%increaseinpilot
plantsize.Thereisnosizeselectioncriteriononexportpowerlosses,butlossesshouldprobablybe
keptbelow5%(or10MWe)oftheexistingpowerexporttoavoidsignificantdisruptiontoelectric
gridpowersupplies.
Figure115NGCCExportPowerLossvs.PilotPlantSize
ApproximateNGCCExportPowerLossvs.PilotPlantSize
15,000
14,000
Basis:
13,000 1.85%CO2RecoverywithoutCO2Compression
12,000 3.PrePilotRetrofitNGCCPowerExport=229,500kW
11,000
NetExportPowerLoss,kW
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
NetExportPowerLoss
11.3.4 IncrementalRawWaterImportConsideration
Figure116isaplotoftheincrementalPCCrawwaterimportCWloadvs.thesizeofthepilotplant.
Thesizeselectioncriterionistolimittheincrementalrawwaterimporttonomorethan5%ofthe
existing raw water import of 5,670 L/min (1,500 gpm) to allow the use of existing equipment
withouthavingtoaddnewcapacity.Thiswouldmeanlimitingtheincrementalrawwaterimportto
lessthan284L/min(75gpm).Asshown,themaximumpilotplantsizewillthenbelimitedtoabout
9%oftheNGCCfluegasflowinordertokeepincrementalrawwaterimportbelow284L/min(75
gpm).
Figure116IncrementalRawWaterImportvsPilotPlantSize
ApproximateIncrementalRawWaterImportvs.PilotPlantSize
200
Basis:
3.PrePilotRetrofitNGCCRawH2OImport=1543GPM
IncrementalRawWaterImport,GPM
150
100
50
0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
IncrementalRawH2O
11.3.5 PilotPlantAbsorberDiametervs.TransportationLimitationConsideration
Figure117isaplotoftheestimatedPCCabsorberdiametervs.thepotentialsizeofapilotplant.
Theoriginalsizeselectioncriterionistolimitthediametertonomorethan4m(13ft)inorderto
allow overland transportation of shopfabricated vessels in typical US locations, since no
transportationsizelimitationwasdefinedforthePozaRicasite.Thiswilllimitthepilotplantsizeto
about7%ofNGCCfluegasflow.

DuringtheOctober2015meetinginMexico,Nexantwasinformedthatthereshouldbenooverland
transportationsizerestriction,sinceaPEMEXrefinerynearbyroutinelytransportsvesselsofsimilar
sizesoverland.Itwasthereforeconcludedthatatransportablesizelimitationwillnotbeafactorin
pilotplantsizeselection.
Figure117AbsorberDiametervsPilotPlantSize
ApproximateAbsorberDiametervs.PilotPlantSize
30
Basis:
25 2.MEAat1,670Btu/LBCO2ReblrQ
3.FullSizeSingleTrainPCCAbsorberApproxDia=46Ft
PCCAbsorberDiameter,Ft
20
15
10
0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
AbsorberDia,Ft
11.3.6 RelativePilotPlantCapitalCost
Figure118isaplotoftheestimatedrelativecapitalcostofaPCCpilotplant.Therelative costis
only for the capture plant and does not include NGCC plant modification costs. Capital cost
selectioncriteriahavenotbeendefinedbytheWorldBankandCFE.Forapproximation,the10%
size PCC capture plant retrofit cost, excluding NGCC plant modification costs, should be no more
than$50to$60million.Actualplantcostwillhavetobedeterminedafterpilotplantsizeisdefined
anddesigncompleted.
Figure118RelativeCapitalCostvsPilotPlantSize
ApproximateRelativeCapitalCostvs.PilotPlantSize
150
Basis:
3.Use10%PilotPlantRecoveredCO2Product(215STPD
CO2)asBaseline(100%RelativePltCost)
RelativePilotPltCost,%
100
50
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
RelativePilotPltCost
11.3.7 PilottoFullSizePCCPlantScaleUpFactorConsideration
The pilottofull size PCC scaleup factor can be defined as the inverse of the pilot plant size. For
example,apilotplantsizeof5%hasascaleupfactorof20(=100/5),whileapilotplantsizeof25%
hasascaleupfactorof4(=100/25).Scaleupfactorscanvaryfrom5to100,buttypicallyscaleup
factorsof10to50areconsideredreasonableandshouldnotposesignificantscaleupdesignrisks.
Thisrangewouldresultinapilotplantsizetreating2%toupto10%ofthePozaRicafluegasflow.
11.3.8 PowerandPotentialCO2ProductOfftakeOption
Product offtake agreements and revenue can potential impact the plant size selection, but is not
consideredasafactoratthistime.
11.4 NEXANTSRECOMMENDATIONS
After reviewing the preliminary integration requirement for PCC pilot plant sizes ranging from
treating1%toupto25%ofthefluegasfromthePozaRicaNGCCgasturbine,Nexantrecommended
thatthePCCpilotplantbesizedtotreatnomorethan5%oftheGTfluegasflow.The5%sizepilot
plantoperationimposesaminimalimpactontheexistingNGCCoperation,asshownbelow:
WhilePCCLPsteamextractionisroughly50%oftheexistingHRSGLPsteamgenerationcapacity,
itisonly2.5%ofthetotalSTGsteammassthroughput;
TheincrementalPCCCWloadisroughly5.9MW(20MMBtu/hr)or10%ofthenormaloperating
load of 62 MW (210 MMBtu/hr) for each of the three CTs, and is well within each CTs excess
capacityof26MW(90MMBtu/hr)(designloadlessnormaloperatingload).Thisshouldallow
the use of the existing CTs without the need for a new CT and may also make it possible to
extracttherequired10%CWflowfromtheexistingCWpumps;
Net power export reduction is less than 3 MWe or less than 1.5% of the total current NGCC
powerexport;
Incrementalrawwaterimportislessthan190L/min(50gpm)orabout3%ofthetotalcurrent
importof5700L/min(1500gpm);
The absorber diameter is roughly 3.4 m (11 feet), which is within the size limit for typical
overlandtransportationbyroadorrailway;
The scaleup factor to fullsize PCC is 20, which should not pose any excessive risks to full size
design.
11.5 FINALPILOTPLANTSIZE
Nexantprovideditsrecommendationandrationaleforthe5%pilotplantsizeselectiontotheWorld
BankonJanuary27,2016.Becausetheactualpilotplantcapitalcostcanonlybedevelopedaftera
pilotplantsizeisdefinedanditsdesigniscarriedout,onlyanestimatedrelativecapitalcostcurve
was provided during the preliminary size selection evaluation. In addition, since the pilot plant
funding and operational length were not defined at the January 27th meeting, Nexants 5% pilot
plantsizerecommendationwasbasedonlyontheplantstechnicalviabilityanditspotentialimpacts
onthePozaRicaplantoperations.
Whileitisdesirabletohavearelativelylargepilotplantwiththeabilitytobetterassesstechnology
scaleup, it was also recognized that costs (both CAPEX and O&M) can be prohibitive. After the
January meeting, subsequent discussions between the World Bank and the Mexican entities
consistingofIIE,SENER,andCFEwereheld.Nexantwasnotifiedthatthepilotplantistobesizedto
treat1%ofthePozaRicaplantfluegasduetopotentialprojectfundingconstraints.
It was recognized that a 1% size pilot plant is on the low end of typical engineering scaleup
practices, but sourcing additional funding to increase the size of the pilot plant at this time was
deemednotrealisticbytheWorldBankteaminviewofprojectsgoaltodesign,buildandoperate
thePozaRicapilotplant by2019.InitsRFItothesixPCCtechnologylicensors,Nexanthadasked
eachlicensortoidentifytheminimumpilotplantsizeneededforscaleuptofullsizedemonstration
plant.ThreeofthesixPCCtechnologylicensorshadrespondedwithanswersrangingbetween0.5%
and 2%. Therefore, the 1% pilot plant, while small, meets the licensors minimum scaleup
requirement.
While using data for process design scale up purposes from a 1% size pilot plant (at a 100toone
scaleupratio)ismoreriskythanthatfromalargersizepilotplant,thefinalPozaRicademonstration
plant can be designed for multiple parallel trains with phased implementation if scaleup concern
becomesanissueduringthepilotplanttestingphase.Forexample,ademoplantwithtwo50%size
trainswillreducethescaleupratioto50to1(equivalenttoa2%sizepilotplantrelativetoa100%
singletraindemoplant),andademoplantwithfour25%sizetrainswillfurtherreducethescaleup
ratio to 25to1 (equivalent to a 4% size pilot plant relative to a 100% single train demo plant).
While a multiple train demonstration plant design may be more expensive in total, a phased
implementation approach can reduce initial capital spending and eliminate repetitious correction
costsduetoscaleupandotherdesignproblemswithlessonslearnedfromthefirsttrain.Therefore
Nexant believes that the scaleup risk for a 1% size pilot plant is manageable under the given
circumstances.
VariousPCCpilotplantshavebeendesigned,constructedandoperatedaroundtheworld,basedon
both coal and natural gas flue gases, ranging from 2 to 500 mTPD in capacity. For example, MHI
constructed and operated a pilot plant facility at Nanko Power Station at Osaka, Japan for
verificationtestingoftheirPCCtechnology.TheNankopilotplantisof2mTPDincapacity,capturing
CO2fromanaturalgasboilerfluegas.AnotherexampleAlstomtestedtheiradvancedaminePCC
technologyattwodifferentpilotfacilitiesinafieldpilotatDowChemicalsfacilityatCharleston,
WestVirginia,atacapacityof5mTPD.Theyalsotestedthetechnology,lateron,atapilotfacilityat
theEDFLeHavrePowerStationinFranceat25mTPDcapacity.Bothwerebasedoncoalfiredflue
gas.
12. PCCPILOTPLANTINTEGRATIONMETHODOLOGYANDEXISTINGPOZA
RICANGCCPERFORMANCE
12.1 INTRODUCTION
TheobjectiveoftheTask3studywastodevelopaconceptualdesignofaPCCpilotplantintegrated
into thePozaRica NGCC powerplant. The pilot plantwas tobe designed to operateonageneric
MEAsolvent,butalsohavetheflexibilitytoallowforthetestingandvalidatingoftheperformance
of other nearterm commerciallyready PCC technologies, which were identified in Task 1 of the
project.Thispilotplantisexpectedtobeusedfortestingwithinthenexttwotofiveyears,followed
by a fullscale PCC demonstration implementation at the Poza Rica NGCC power plant five to ten
yearsafterpilottesting.
ThePCCpilotplantistorecover85%oftheCO2froma1%slipstreamoffluegasleavingtheNGCC
HRSG. The PCC pilot plant design scope includes the pilot units major equipment and necessary
modificationsoftheexistingNGCCsystems.
12.2 METHODOLOGY
ThemethodologyusedtodeterminetheperformanceandcostofthePCCpilotplantanditsoverall
impactonNGCCperformanceconsistedofthefollowing:
1. DevelopedaThermoFlexmodeloftheexistingPozaRicaNGCCtoserveasthebasisforall
PCCintegrationcasestobeevaluatedagainst.ThepredictedoverallNGCCperformanceis
benchmarked against the performance provided by Poza Rica to ensure accuracy of the
model.(CompletedinTask1ofthestudy)
2. Developed overall balances on power generation/consumption, cooling water loads, and

deionized water/filtered water/raw river water demands to define existing NGCC plant
support facility capacities. These served as the bases to determine postPCC retrofit
modifications,andnewsystemadditionsrequirements.(CompletedinTask1ofthestudy)
3. DevelopedaPCCplantdesignbasis,whichwasusedtodesignthePCCpilotplantpackage.
Thedesignbasisidentifiedthefollowingmetrics:
fluegasfeedflow,composition,pressureandtemperatureconditions,
degreeofCO2recovery,
treatedfluegasventemissionspecifications,
interfaceutilityandoffsitecommoditysupplyandreturnconditions,and
basisforcostestimates.
4. Developed a 30% MEAbased PCC pilot plant design. The PCC pilot plant design includes
heatandmaterialbalances(HMB),equipmentsizing,majorequipment(ME)factoredcost
estimates,andestimatedPCCchemicalconsumptionsandcosts.
5. RevisedtheexistingPozaRicaNGCCThermoFlexmodeltointegratethe30%MEAPCCpilot
plants process interface steam/condensate demands to determine the NGCCs overall
steamcycleoperationandpowergenerationpostPCCpilotplantinstallation.
6. DevelopedoverallbalancesforthePozaRicaNGCCpostpilotplantinstallationforpower
generation/consumption,coolingwaterloads,andrevisedwaterdemandstodefineplant
modifications,andnewsystemadditionsneededtosupportPCCpilotplantoperation.
7. Developed designs and cost estimations of plant modifications and additions needed to
supportoperationsofthePozaRicaNGCCplantpostPCCpilotplantinstallation.
8. Prepared preliminary plot layouts to determine PCC pilot plant location and to estimate
interconnectingpiperunsandcosts.
9. EstimatedincrementaloveralloperatingcostsforthePozaRicaNGCCplantpostPCCpilot
plantinstallation.
12.3 EXISTING(PREPCCRETROFIT)POZARICANGCCMODELPERFORMANCE
Keeping the same firing rate of 1,680 GJ/h [LHV37] (1,595 MMBtu/h [LHV]) of natural gas, the
ThermoFlexmodeled,singleSiemens/WestinghouseW501FGTgeneratesapproximately166MWe
of power. Exhaust from the GT goes through a single HRSG and produces roughly 261,300 kg/h
(576,000 lb/h) of 79 bara/525 C (1,152 psia/977 F) HP steam, 19,400 kg/h (42,800 lb/h) of 14
bara/298C(198psia/569F)IPsteam,plus14,900kg/hr(32,800lb/hr)of5bara/179C(72psia/
354F)LPsteam.SteamfromthesingleHRSGgoestothreeidenticalSTGstogenerate82.5MWeof
power, or 27.5 MWe from each STG. Exhaust from each STG goes through an individual surface
condenser.EachcondenseriscooledwithCWfromonededicatedCT.Figure121summarizesthe
prePCCretrofitPozaRicaNGCCdesignoperationassimulatedbytheThermoFlexmodel.
37LHV=LowerHeatingValue
Figure121ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOperation
POWER BALANCES:
G104 A/B MW
CW Pump Generation:
Numbers in Red are HRSG Case 1 values. Gas Turb Gen 166.6
704 CW Return
701 34 Numbers in Black are Calculated Values. Stm Turb Gen 82.5
Total Gen 249.1
RFI RFI Calc RFI Flue G.
Natural Filtered GT Emission
Gas Amb Air Exhaust Specificat'n CW Supply NGCC Parasitic Loads:
Mol Wt Vol % Vol % Vol % Vol% Wet HP BFW Pump
N2 28.01 1.01 75.99 73.26 73.15 G102 A/B IP BFW Pump
Surf Cond Pump
O2 32.00 0.00 20.39 12.32 12.17 One of Three Identical STG Units G103 A/B Condensate Pump
CO2 44.01 0.81 0.03 3.81 3.756 DMW Pump Hot Condensate Recycle Pump
Argon 39.95 0.00 0.92 0.89 0.8809 645,256 PPH River Water Pump
H2S 34.08 0.0330 0.00 0.00 1.29 psia 1.29 psia Filtered Water Pump
Demin
CH4 16.04 89.97 0.00 0.00 110 oF 110 deg F NGCC CW Pump Power Consumptions
Water
C2H6 30.07 6.65 0.00 0.00 32,587 PPH NGCC CT Fan Power Consumptions
Tank
C3H8 44.10 1.04 0.00 0.00 51 90 deg F Transformer Losses
iC4 58.12 0.22 0.00 0.00 NGCC Misc Consumption Allowance
nC4 58.12 0.20 0.00 0.00 E102 52
C5's 72.15 0.08 0.00 0.00 Surface
C6's 86.18 0.00 0.00 0.00
Condenser
SO2 64.06 0.00 0.00 0.0011 192,055 PPH
Steam 18.02 0.00 2.67 9.72 10.04 1 1,117 psia 210.4 MMBtu/Hr
Total Vol % 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00% 975 deg F 200 PPH
Total MPH 4,355 121,261 125,840 84 psia
Total LB/Hr 77,694 3,477,073 3,554,768 316 deg F
28.1 MW Gross
NGCC Design Basis: 0.6 MW Gen Loss
25
3. Items 1 and 2 are then used to back-calculated the GT natural gas (NG) and air flows, and the GT isentropic efficiency.
4. HRSG steam & condensate flows are estimated from HRSG Case 1 heat and material balance (H&MB).
A 0.5% heat loss is included in the H&MB. 32,772 PPH 32,772 PPH
5. Steam drum blowdowns are assumed to be 1% of steam generation. Deaerator vent is assumed to be 200 lb/hr. 12 72 psia 84 psia 84 psia
6. Steam turbine (ST) efficiency is back-calculated to match HRSG Case 1 ST output of 26.7 MW for each of the three ST generators (STG). 354 deg F 316 deg F 316 deg F
Generator power loss is assmed to be 2%.
Natural gas and ambient air composition are taken from Request For Information (RFI) table filled by CFE. Exhaust composition are calculated. 19 22
7. 39
42,800 PPH C103
198 psia LP Stm Drum
569 deg F
/ Dearator
677,843 PPH
110 deg F
1,302 psia 32
649,913 PPH
84 psia
316 deg F
24
C105
6 C101 BD Flash
23 Drum
HP Steam Drum HP BD
37 28,808 PPH
MP BD
1,595 MMBtu(LHV)/Hr
15 218 psia 45 84 psia
BD To WWT
474.7 psia 701 576,165 PPH 579,961
38
77 oF 1,152 psia 1172 604,973 PPH G102 A/B
GT Nat Gas
977 deg F 976 C102 MP BFW 3,554,768 Lbs/Hr
MP Steam Drum Pumps 14.7 psia
195.1 deg F
20 Flue Gas
3,477,073 lb/hr @ Actual Amb T 34
14.7 psia Amb Pressure 14.5 psia Inlet Pressure 9,570 2003 GT Des Spec
89.6 oF Amb Temp o DesuperHt BFW 26
89.6 F GT Combustor 9,570 Btu/kW-Hr GT Ht Rate 17 18
57.0 % RH HRSG
Ambient Air 44,940 PPH Flue Gas RFI
G101 A/B
704 232 psia 229 psia 0 lbs/hr Mol Wt MPH Mol% Wet Mol% Dry Mol% Wet
GT Generator HP BFW
787 deg F 2229 deg F Pumps N2 28.01 92,188 73.26% 81.15% 73.15
AC Inlet
Filter 166.6 MW O2 32.00 15,504 12.32% 13.65% 12.17
8
162.8 HRSG-1 V-101 CO2 44.01 4,793 3.81% 4.22% 3.756
K101 2
Air Comp Stack Argon 39.95 1,121 0.89% 0.99% 0.8809
Gas Turbine 13 29 30 Steam 18.016 12,232 9.72% 10.04
9
------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Total MPH 125,838 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Per HRSG-1
3,554,734 3,554,388 lbs/hr
4 5
15.14 15.39 psia
33 MP ECON HRSG_01D_1141
HP EVAP
PREHTR 0 8/19/2015 Design Basis Preparation RC
POZA RICA NGCC Plant Operating Data
11
908.3 MMBtu/Hr (Flue Gas Cooling) Total
E101 4.5 MMBtu/Hr (Loss) Total Job Rev.
Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) 903.7 MMBtu/Hr (Absorbed) Total No. DRAWING No. No.
1.0 Total Number of HRSGs
66' H x 21' W x 49' L Dimensions per HRSG A02484 PFD-001 0

Theoverallpowerbalance,CWandCTloadsfortheexistingPozaRicaNGCCaresummarizedin
Table121.
Table121ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance
Pre-PCC
Overall Poza Rica Power Balance: Retrofit
Existing Siemens/Westinghouse GT 166,570
Existing Siemens Steam Turbine (Total for 3 operating) 82,500
Total Gross Generation 249,070
Existing HP & IP BFW Pumps 1,047
Existing Condensate & Hot Cond Recycle Pumps 101
Existing Raw Water & Filtered Water Pumps 159
Existing Cooling Water Pumps 3,626
Existing Cooling Tower Fans 1,350
Transformer Loss Allowance 730
Misc Existing NGCC Loss Allowance 200
Total NGCC Electrical Loads 7,213
Net Poza Rica Power Export, kW 241,857

Poza Rica CW/CT Duty Breakdown: (Generic 30% MEA) Pre-PCC
Existing NGCC CW/CT Duty, GJ/Hr (MMBtu/Hr) 666 (631)
Total Poza Rica CW/CT Duty, GJ/Hr (MMBtu/Hr) 666 (631)
Overall water balances for the existing Poza Rica NGCC are summarized in Figure 122. The total
estimatedrawriverwaterwithdrawisabout345m3/hror1,500gallonsperminute(gpm).About
90%ofthewaterisusedformakeuptotheexistingCT.OfthetotalCTmakeup,80%islostthrough
evaporativecooling,and20%islosttoblowdown,whichrepresentsa5cycleofconcentrationfor
theCT.
Figure122ExistingPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance
CT Evaporation Loss for
Pre 1% Pilot PCC Retrofit Simplified dissipating Surface Cond
Overall Incremental Water Balance Loads
Diagram
1. Existing river water pumps 1,080 GPM

and supply pipeline max
capacity is 1550 gpm.
Existing CT Blowdown
River 1,516 GPM Feed Water 1,485 GPM 1,350 GPM Cooling Tower 270 GPM
Treatment: (5 Cycles of
Water
Clarifier & Filter Conc.)
Condenser Duty =
631 MMBtu/Hr CT
Blowdowns &
Other Waste
Feed Water Treat Purge 30 GPM Water to WWT
& Disposal
Exist ACF/RO/ED Purge 20 GPM
Existing NGCC
85 GPM Avg ACF/RO/ED System
1x200 GPM ACF/RO
+
2x88 GPM ED
0 4/26/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report RC
65 GPM Avg Poza Rica NGCC With 1% Scale Pilot Plant
30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW at 85% CO2 Recovery
OVERALL WATER BALANCE DIAGRAM
Misc NGCC
Makeup 50 GPM Pre-PCC Operation at 100% GT Output
Allowance Exist NGCC DI Job Rev.
Water Usage No. DRAWING No. No.

13. MEAPCCPILOTPLANTSYSTEMDESIGN
13.1 INTRODUCTION
Nexants Task 3 activities included designing and integrating a conceptual PCC pilot plant into the
PozaRicaNGCCpowerstation.Thedeliverableforthistaskisapreliminaryprocessdesignpackage
thatincludesthefollowing:
Processflowdiagram(PFD)identifyingallmajorprocessequipmentfortheCO2capturesystem,
includingabsorptioncolumn,separationvessels,heatexchangers,pumps,compressors,etc.
MaterialandenergybalancesaroundtheCO2capturesystem,includingallheatingandcooling
duties,andelectricpowerrequirementsforthemajorequipmentpieces.
Streamtablesshowingoperatingpressures,temperatures,compositionsand enthalpiesforall
streamsenteringorleavingmajorprocessequipment.
DatasheetsforallmajorequipmentonthePFD.
Simpleprocessandequipmentdescriptions,includingalternateoperatingmodes.
EstimatedperformanceofthePozaRicaNGCCplantwhenthePCCpilotplantisinoperation.
EstimatedcapitalcostsofthePCCpilotplantandNGCCplantmodifications,and
EstimatedannualoperatingcostsofthePCCpilotplant.
ThedesignwillhavesufficientdetailtoproceedtoPhaseIIoftheproject,whichcallsforthedesign
ofaFEEDpackageforthePCCpilotplant.
13.2 PCCPILOTPLANTOBJECTIVE
The objective of the proposed PCC pilot plant is to provide a facility to test and validate the
performanceofpromisingPCCtechnologiesforNGCCpowerplantapplications.WhileTask1ofthis
study has identified six promising, commerciallyready advanced PCC technologies, no specific
technologies have been selected for testing yet. To meet WBs desired goal of completing the
design,constructionandoperationofthepilotplantwithinthenexttwotofiveyears,thepilotplant
willbedesignedtooperateongeneric30wt%MEAwithsufficientprocessflexibilitytoallowforthe
testingandperformancevalidationoftheadvancedPCCtechnologiesidentifiedinTask1aswellas
anyotherfuturecandidates.ThePCCpilotplantdesignwillincludeonlytheCO2capturefacility,plus
supportfacilitiesandmodificationsneededfortheexistingPozaRicaNGCCplanttosupportthePCC
pilot plant operation. Captured CO2 is to be vented, so a CO2 compression facility will not be
included.
The pilot plant process design package is to contain sufficient definition to facilitate FEED
preparation during Phase II of this project by experienced commercial engineering, procurement,
and construction (EPC) companies to validate the feasibility of the pilot facility. Upon project
approval after feasibility validation by FEED evaluation, detailed EPC will proceed. A minimum of
twoyearsofpilottestingisanticipatedoncethePCCpilotplantisbuiltandoperating.Afullscale
PCCdemonstrationplantisexpectedtobeimplementedatthePozaRicaNGCCpowerplantinfive
totenyearsafterpilottesting.
13.3 PCCPILOTPLANTDESIGNCRITERIAANDASSUMPTIONS
ThePCCpilotplantwillbedesignedtothefollowingcriteriainordertoaccommodatethetestingof
multipletypesofamines,aswellastominimizeinterferencewiththePozaRicaNGCCpowerplants
existingoperation:
a. Sizepilotplanttotreata1%slipstreamoffluegasextractedfromtheNGCCHRSGstack,
b. Designtorecover85%oftheCO2inthefluegasslipstream,
c. Fabricate all aminecontacting process equipment with 316 stainless steel (316SS) to
accommodatenotyetdefinedproprietaryaminetesting,
d. Provide capability for separate chemical scrubbing, in addition to water scrubbing, of the
flue gas feed to verify feed pretreatment specifications as required by some proprietary
aminelicensors,
e. Providecapabilityforseparatechemicalwashing,inadditiontowaterwashing,of treated
flue gas to verify meeting VOC and hazardous chemical emission specifications for
atmosphericvents,
f. Provideamineabsorberinterstagecoolingcapabilityincasethisisrequiredbyproprietary
aminePCCtechnologies,
g. Providemotordrivenactuatorstoavoidplantinstrumentairrequirement,
h. Provide an online analyzer for monitoring of CO2 and/or O2 concentrations, including

respectivetemperatureandpressuremeasurementsinthemaingaseousstreams,
i. Provide grab samples for offline laboratory analysis of liquid stream CO2 and amine
contents,aswellastracecontaminantconcentrations,
j. Providegrabsamplesforofflinelaboratoryanalysisoftracecontaminantconcentrationsin
gaseousandliquidstreams(especiallyventandeffluentdischargestreams),
k. MinimizedependencyonexistingNGCCPowerPlantforoperatingandtechnicalsupport,
l. Provideatrailermountedcontrolroomforpilotplantoperationcontrolandmonitoring,
m. Provide a trailermounted, onsite laboratory facilities for onsite analysis of liquid and
gaseoussamples,
n. Share existing NGCC power plant facilities for emergency services such as medical, fire
fighting,andguardduties,
o. Share existing NGCC power plant shop facilities for minor equipment maintenance with
majormaintenanceservicesbeingoutsourced.
13.4 PCCPILOTPLANTRETROFITARRANGEMENT
Figure 131 is a simplified block flow diagram (BFD) showing the battery limits of the new pilot
facilities,plusexistingfacilitymodificationsneededforretrofittingthepilotplantintothePozaRica
NGCC power plant. All new equipment is generally located together in an unused area within the
PozaRicapowerplantboundaryandisconsideredtobeinsidethebatterylimit(ISBL)ofthepilot
plant.TheISBLequipmentandfacilitiesincludethefollowing:
BlowertoextractslipstreamfluegasfeedfromtheHRSGstack.
Allamineplantprocessequipmentforfeedgasfeedscrubbing,CO2absorption,andamine
solutionregeneration.
CoolingwaterboosterpumpstopumpCWthroughthepilotplantexchangersandbackto
theexistingNGCCcoolingtowers.
Allsupportfacilitiesneededsolelyforpilotplantoperationssuchasthecontrolhouseand
laboratory.
NGCC plant modifications are generally those located within or close to the existing NGCC power
plantequipmentareas.Theseareconsideredtobeoutsidethebatterylimit(OSBL)ofthepilotplant
andincludethefollowingmajorcomponents:
NGCCstackmodificationsandductingtoextractanddeliverslipstreamfluegastothepilot
plant.
NGCCsteampipingmodificationstoextractandnewpipetodeliversuperheatedMPsteam
tothepilotplant.
NewtrenchedpipingtorouteexistingNGCCcoolingtowerCWtoandreturnfromthepilot
plant.
Additional interconnections to the existing NGCC, such as, but not limited to, those for
electricwiring,municipalwatersupply,undergroundsewers,andnewroads.
Otheritemssolelyforpilotplantoperations,sucharepickuptrucks,bicycles,industrialcranes
(mobileequipment)areundefinedandtheircostsareincludedundercostcontingencyallowances.
Figure131PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCSimplifiedBFD
De-Superheater
Post-PCC Pilot
Retrofit Poza Rica CO2-Lean
Flue Gas Vent
NGCC from Absorber CO2 to
top Vent
LP Sat
Condensate Steam
CO2-Rich
Flue Gas MEA PCC Pilot
IP SH Plant
Steam Flue Gas
3 Identical Single Booster Blower CO2 Recovery
Other NGCC Plant Modifications:

1. Modifications for Steam Extraction
Three Identical Siemen Stm Turb: GT/HRSG: 2. Trenching for New CW Piping to PCC Pilot Plant
1. 192,000 lb/hr HP SH Stm Each 1. 163 MW Siemen/Westinghouse GT 3 Inter-Connecting Piping and Ductwork
4. 580,000 #/Hr HP Stm
PCC Pilot Plant Support Facilities:
1. Control House
2. Laboratory Facilities
Existing NGCC, No Change Shared NGCC Facilities:
Design & Cost by Nexant 1. Medical
2. Fire-fighting
3. Security
4. Minor Equipment Maintenance
13.5 PCCPILOTPLANTPROCESSDESIGNMETHODOLOGY
Asingletrainpilotplantisprovidedtotreat1%ofthePozaRicaNGCCfluegastorecover85%ofthe
containedCO2.Thepilotplantprocessschemeconsistsofthreemajorprocessingsteps:(1)FlueGas
Feed Scrubbing, (2) Flue Gas CO2 Absorption, and (3) Amine Solution Regeneration. Heat and
material balances (H&MB) are carried out for a generic 30 wt% MEAbased PCC design using
Nexant's inhouse data and process design procedures for commercial amine plants. Results from
the H&MB form the bases for pilot plant equipment sizing and capital cost estimation. H&MB for
threecasesarecarriedout.Theseare:
DesignCase(Des)tosizealmostallpilotplantequipment.
ExpectedOperationCase(Exp)forexpectedpilotplantperformances.
AbsorberInterCooledOperationCase(IC)tosizeabsorberintercoolingequipment.
13.5.1 Design(Des)CasePilotPlantOperation
TheDescaseisfor85%CO2recovery,basedonrichaminefromtheabsorberbottomachievingan
acid gas loading of 0.36 moles of CO2 per mole of MEA, and lean amine from the regeneration
stripper bottom achieving an acid gas loading of 0.16 moles of CO2 per mole of MEA. The
correspondingabsorberacidgaspickupisthus0.20molesofCO2permoleofMEA,whichgivesa
reboilingdutyofroughly4.4GJ/mT(1,900Btu/lb)ofCO2recovered.Thiscaserepresentsaneasily
achievableMEAoperationthatresultsinconservativeequipmentsizes.
TheDescasePFD,completewithmajorstreamcompositions,flows,temperaturesandpressures,is
presentedinFigure132.ThecorrespondingstreamH&MBtableisshowninTable131,theutility
consumption summary is shown in Table 132, and the catalysts and chemicals consumption
summary is shown in Table 133. Equipment datasheets for major equipment are included in
AppendixH.
AsshowninFigure132,intheDescase19.5mTPD(21.5STPD)or7,120mTPY(7,850STPY38)of
CO2willberecoveredfromthe1%fluegasslipstream.
38STPY=ShortTonsPerYear
Figure132PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantPFDDesignCaseOperation
K-101 C-100 G-105 E-109 G-100 E-100 E-105 G-103 G-111 C-101 G-101 E-110 G-110 G-106 D-101 V-102 E-102 G-102 E-101 G-107 D-102 C-102 V-101 E-106 E-104 E-103 G-104 A/B C-103 C-106 E-108 G-109 A/B G-112 A/B
Feed Gas Feed Feed Scrub Feed Scrub Feed Scrub Feed Scrub Absorber Absorber Absorber Absorber Rich Amine Absorber Absorber Makeup Amine Amine Lean Amine Lean Amine Lean Amine Rich/Lean Amine Sump Amine Stripper Soda Ash Reclaimer Reboiler OVHD CW Reflux Reflux Stm Cond Stm Cond Stm Cond Cooling
Blower Scrubber 1st Stg Wash 1st Stg Wash 2nd Stg Wash 2nd Stg Wash OH Water OH Water OH VOC Pump Inter-Stage Inter-Stage Pump Storage Tank Filters Pkg Trim Cooler Pump Amine Pump Sump Feed Pkg (Kettle Type) (Kettle Type) Condenser Pump Drum Drum Cooler Pump Water Pump
Circ Pump Cooler Circ Pump Cooler Wash Cooler Wash Pump Wash Pump Cooler Circ Pump Exchanger
133 BHP Des 5 Ft ID x 2.1 BHP Des 0.796 MM Des 3.5 BHP Des 1.013 MM Des 0.554 MM Des 7.2 BHP Des 2.6 BHP Des 5 Ft ID x 8.6 BHP Des 1. MM Des 2.5 BHP Des 6. BHP Des 7 Ft ID x 8 GPM Des 1.055 MM Des 7.6 BHP Des 4.07 MM Des 1.2 BHP Des 6 ft W x 6 ft L 2 Ft ID x 25 Gallon Size 0.683 MM Des 3.416 MM Des 1.216 MM Des 0.2 BHP Des 2 Ft ID x 6 Ft ID x 0.72 MM Des 0.4 BHP Des 57.4 BHP Des
8,755 SCFM Des 59 Ft T/T 83 GPM Des 172.5 ft2 Des 105 GPM Des 219.5 ft2 Des 168.5 ft2 Des 229 GPM Des 119 GPM Des 150 Ft T/T 92 GPM Des 268 ft2 Des 92 GPM Des 92 GPM Des 12 Ft T/T 142.8 ft2 Des 92 GPM Des 1,065.4 ft2 Des 81 GPM Des x 6 ft D 112 Ft T/T 114. ft2 Des 445.4 ft2 Des 55.2 ft2 Des 2.6 GPM Des 8 Ft T/T 15 Ft T/T 42.9 ft2 Des 8.6 GPM Des 953 GPM Des
7,959 SCFM Oper 75 GPM Oper 0.796 MM Oper 95 GPM Oper 1.013 MM Oper 0.549 MM Oper 199 GPM Oper 99 GPM Oper 83 GPM Oper 0. MM Oper 83 GPM Oper 84 GPM Oper 1.055 MM Oper 84 GPM Oper 4.07 MM Oper 81 GPM Oper 0.683 MM Oper 3.416 MM Oper 1.216 MM Oper 2.2 GPM Oper 0.72 MM Oper 7.5 GPM Oper 794 GPM Oper
O2 & CO2 CO2 Product Vent

Treated Flue Gas SV CO2
100 F AI TI PI AI FI PC M
2
14.9 psia V-102
ATM VENT Atmosphere
1.4 ppmV MEA SV
Particulate E-103 3
C-101 Filters 21.5 STPD 100% CO2
FC CW C-103
FI CO2
3,342 LB/Hr 3,342 LB/Hr Carbon 218 F PI TI AI TI
This Drawing Filters
7
100 F C-102 27.4 psia 21.4 psia
LC
Steam Condensate from E-108 FI 100 F
G-111 Particulate
M M FC
SL TI LC Filters G-104
100 F FC
49,445 LB/Hr M SL FI M Excess Water Purge
1,107 LB/Hr
Sewer
VOC Scrubbing Purge to Sewer FI M
100 F TI
LI SL FI TI
NNF 3,342 LB/Hr LC PI
SEWER
SEWER
or CT FC
SL TI M M
6
15.3 psia 100 F TI PI 175 psia FI MP Steam
CO2
Excess Steam Condensate CW
AI
110 F
M FC TI TI SL NNF LB/Hr 565 F
Purge (Amine-Free) SL FI TC Power Plant
0 LB/Hr LC LI
100 F 107 F TI PI
POWER PLANT CT SL TI
CW 98,891 LB/Hr 3,342 LB/Hr
G-103 TI CO2 AI
E-105 CO2 AI
Absorber Wash Water Purge TI PI LI SL FI TC
(Amine-Containing) FI FI E-102
M TI PI
3,429 LB/Hr O2 & LC SL 3,342 LB/Hr
CT
SEWER
or SEWER
or CT TI CW CO2 AI
CO2 SV
3,461 LB/Hr FI PI TI AI 60 psia FI PI TC M
CO2 TI PI TI
303 F
Water to Fresh Amine Makeup AI
32 LB/Hr Avg 105 F TI 3,709 LB/Hr
C-100 4 FI TI PI TI
TI PI
M
ATM VENT 16.1 psia 149 F 27.6 psia
FC TI 253 F FI
M M E-104
LC
16.2 psia 47,345 LB/Hr 234 F 368 LB/Hr
Flue Gas Feed from M
E-100
HRSG Stack 99 F LC
TI FI
195 F FI CW
293F Sat
C-106
POWER G-100 TI CW TI
PLANT
G-110
14.7 psia LC 120 F 252 F
PI E-110 TI
O2, CO2,
& H2O 120 F TC SL 253 F LC
TI FC SV
AI FC TI
M E-109 G-102
226 F 318 LB/Hr CW Condensate to Absorber
E-101 M Ovhd Water Wash
16.7 psia 16.6 psia 99 F 37,200 TI SL FI M FI
1 LC LB/Hr 130 F
CW PI FI TC
This Drawing
K-101 M TC
G-105
5 G-101 G-109 3,342 LB/Hr
TI CW
Feed Scrub 1st (Btm) Bed Purge M SL FI 120 F
LI E-106 M E-108
CT
SEWER
or SEWER
or CT
FI
NNF Stm
M FI Trap
FI
Feed Scrub 2nd (Top) Bed Purge FI M 185 LB/Hr SL
120 F Reclaimer Waste
Power Plant CT
710 LB/Hr
Split Range OFF-PLOT
Low Level M
Stream Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
V-101 G-112
Design Case Stream Descriptions: Flue Treated LP CO2 Cooled Rich Lean Stripper
Lean Loading = 0.16 Mole CO2 / Mole MEA Gas Flue Product Flue Gas Amine Amine Column
High Level G-107
CO2 Pickup = 0.2 Mole CO2 / Mole MEA Feed Gas Feed OVHD Cooling Water Supply Header
M
VAPOR COMPONENTS: MW
Power Plant CT
N2 28.01 922 922 0 922 - - 0 D-101 81.5 F
TI
CO2 44.01 48 7 41 48 - - 41 794 GPM
Argon 39.95 11 11 0 11 - - 0 FI FI FI
O2 32.00 155 155 0 155 - - 0 FI FI FI FI
G-106
MEA Vapor 61.09 - 0 - - - - -
D-102 Cooling Water Return Header
H2O Vapor 18.02 122 74 2 83 - - 61
Total MPH Vapor 1,258 1,170 43 1,219 - - 102 Power Plant CT
E-100 E-102 E-103 E-105 E-108 E-109 E-110 95. F
LIQUID COMPONENTS: Instrumentation Legends:
N2 28.01 - - - - 0 - - Vap & Liq Sample 85Pilot_01% Des:
SV S
SVL
CO2 44.01 - - - - 73 33 - Connection Valve Legends:
Argon 39.95 - - - - 0 - - NOTES: On-Line Gas Motor Operated
1) All information shown on this diagram or data sheet represent estimatons for given AI
SL M
O2 32.00 - - - - 0 - - Analyzer Control Valve 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report RC
operations and are provided for pre-feasibility evaluation purposes based on Nexant's in-
MEA 61.09 - - - - 204 204 - Flow Indicator, Motor Operated Rev. Date Revision BY
house data from similar applications. The information shown represent projected best FI FC M
Water 18.02 - - - - 1,613 1,613 - achievable performance for generic inhibited MEA processes. While useful for studies, Controller Butterfly Valve WB MEXICO PCC STUDY PHASE I : Poza Rica NGCC With 1% Scale Pilot Plant
Nexant does not guarantee the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. Manually Oper'd
Total MPH Liquid - - - - 1,890 1,849 - Actual performance and design specifications and guarantees are the responsibilities of
Temp Indicator, TASK 3 - GENERIC MEA BASED CO2 CAPTURE PILOT PLANT
TI TC
the selected technology licensors. Controller Control Valve PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM FOR 30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW at 85% CO2 Recovery
Total Stream LBMole/Hr 1,258 1,170 43 1,219 1,890 1,849 102 Press Indicator, On/Off Isolation Design Operation with 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading
2) Normal consumptions for given operation are listed in the utlities summary data PI P
Total Stream LB/Hr 35,547 32,889 1,828 34,836 44,736 42,942 2,901 Controller Valve Job Rev.
sheet. Equipment design sizes are shown under the major equipment listing data sheet.
Total Stream Wt Fraction Vapor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 Level Indicator, No. DRAWING No. No.
LI LC
Temperature, deg F 226.0 100.3 100.0 105.0 130.1 252.7 217.7 Controller
Pressure, PSIA 16.6 14.9 21.4 16.2 16.1 27.6 27.4 A02484 PFD-100-DESIGN 0
Table131PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantH&MBTableDesignCaseOperation
Stream Number 1 2 3 4 5 5A 5B 6 6A 6B 6C 7 8 9
Stream Description Flue Treated LP CO2 Cooled Rich Rich Rich Lean Amine Lean Amine Lean Amine Lean Amine Regenerator Regenerator Fd Scrub
Gas Flue Product Flue Gas Amine Amine Amine to Absorber From After Lean/Rich to Trim Column OVHD Water
Feed Gas Feed Regenertor Exchanger Cooler OVHD Reflux Makeup
N2 28.01 922 922 0 922 - - - - - - - 0 - -
CO2 44.01 48 7 41 48 - - - - - - - 41 - -
Argon 39.95 11 11 0 11 - - - - - - - 0 - -
O2 32.00 155 155 0 155 - - - - - - - 0 - -
MEA Vapor 61.09 - 0 - - - - - - - - - - - -
H2O Vapor 18.02 122 74 2 83 - - - - - - - 61 - -
Total MPH Vapor 1,258 1,170 43 1,219 - - - - - - - 102 - -
LIQUID COMPONENTS:
N2 28.01 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
CO2 44.01 - - - - 73 73 73 33 33 33 33 - 0 -
Argon 39.95 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
O2 32.00 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
MEA 61.09 - - - - 204 204 204 204 204 204 204 - - -
Water 18.02 - - - - 1,613 1,613 1,613 1,613 1,613 1,613 1,613 - 61 39
Total MPH Liquid - - - - 1,890 1,890 1,890 1,849 1,849 1,849 1,849 - 61 39
Total Stream LBMole/Hr 1,258 1,170 43 1,219 1,890 1,890 1,890 1,849 1,849 1,849 1,849 102 61 39
Total Stream LB/Hr 35,547 32,889 1,828 34,836 44,736 44,736 44,736 42,942 42,942 42,942 42,942 2,901 1,107 710
Total Stream Wt Fraction Vapor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - - - - - - 1.00 - -
Total Stream Enthalpies, MMBtu/hr 3.83 1.75 0.05 1.97 (0.05) (0.03) 4.04 0.28 6.19 2.12 2.13 1.31 0.04 0.04
Temperature, deg F 226.0 100.3 100.0 105.0 130.1 130.5 234.2 100.0 252.7 149.1 149.4 217.7 100.0 120.0
Pressure, PSIA 16.57 14.93 21.35 16.18 16.11 120.78 99.78 15.32 27.65 19.70 76.40 27.35 21.35 16.18
Vapor Phase
Lbs/hr 35,546 32,889 1,828 34,836 - - - - - - - 2,901 - -
Mol Wt. 28.25 28.12 42.85 28.58 - - - - - - - 28.40 - -
Flow @ Std T&P, MMSCFD 11.46 10.65 0.39 11.10 - - - - - - - 0.93 - -
Flow @ T&P, ACFS 155.27 130.82 3.33 126.88 - - - - - - - 7.54 - -
Density, lb/ft3 0.06 0.07 0.15 0.08 - - - - - - - 0.11 - -
Viscosity, cp
Compressibility, Z 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Liquid Phase
Lbs/hr 0 0 0 0 44,736 44,736 44,736 42,942 42,942 42,942 42,942 0 1,107 710
Flow @ T&P, GPM - - - - 83.19 83.20 86.34 82.58 87.07 83.64 83.65 - 2.22 1.44
SpGr @ T&P - - - - 1.08 1.07 1.04 1.04 0.99 1.03 1.03 - 1.00 0.99
Viscosity @ T&P, cp - - - - 1.64 1.64 0.53 2.11 0.39 1.10 1.10 - 0.68 0.56
Surface Tension, Dynes/Cm
Phase 1 Feasibility Study For Post Combustion CO2 Capture JOB NUMBER A02484
Poza Rica NGCC With 1% Scale Pilot Plant DRAWING No. REV.

0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Design Operation with 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading DS-STREAM TABLES-Design 0
REV DATE REVISIONS PROC. ENG UNIT ENG STREAM PROPERTIES TABLE English (Sheet 1 of 2)
Table131(contd)PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantH&MBTableDesignCaseOperation
Stream Number 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Stream Description Abs Wash Make Up Make Up Abs Wash Abs Wash Reboiler Reboiler Lean Amine Lean Amine
Water Water To Water To Water Water Feed Vapor Bypass To Carbon
Purge Stripper Absorber Draw Return Carb Filter Filter
N2 28.01 - - - - - - - - -
CO2 44.01 - - - - - - 10 - -
Argon 39.95 - - - - - - - - -
O2 32.00 - - - - - - - - -
MEA Vapor 61.09 - - - - - - 1 - -
H2O Vapor 18.02 - - - - - - 175 - -
Total MPH Vapor - - - - - - 186 - -
LIQUID COMPONENTS:
N2 28.01 - - - 0 0 - - - -
CO2 44.01 - - - 0 0 42 - 29 3
Argon 39.95 - - - 0 0 - - - -
O2 32.00 - - - 0 0 - - - -
MEA 61.09 0 - 0 4 4 205 - 183 20
Water 18.02 184 2 208 5,476 5,452 1,788 - 1,452 161
Total MPH Liquid 184 2 208 5,480 5,456 2,035 - 1,664 185
Total Stream LBMole/Hr 184 2 208 5,480 5,456 2,035 186 1,664 185
Total Stream LB/Hr 3,308 34 3,753 98,891 98,445 46,600 3,657 38,648 4,294
Total Stream Wt Fraction Vapor - - - - - - 1.00 - -
Total Stream Enthalpies, MMBtu/hr 0.13 0.00 0.15 4.62 3.93 6.44 3.67 0.25 0.03
Temperature, deg F 100.0 100.0 100.0 106.8 100.0 251.9 252.7 100.0 100.0
Pressure, PSIA 15.32 27.65 15.32 15.32 15.12 27.60 27.65 106.40 106.40
Vapor Phase
Lbs/hr - - - - - - 3,657 - -
Mol Wt. - - - - - - 19.66 - -
Flow @ Std T&P, MMSCFD - - - - - - 1.69 - -
Flow @ T&P, ACFS - - - - - - 14.29 - -
Density, lb/ft3 - - - - - - 0.07 - -
Viscosity, cp
Compressibility, Z 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Liquid Phase
Lbs/hr 3,308 34 3,753 98,891 98,445 46,600 (0) 38,648 4,294
Flow @ T&P, GPM 6.65 0.07 7.55 199.24 198.04 93.88 - 74.32 8.26
SpGr @ T&P 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 - 1.04 1.04
Viscosity @ T&P, cp 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.64 0.69 0.39 - 2.11 2.11

0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Design Operation with 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading DS-STREAM TABLES-Design 0
Table132PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantUtilityConsumptionSummaryTableDesignCaseOperation
Steam Water Requirement, 1000 Lbs/Hr Feed Water
Elect.
Load BHP Warm Return Cooling Water
Power 1000 Lbs/Hr Hot Cond Make up Waste
Item No Item Name Cond Cond Pre-Heat Q
160 45 PSIG Hot Cond Warm Return Proc MUW
Waste W / CW, C.W. circ. MMbtu/hr
Norm. Max (3). KW PSIG / / 303F / 293F Cond / Cond / @ / @ 100
@ 100 F MMbtu/hr GPM Absorbed
565 F Sat Sat @ 293 F 100F F
VESSELS:
C-100 Feed Scrubber/Cooler (0.710)
C-101 Flue Gas Absorber 3.308 (3.461)
C-103 Stripper OVHD Receiver 0.034
C-106 Condensate Flash Drum 3.709 (3.709)
D-101 MEA Storage Tank Make Up 0.000 0.032 0.000
EXCHANGERS:
E-100&109 Fd Scrub Wash Coolers 1.8 270
E-102&A Lean Amine Cooler 1.1 156
E-103&A Stripper Condenser 1.2 180
E-104 Stripper Reboiler 3.709 (3.709)
E-105 Wash Water Cooler 0.5 81
E-106 Reclaimer (3) 0.655 (0.655)
E-108 Stm Condensate Cooler 3.709 (3.709) 0.7 107
E-110 Abs InterCool Circ Cooler 0.0 0
COMPRESSORS:
K-101 Flue Gas Blower 121 133 99
PUMPS:
G-100 Fd Scrub 2nd Stg Wash Pump 3 3 3
G-101 Rich Amine Pump 8 9 6
G-102 Lean Amine Pump 7 8 6
G-103 Absorb OH Water Wash Pump 6 7 5
G-104 Stripper Reflux Pump 0 0 0
G-105 Fd Scrub 1st Stg Wash Pump 2 2 2
G-106 Amine Fill Pump 6 6 5
G-107 Amine Sump Pump 1 1 1
G-109 Condensate Return Pump 0 0 0
G-110 Abs InterCooler Circ Pump - 2 -
G-111 Absorb OH VOC Wash Pump 2 3 2
G-112 PCC CW Booster Pump 48 57 40
PACKAGED EQUIPMENTS:
V-103 Soda Ash Feed Syst Pkg (3) 0.0 0.0 0.0
MISCELLANEOUS:
Reboiler Stm De-Superhtr 3.342 (3.709) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.368 0.000
Internal WW Recycle 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 (0.032) 0.032
Plt Lighting & Instrument'n 0.0 0.0 0.0
TOTAL 197 225 162 3.342 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 (4.140) 5.4 794
NOTES:
(1) Negative numbers (xxx) are productions while positive numbers are consumptions.
(2) Numbers shown are for ONE Train @ 8000 Oper Hrs/Yr. 1 identical trains required.
(3) Numbers shown are intermittent consumptions and are NOT included in NORMAL total.
(4) CW temperatures, Tin= 81.5 deg F Tout= 95.0 deg F
Phase 1 Feasibility Study For Post Combustion CO2 CapturJOB NUMBER A02484
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Design Operation with 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading DS-Util-100-Design 0
REV DATE REVISIONS PROC. ENG UNIT ENG UTILITY CONSUMPTION SUMMARY (English)
Table133PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantCatalystsandChemicalsConsumptionSummaryDesignCaseOperation
Commodity Purchase Initial Inventory Avg Consumption Cost
Type Concentration Total Vol Conc Used Density Total Inventory Avg Rate Unit Cost Initial Fill Annual Cost
Equip No Equipment Name
Wt% Units Ft3 Wt% LB/Ft3 Units Life, Years Units/Hr $/Units $MM $MM/Yr
C-101 Absorber & Strip OH Amine Losses MEA 100.0 LBs 462 30.0 62.7 8,680 0.0 0.1 1.00 0.017 0.001 (Note 2)
C-101 Amine Degradation Losses (2) MEA 100.0 LBs 0.0 0.0 11,622 0.0 5.4 1.00 0.012 0.043 Incl 90 days consumpt'n in Initial Fill
C-101 Corrosion Inhibitors Propriety 100.0 LBs 0.0 0.0 581 0.0 0.3 3.48 0.002 0.007 Incl 90 days consumpt'n in Initial Fill
0 Purge Water Amine Losses MEA 100.0 LBs 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 18.0 1.00 0.000 0.144
E-106 Reclaimer Chem Additive Na2CO3 100.0 LBs 0.0 0.0 11,622 0.0 5.4 0.10 0.001 0.004 90 days of avg consumpt'n in Initial Fill
V-102 Lean Amine Filter Package Carbon 100.0 LBs 4 0.0 25.0 94 0.08 0.1 1.24 0.000 0.001
V-102 Lean Amine Pre-Filter Cartridge Each Each 0 0.0 0.0 1 0.08 0.00150 96.9 0.000 0.001
V-102 Lean Amine Post-Filter Cartridge Each Each 0 0.0 0.0 1 0.08 0.00150 96.9 0.000 0.001
Waste Disposal Cost Allowance:

Reclaimer Waste (Dry Basis) LBs 10.8 0.28 0.024 Assume disposal cost is 50% makeup cost.
Spent Activated Carbon (Dry Basis) LBs 0.1 1.24 0.001 Assume disposal cost is 100% makeup cost.
Spent Pre & Post-Filters Each 0.0030 96.86 0.002 Assume disposal cost is 100% makeup cost.
TOTAL 0.032 0.231

NOTES:
(1) Provide 1 identical trains. Equipment shown are for ONE Amine train unless otherwise stated.
(2) Initial fill cost shown included 200 % calculated system inventories (excluding consumption inventories)
85Pilot_01% Des:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Design Operation with 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading DS-CAT&CHEM-100-Design 0
REV DATE REVISIONS PROC. ENG UNIT ENG CAT & CHEM CONSUMPTION SUMMARY
13.5.2 Expected(Exp)CasePilotPlantOperation
TheExpcaseisfor85%CO2recovery,basedonrichaminefromtheabsorberbottomachievingan
acid gas loading of 0.37 moles of CO2 per mole of MEA, and lean amine from the regeneration
stripper bottom achieving an acid gas loading of 0.12 moles of CO2 per mole of MEA. The
correspondingabsorberacidgaspickupisthus0.25molesofCO2permoleofMEA,whichgivesa
reboiling duty of roughly 3.9 GJ/mT (1,670 Btu/lb) of CO2 recovered. This case represents a
projected best achievable MEA operation based on Nexants past experiences with commercial
amineplants.
TheExpcasePFD,completewithmajorstreamcompositions,flows,temperaturesandpressuresis
presented in Figure 133. The corresponding H&MB table is shown in Table 134, the utility
consumption summary in Table 135, and the catalysts and chemicals consumption summary in
Table136.
AsshowninFigure133,intheExpcase19.5mTPD(21.5STPD)or7,120t/y(7,850STPY)ofCO2will
berecoveredfromthe1%fluegasslipstream.
Figure133PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantPFDExpectedCaseOperation
K-101 C-100 G-105 E-109 G-100 E-100 E-105 G-103 G-111 C-101 G-101 E-110 G-110 G-106 D-101 V-102 E-102 G-102 E-101 G-107 D-102 C-102 V-101 E-106 E-104 E-103 G-104 A/B C-106 E-108 G-109 A/B G-112 A/B
C-103
133 BHP Des 5 Ft ID x 2.1 BHP Des 0.796 MM Des 3.5 BHP Des 1.013 MM Des 0.554 MM Des 7.2 BHP Des 2.6 BHP Des 5 Ft ID x 6.7 BHP Des 1. MM Des 2. BHP Des 4.7 BHP Des 7 Ft ID x 7 GPM Des 01.055 MM Des 5.9 BHP Des 4.07 MM Des 1.2 BHP Des 6 ft W x 6 ft L 2 Ft ID x 20 Gallon Size 0.171 MM Des 3.416 MM Des 1.216 MM Des 0.2 BHP Des 2 Ft ID x 6 Ft ID x 0.72 MM Des 0.4 BHP Des 52.1 BHP Des
8,755 SCFM Des 59 Ft T/T 83 GPM Des 172.5 ft2 Des 105 GPM Des 219.5 ft2 Des 168.5 ft2 Des 229 GPM Des 119 GPM Des 150 Ft T/T 73 GPM Des 268 ft2 Des 73 GPM Des 74 GPM Des 12 Ft T/T 142.8 ft2 Des 74 GPM Des 1,065.4 ft2 Des 81 GPM Des x 6 ft D 112 Ft T/T 28.5 ft2 Des 445.4 ft2 Des 55.2 ft2 Des 2. GPM Des 8 Ft T/T 15 Ft T/T 42.9 ft2 Des 7.5 GPM Des 864 GPM Des
7,959 SCFM Oper 75 GPM Oper 0.796 MM Oper 95 GPM Oper 1.013 MM Oper 0.554 MM Oper 199 GPM Oper 99 GPM Oper 67 GPM Oper 0. MM Oper 67 GPM Oper 67 GPM Oper 0.899 MM Oper 67 GPM Oper 3.081 MM Oper 81 GPM Oper 0.15 MM Oper 3.005 MM Oper 0.955 MM Oper 1.7 GPM Oper 0.633 MM Oper 6.6 GPM Oper 720 GPM Oper

2
14.9 psia V-102
ATM VENT Atmosphere
1.8 ppmV MEA SV
Particulate E-103 3
FC CW C-103
FI CO2
7
100 F 27.4 psia 21.4 psia
C-102 LC
G-111 Particulate
M M FC
100 F FC
871 LB/Hr
Sewer
100 F TI
LI SL FI TI
SEWER
SEWER
or CT FC
SL TI M M
6
CO2
AI
110 F
0 LB/Hr LC LI
100 F 107 F TI PI
CW 98,949 LB/Hr 2,939 LB/Hr
G-103 TI CO2 AI
E-105 CO2 AI
M TI PI
3,029 LB/Hr O2 & LC SL 2,939 LB/Hr
CT
SEWER
or SEWER
or CT TI CW CO2 AI
CO2 SV
CO2 TI PI TI
303 F
C-100 4 FI TI PI TI
TI PI
M
FC TI 254 F FI
M M E-104
LC
16.2 psia 47,345 LB/Hr 236 F 323 LB/Hr
E-100
HRSG Stack 99 F LC
TI FI
195 F FI CW
293F Sat
C-106
PLANT
G-110
14.7 psia LC 120 F 254 F
PI E-110 TI
O2, CO2,
& H2O 120 F TC SL 254 F LC
TI FC SV
AI FC TI
M E-109 G-102
1 LC LB/Hr 138 F
CW PI FI TC
This Drawing
K-101 M TC
G-105
5 G-101 G-109
TI
2,939 LB/Hr
CW
LI E-106 M E-108
CT
SEWER
or SEWER
or CT
FI
NNF Stm
M FI Trap
FI
Power Plant CT
710 LB/Hr
Low Level M
V-101
Expected Operation Stream Descriptions: Flue Treated LP CO2 Cooled Rich Lean Stripper G-112
Lean Loading = 0.12 Mole CO2 / Mole MEA Gas Flue Product Flue Gas Amine Amine Column
High Level G-107
M
Power Plant CT
N2 28.01 922 922 0 922 - - 0 D-101 81.5 F
TI
CO2 44.01 48 7 41 48 - - 41 720 GPM
Argon 39.95 11 11 0 11 - - 0 FI FI FI
O2 32.00 155 155 0 155 - - 0 FI FI FI FI
G-106
MEA Vapor 61.09 - 0 - - - - -
H2O Vapor D-102 Cooling Water Return Header
18.02 122 74 2 83 - - 48
Total MPH Vapor 1,258 1,169 43 1,219 - - 89
Power Plant CT
E-100 E-102 E-103 E-105 E-108 E-109 E-110 95. F
N2 28.01 - - - - 0 - - Vap & Liq Sample 85Pilot_01% Exp:
SV S
SVL
SL M
MEA 61.09 - - - - 163 163 - house data from similar applications. The information shown represent projected best Flow Indicator, Motor Operated Rev. Date Revision BY
FI FC M
Total MPH Liquid - - - - 1,514 1,473 - Temp Indicator, TASK 3 - GENERIC MEA BASED CO2 CAPTURE PILOT PLANT
Actual performance and design specifications and guarantees are the responsibilities of TI TC
Total Stream LBMole/Hr 1,258 1,169 43 1,219 1,514 1,473 89 Press Indicator, On/Off Isolation Expected Operation with 0.37 RA & 0.12 LA Loading
Total Stream LB/Hr 35,547 32,884 1,828 34,836 35,861 34,067 2,665 Controller Valve Job Rev.
sheet. Equipment design sizes are shown under the major equipment listing data sheet.
LI LC
Table134PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantH&MBTableExpectedCaseOperation
N2 28.01 922 922 0 922 - - - - - - - 0 - -
CO2 44.01 48 7 41 48 - - - - - - - 41 - -
Argon 39.95 11 11 0 11 - - - - - - - 0 - -
O2 32.00 155 155 0 155 - - - - - - - 0 - -
MEA Vapor 61.09 - 0 - - - - - - - - - - - -
H2O Vapor 18.02 122 74 2 83 - - - - - - - 48 - -
Total MPH Vapor 1,258 1,169 43 1,219 - - - - - - - 89 - -
LIQUID COMPONENTS:
N2 28.01 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
CO2 44.01 - - - - 60 60 60 20 20 20 20 - 0 -
Argon 39.95 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
O2 32.00 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
MEA 61.09 - - - - 163 163 163 163 163 163 163 - - -
Water 18.02 - - - - 1,290 1,290 1,290 1,290 1,290 1,290 1,290 - 48 39
Total MPH Liquid - - - - 1,514 1,514 1,514 1,473 1,473 1,473 1,473 - 48 39
Total Stream LB/Hr 35,547 32,884 1,828 34,836 35,861 35,861 35,861 34,067 34,067 34,067 34,067 2,665 871 710
Total Stream Enthalpies, MMBtu/hr 3.83 1.74 0.05 1.97 0.13 0.14 3.22 0.46 5.22 2.14 2.15 1.04 0.03 0.04
Pressure, PSIA 16.57 14.93 21.35 16.18 16.11 117.98 96.98 15.32 27.65 19.62 73.83 27.35 21.35 16.18
Vapor Phase
Lbs/hr 35,546 32,884 1,828 34,836 - - - - - - - 2,665 - -
Mol Wt. 28.25 28.12 42.85 28.58 - - - - - - - 29.92 - -
Flow @ T&P, ACFS 155.27 130.77 3.33 126.88 - - - - - - - 6.53 - -
Density, lb/ft3 0.06 0.07 0.15 0.08 - - - - - - - 0.11 - -
Viscosity, cp
Liquid Phase
Lbs/hr 0 0 0 0 35,861 35,861 35,861 34,067 34,067 34,067 34,067 0 871 710
Flow @ T&P, GPM - - - - 66.69 66.69 69.11 66.06 69.71 67.06 67.07 - 1.75 1.44
SpGr @ T&P - - - - 1.07 1.07 1.04 1.03 0.98 1.02 1.02 - 1.00 0.99
Viscosity @ T&P, cp - - - - 1.50 1.50 0.53 2.04 0.37 0.98 0.97 - 0.68 0.56

0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Expected Operation with 0.37 RA & 0.12 LA Loading DS-STREAM TABLES-Design 0
Table134(contd)PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantHMBTableExpectedCaseOperation
Stream Number 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
N2 28.01 - - - - - - - - -
CO2 44.01 - - - - - - 5 - -
Argon 39.95 - - - - - - - - -
O2 32.00 - - - - - - - - -
MEA Vapor 61.09 - - - - - - 1 - -
H2O Vapor 18.02 - - - - - - 163 - -
Total MPH Vapor - - - - - - 169 - -
LIQUID COMPONENTS:
N2 28.01 - - - 0 0 - - - -
CO2 44.01 - - - 0 0 24 - 18 2
Argon 39.95 - - - 0 0 - - - -
O2 32.00 - - - 0 0 - - - -
MEA 61.09 0 - 0 5 5 164 - 147 16
Water 18.02 161 2 186 5,476 5,452 1,453 - 1,161 129
Total MPH Liquid 161 2 186 5,481 5,457 1,642 - 1,326 147
Pressure, PSIA 15.32 27.65 15.32 15.32 15.12 27.60 27.65 103.83 103.83
Vapor Phase
Lbs/hr - - - - - - 3,212 - -
Mol Wt. - - - - - - 19.03 - -
Flow @ T&P, ACFS - - - - - - 12.99 - -
Density, lb/ft3 - - - - - - 0.07 - -
Viscosity, cp
Liquid Phase
Lbs/hr 2,905 34 3,356 98,949 98,498 37,279 - 30,660 3,407
Flow @ T&P, GPM 5.84 0.07 6.75 199.35 198.14 76.06 - 59.46 6.61
SpGr @ T&P 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 - 1.03 1.03
Viscosity @ T&P, cp 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.64 0.69 0.37 - 2.04 2.04

0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Expected Operation with 0.37 RA & 0.12 LA Loading DS-STREAM TABLES-Design 0
Table135PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantUtilityConsumptionSummaryTableExpectedCaseOperation
Elect.
160 45 PSI G Ho t Cond War m Return Proc M UW
Waste W / CW, C.W. circ. MMbt u/hr
Norm . Max (3). KW P SIG / / 303F / 293F Cond / Cond / @ / @ 1 00
@ 10 0 F MM btu/h r GPM Abso rbed
565 F Sa t Sat @ 293 F 100F F
VESSELS:
EXCHANGERS:
E-106 Reclaimer (3) 0.144 (0.144)
COMPRESSORS:
PUMPS:
G-104 Regenerator Reflux Pump 0 0 0
G-110 Abs InterCooler Circ Pump - 2 -
MISCELLANEOUS:
TOTAL 189 215 156 2.939 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 (3.739) 4.9 720
NOTES:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Expected Operation with 0.37 RA & 0.12 LA Loading DS-Util-100-Design 0
Table136PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantCatalystsandChemicalsConsumptionSummaryExpectedCaseOperation

TOTAL 0.032 0.229

NOTES:
85Pilot_01% Exp:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Expected Operation with 0.37 RA & 0.12 LA Loading DS-CAT&CHEM-100-Design 0
13.5.3 AbsorberIntercooled(IC)CasePilotOperation
TheICcaseisbasedontheinclusionofabsorberinterstagecoolingtoreducethetemperatureinthe
lowersectionsoftheabsorbertoimproveCO2recoveryto90%ataboutthesameaminecirculation
rateastheExpoperation.Thecorrespondingrichamineacidgasloadingattheabsorberbottomis
projected to be 0.40 moles of CO2 per mole of MEA. Lean amine from the regeneration stripper
bottom remains at an acid gas loading of 0.12 moles of CO2 per mole of MEA. The corresponding
absorber acid gas pickup is thus improved to 0.28 moles of CO2 per mole of MEA, which gives a
reboiling duty of roughly 3.7 GJ/mT (1,600 Btu/lb) of CO2 recovered. This case represents a
projected achievable MEA operation, based on a colder absorber bottom temperature resulting
from the absorber interstage cooling. This case is primarily used for sizing the interstage cooling
equipment that may be required by some of the licensor amine processes. Nexant does not have
intercooledcommercialamineplantsperformancedata.
The IC case PFD, complete with major stream compositions, flows, temperatures and pressures is
presented in Figure 134. The corresponding stream H&MB table is shown in Table 137 and the
utilityconsumptionsummaryisshowninTable138,whilethecatalystsandchemicalssummaryis
showninTable139.EquipmentdatasheetsforintercoolingequipmentareincludedwiththeDes
caseequipmentdatasheetsinAppendixH.
AsshowninFigure134,intheICcase20.7mTPD(22.8STPD)or7,560mTPY(8,320STPY)ofCO2will
berecoveredfromthe1%fluegasslipstream.
Figure134PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantPFDAbsorberInterCooledOperation
K-101 C-100 G-105 E-109 G-100 E-100 E-105 G-103 G-111 C-101 G-101 E-110 G-110 G-106 D-101 V-102 E-102 G-102 E-101 G-107 D-102 C-102 V-101 E-106 E-104 E-103 G-104 A/B C-106 E-108 G-109 A/B G-112 A/B
C-103
133 BHP Des 5 Ft ID x 2.1 BHP Des 0.796 MM Des 3.5 BHP Des 1.013 MM Des 0.554 MM Des 7.1 BHP Des 2.6 BHP Des 5 Ft ID x 6.3 BHP Des 1. MM Des 1.9 BHP Des 4.6 BHP Des 7 Ft ID x 6 GPM Des 01.055 MM Des 5.7 BHP Des 4.07 MM Des 1.2 BHP Des 6 ft W x 6 ft L 2 Ft ID x 19 Gallon Size 0.171 MM Des 3.416 MM Des 1.216 MM Des 0.1 BHP Des 2 Ft ID x 6 Ft ID x 0.72 MM Des 0.4 BHP Des 52.3 BHP Des
8,755 SCFM Des 59 Ft T/T 83 GPM Des 172.5 ft2 Des 105 GPM Des 219.5 ft2 Des 168.5 ft2 Des 229 GPM Des 118 GPM Des 150 Ft T/T 69 GPM Des 268 ft2 Des 69 GPM Des 69 GPM Des 12 Ft T/T 142.8 ft2 Des 69 GPM Des 1,065.4 ft2 Des 81 GPM Des x 6 ft D 112 Ft T/T 28.5 ft2 Des 445.4 ft2 Des 55.2 ft2 Des 1.9 GPM Des 8 Ft T/T 15 Ft T/T 42.9 ft2 Des 7.6 GPM Des 868 GPM Des
7,959 SCFM Oper 75 GPM Oper 0.796 MM Oper 95 GPM Oper 1.013 MM Oper 0.554 MM Oper 199 GPM Oper 99 GPM Oper 63 GPM Oper 0.93 MM Oper 63 GPM Oper 63 GPM Oper 0.019 MM Oper 63 GPM Oper 3.7 MM Oper 81 GPM Oper 0.151 MM Oper 3.023 MM Oper 0.92 MM Oper 1.7 GPM Oper 0.637 MM Oper 6.6 GPM Oper 723 GPM Oper

2
14.9 psia V-102
ATM VENT Atmosphere
1.8 ppmV MEA SV
Particulate E-103 3
FC CW C-103
FI CO2
7
100 F C-102 27.4 psia 21.4 psia
LC
G-111 Particulate
M M FC
100 F FC
840 LB/Hr
Sewer
100 F TI
LI SL FI TI
SEWER
SEWER
or CT FC
SL TI M M
6
CO2
AI
110 F
0 LB/Hr LC LI
100 F 107 F TI PI
CW 98,730 LB/Hr 2,957 LB/Hr
G-103 TI CO2 AI
E-105 CO2 AI
M TI PI
3,043 LB/Hr O2 & LC SL 2,957 LB/Hr
CT
SEWER
or SEWER
or CT TI CW CO2 AI
CO2 SV
CO2 TI PI TI
303 F
C-100 4 FI TI PI TI
TI PI
M
FC TI 254 F
M M FI
E-104
LC
16.2 psia 47,345 LB/Hr 236 F 325 LB/Hr
E-100
HRSG Stack 99 F LC
TI FI
195 F FI CW
293F Sat
C-106
PLANT
G-110
14.7 psia LC 120 F 254 F
PI E-110 TI
O2, CO2,
& H2O 120 F TC SL 254 F LC
TI FC SV
AI FC TI
M E-109 G-102
1 LC LB/Hr 111 F
CW PI FI TC
This Drawing
K-101 M TC
G-105
5 G-101 G-109 2,957 LB/Hr
TI CW
LI E-106 M E-108
CT
SEWER
or SEWER
or CT
FI
NNF Stm
M FI Trap
FI
Power Plant CT
710 LB/Hr
Low Level M
Flue Treated LP CO2 Cooled Rich Lean Stripper V-101 G-112
Absorb Inter-Cool Oper Stream Descriptions:
Lean Loading = 0.12 Mole CO2 / Mole MEA Gas Flue Product Flue Gas Amine Amine Column G-107
High Level
M
Power Plant CT
N2 28.01 922 922 0 922 - - 0 D-101 81.5 F
TI
CO2 44.01 48 5 43 48 - - 43 723 GPM
Argon 39.95 11 11 0 11 - - 0 FI FI FI
O2 32.00 155 155 0 155 - - 0 FI FI FI FI
G-106
MEA Vapor 61.09 - 0 - - - - -
H2O Vapor D-102 Cooling Water Return Header
18.02 122 74 2 83 - - 47
Total MPH Vapor 1,258 1,167 45 1,219 - - 90 Power Plant CT
E-100 E-102 E-103 E-105 E-108 E-109 E-110 95. F
N2 28.01 - - - - 0 - - Vap & Liq Sample 85Pilot_01% IC:
SV S
SVL
SL M
MEA 61.09 - - - - 154 154 - house data from similar applications. The information shown represent projected best Flow Indicator, Motor Operated Rev. Date Revision BY
FI FC M
Total MPH Liquid - - - - 1,436 1,392 - Temp Indicator, TASK 3 - GENERIC MEA BASED CO2 CAPTURE PILOT PLANT
Actual performance and design specifications and guarantees are the responsibilities of TI TC
Total Stream LBMole/Hr 1,258 1,167 45 1,219 1,436 1,392 90 Press Indicator, On/Off Isolation Absorb Inter-Cool Operation with 0.40 RA & 0.12 LA Loading
Total Stream LB/Hr 35,547 32,779 1,936 34,836 34,105 32,205 2,740 sheet. Equipment design sizes are shown under the major equipment listing data sheet.
Controller Valve Job Rev.
LI LC
Table137PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantHMBTableAbsorberInterCooledOperation
N2 28.01 922 922 0 922 - - - - - - - 0 - -
CO2 44.01 48 5 43 48 - - - - - - - 43 - -
Argon 39.95 11 11 0 11 - - - - - - - 0 - -
O2 32.00 155 155 0 155 - - - - - - - 0 - -
MEA Vapor 61.09 - 0 - - - - - - - - - - - -
H2O Vapor 18.02 122 74 2 83 - - - - - - - 47 - -
Total MPH Vapor 1,258 1,167 45 1,219 - - - - - - - 90 - -
LIQUID COMPONENTS:
N2 28.01 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
CO2 44.01 - - - - 62 62 62 18 18 18 18 - 0 -
Argon 39.95 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
O2 32.00 - - - - 0 0 0 - - - - - 0 -
MEA 61.09 - - - - 154 154 154 154 154 154 154 - - -
Water 18.02 - - - - 1,220 1,220 1,220 1,220 1,220 1,220 1,220 - 47 39
Total MPH Liquid - - - - 1,436 1,436 1,436 1,392 1,392 1,392 1,392 - 47 39
Total Stream LB/Hr 35,547 32,779 1,936 34,836 34,105 34,105 34,105 32,205 32,205 32,205 32,205 2,740 840 710
Total Stream Enthalpies, MMBtu/hr 3.83 1.74 0.05 1.97 (0.82) (0.81) 2.89 0.43 4.94 1.24 1.25 1.01 0.03 0.04
Pressure, PSIA 16.57 14.93 21.35 16.18 16.11 118.03 97.03 15.32 27.65 19.68 76.92 27.35 21.35 16.18
Vapor Phase
Lbs/hr 35,546 32,779 1,936 34,836 - - - - - - - 2,740 - -
Mol Wt. 28.25 28.09 42.85 28.58 - - - - - - - 30.52 - -
Flow @ T&P, ACFS 155.27 130.50 3.53 126.88 - - - - - - - 6.55 - -
Density, lb/ft3 0.06 0.07 0.15 0.08 - - - - - - - 0.12 - -
Viscosity, cp
Liquid Phase
Lbs/hr 0 0 0 0 34,105 34,105 34,105 32,205 32,205 32,205 32,205 0 840 710
Flow @ T&P, GPM - - - - 62.60 62.60 65.34 62.45 65.90 62.89 62.90 - 1.69 1.44
SpGr @ T&P - - - - 1.09 1.09 1.04 1.03 0.98 1.02 1.02 - 1.00 0.99
Viscosity @ T&P, cp - - - - 2.21 2.20 0.54 2.04 0.37 1.38 1.37 - 0.68 0.56

0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Absorb Inter-Cool Operation with 0.40 RA & 0.12 LA Loading DS-STREAM TABLES-Design 0
Table137(contd)PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantHMBTableAbsorberInterCooledOperation
Stream Number 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
N2 28.01 - - - - - - - - -
CO2 44.01 - - - - - - 5 - -
Argon 39.95 - - - - - - - - -
O2 32.00 - - - - - - - - -
MEA Vapor 61.09 - - - - - - 1 - -
H2O Vapor 18.02 - - - - - - 164 - -
Total MPH Vapor - - - - - - 170 - -
LIQUID COMPONENTS:
N2 28.01 - - - 0 0 - - - -
CO2 44.01 - - - 0 0 23 - 17 2
Argon 39.95 - - - 0 0 - - - -
O2 32.00 - - - 0 0 - - - -
MEA 61.09 0 - 0 5 5 155 - 139 15
Water 18.02 162 2 187 5,464 5,440 1,384 - 1,098 122
Total MPH Liquid 162 2 187 5,469 5,445 1,562 - 1,253 139
Pressure, PSIA 15.32 27.65 15.32 15.32 15.12 27.60 27.65 106.92 106.92
Vapor Phase
Lbs/hr - - - - - - 3,232 - -
Mol Wt. - - - - - - 19.03 - -
Flow @ T&P, ACFS - - - - - - 13.07 - -
Density, lb/ft3 - - - - - - 0.07 - -
Viscosity, cp
Liquid Phase
Lbs/hr 2,920 36 3,371 98,730 98,280 35,437 - 28,985 3,221
Flow @ T&P, GPM 5.88 0.07 6.78 198.91 197.70 72.29 - 56.21 6.25
SpGr @ T&P 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 - 1.03 1.03
Viscosity @ T&P, cp 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.64 0.69 0.37 - 2.04 2.04

0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Absorb Inter-Cool Operation with 0.40 RA & 0.12 LA Loading DS-STREAM TABLES-Design 0
Table138PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantUtilityConsumptionSummaryTableAbsorberInterCooledOperation
Elect.
16 0 45 PSIG Hot C ond Warm Retur n P roc MU W
Waste W / C W, C.W. circ. MMb tu/hr
No rm. Max (3). KW PSI G / / 3 03F / 29 3F Cond / Cond / @ / @ 10 0
@ 100 F MM btu/hr GPM Abs orbed
565 F Sat Sat @ 29 3 F 100F F
VESSELS:
EXCHANGERS:
E-106 Reclaimer (3) 0.145 (0.145)
COMPRESSORS:
PUMPS:
G-104 Regenerator Reflux Pump 0 0 0
G-110 Abs InterCooler Circ Pump 2 2 1
MISCELLANEOUS:
TOTAL 191 215 157 2.957 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 (3.754) 4.9 723
NOTES:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Absorb Inter-Cool Operation with 0.40 RA & 0.12 LA Loadin DS-Util-100-Design 0
Table139PozaRicaNGCCMEABasedPCCPilotPlantCatalystsandChemicalsConsumptionSummaryAbsorberInterCooledOperation

TOTAL 0.033 0.233

NOTES:
85Pilot_01% IC:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Absorb Inter-Cool Operation with 0.40 RA & 0.12 LA Loadin DS-CAT&CHEM-100-Design 0
13.6 PCCPILOTPLANTPROCESSFLOWDESCRIPTION
ThePCCpilotplantcontainsthefollowingmajorpiecesofequipment:
FlueGasBlower(K101)
FeedScrubber/Cooler(C100)
FeedScrubber1stStageWashCooler(E109)
FeedScrubber1stStageWashCirculationPump(G105)
FeedScrubber2ndStageWashCooler(E100)
FeedScrubber2ndStageWashCirculationPump(G100)
FlueGasAbsorber(C101)
AbsorberOverheadWashWaterPump(G103)
AbsorberOverheadWashWaterCooler(E105)
AbsorberOverheadVOCWashPump(G111)
RichAminePump(G101)
AbsorberInterstageCooler(E110)
AbsorberInterstageCirculationPump(G110)
Rich/LeanAmineHeatExchanger(E101)
LeanAmineTrimCooler(E102)
LeanAminePump(G102)
AmineStripper(C102)
StripperRefluxDrum(C103)
StripperRefluxPump(G104)
StripperOverheadCondenser(E103)
StripperReboiler(E104)
AmineReclaimer(E106)
SteamCondensateDrum(C106)
SteamCondensateCooler(E108)
CondensatePump(G109)
SodaAshFeedSystem(V101)includingSodaAshPump(G108)
CarbonFilters(V102)
MEAStorageTank(D101)
AmineFillPump(G106)
AmineSump(D102)
AmineSumpPump(G107)

TheproposedinstrumentationshownonthePFDiscapableofdirectlymeasuringstreamflows,
temperaturesandpressures,aswellasprovidingsamples,toallowthedeterminationofH&MB
aroundallmajorequipment(ME).Actualinstrumentationmaybesimplifiedtoreducecost,aslong
asH&MBaroundallMEcanbedetermined,eitherdirectlybymeasurementsorindirectlyby
inference.
AsshownonthePFD(Figure132),fluegastotheMEAPCCpilotplantwillbea1%slipstreamofthe
flue gas taken from Poza Rica NGCC stack. A Feed Gas Blower (K101) is provided to boost the
pressureofthefluegasbyabout0.14bar(2psi)toovercomethepressuredropinthepilotplant
andallowtreatedfluegastobeventedtoatmospherefromthetopoftheMEAAbsorber(C101).
The flue gas feed (Stream 1) enters the bottom bed of the Flue Gas Scrubber (C100). The C100
bottombedsfunctionistoreducethefluegastemperaturetonearsaturationbeforeitentersthe
topbedofC100tobefurther cooledtocondense outmostofthemoistureintheflue gasfeed.
The flue gas moisture is reduced as low as practically possible in C100 to minimize heat addition
from moisture condensation in the downstream CO2 absorption section. The flue gas, with a dew
pointtemperaturenear48C(118F),isscrubbedcountercurrentlywithcooledwaterintheC100
bottombedwithrandompacking(Pallrings)toabout49C(120F).Thefluegasisfurtherscrubbed
in the C100 top bed with random packing to about 41 C (105 F) before leaving C100 for
downstream CO2 absorption. Water condensed in C100 is relatively clean and can be used as
coolingwatermakeuptoreduceoverallmakeupwaterdemand.
Thedesignfluegasfeedcontainsroughly10ppmVSOx.BecausemanyoftheadvancedaminePCC
technologylicensorsrequirethefluegasfeedsulfurcontenttobereducedto1ppmVorless,deep
wetfluegasdesulfurization(WFGD)bychemicalscrubbingmaybenecessary.Inthesecasesitwill
bedesirabletominimizethecontaminatedpurgefromthechemicalscrubbingandtomaximizethe
cleanwaterpurgefromthefluegascooling.ThisisachievedinthetwobedC100designbyadding
licensorspecifieddeepWFGDchemicalstothebottombed.Becausethescrubbedfluegasleaving
from the bottom bed is slightly above the dew point, the moisture in the flue gas feed is not
condensed, so the contaminate purge from the bottom bed can be controlled and minimized.
Almost all of the condensation from cooling to 41 C (105 F) will occur in the top bed, which is
chemicalfreeandclean.
Thecooledfluegasfeed(Stream4),entersthebottomoftheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)andtravels
upward, where it is scrubbed countercurrently by the lean 30 wt% MEA solution (Stream 6) over
threebedsofstructuredpackingtoremove85%ofitsCO2content.Structuredpackingisselected
for absorption because the required bed height to achieve the same amount of CO2 removal is
roughly half of that for random packing (Pall rings). Three packed beds are used in order to stay
withinthemaximumallowablepackingheightandtopreventexcessiveweightfromdeformingor
crushingthebottompacking.Thisalsoallowstheamountofpackingrequiredforagivenamountof
CO2removalvs.C101operationconditionstobemeasuredandwillaidinthedesignoptimization
forcommercialplants.Liquidfromeachbediscollectedandroutedexternallytothebedbelow.By
measuring the liquid flow as well as taking samples for laboratory property analysis, the H&MB
around each bed can be calculated to confirm CO2 removal as measured with the online gas
analyzers.
The CO2depleted flue gas from the amine absorption section then travels upwards to the water
washingsectioninC101,whereitiscontactedcountercurrentlywithwashwaterovertwobedsof
random packing (Pall rings) to remove any amine present in the gas before it is vented to
atmosphere through C101 overhead. The bottom water wash bed is primarily for cooling the
treatedgasfromtheabsorptionsection,condensemostofitsmoistureandremovethebulkofthe
entrainedamineaswellasanyvolatileaminesintheCO2depletedtreatedgas.Thetopwashbedis
for trim volatile amine removal with relatively aminefree clean circulating water. This twobed
washingarrangementalsoallowsforthecapabilitytotestVOCremovalwithPCClicensorspecified
wetchemicalwashinginthetopbedincasethetreatedgascontainsexcessiveamountsofVOCsor
hazardoustracecontaminants,whichwouldmakeitunsuitableforatmosphericventing.Sincemost
of the moisture in the gas from the absorption section is condensed and removed in the bottom
washbedwithitspurgewater,chemicalcontainingpurgefromthetopwashbedcanbecontrolled
andminimized.
TheCO2richMEAsolvent(Stream5)iscollectedatthebottomoftheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)and
transferred by the Rich Amine Pump (G101), via the Rich/Lean Amine Heat Exchanger (E101), to
theAmineStripper(C102)forregeneration.InE101heatfromthehotregeneratedleanamineis
transferred to the rich amine to recover some of the energy in the lean amine and minimize
reboilingenergyconsumption.
TherichsolutionleavingE101isstrippedofCO2inareboiledAmineStripper(C102)toregenerate
the lean amine. C102 consists of three stripping sections with randomly packed Pall rings for
removing CO2 from the amine, and a packed upper wash section also equipped with randomly
packedPallringsforremovingentrainedandvolatizedMEA.OverheadvaporfromC102iscooled
with CW in the Stripper Overhead Condenser (E103) before it is sent to the Stripper Overhead
RefluxDrum(C103).VaporfromC103istherecoveredCO2andisventedtotheatmosphere,while
therefluxleavingasthebottomsfromC103containsmostlywaterandisreturnedtothetopofthe
C102washsection.
TheStripperReboiler(E104),akettletypeheatexchanger,isheatedwith4.1bara(60psia)steam
togeneratethevaporusedtostriptheCO2fromtheMEAsolution.Italsoprovidespartofthelean
aminesurgevolumetogetherwiththeC102bottomliquidvolume.
HotleansolutionfromthebottomoftheAmineStripperiscooledbytherichMEAsolutioninthe
Rich/LeanAmineHeatExchanger(E101).ItisthenpumpedbytheLeanAminePump(G102)tothe
LeanAmineCooler(E102),whereitundergoesfurthercoolingtoabout38C(100F)beforebeing
returnedtothetopoftheabsorptionsectionoftheFlueGasAbsorberforreuse.A10%slipstream
ofthecooledleanamineiscirculatedthroughanactivatedcarbonfiltrationsystemtoremoveany
degradation and corrosion products in the solution. This filtration system consists of a dual line
Carbon Drum (C108) with pre and postfilters (V102) to facilitate periodic carbon removal and
replacementwithoutneedtoshutdownthepilotplant.
AnMEAReclaimer(E106)isprovidedtoremovedecompositionanddegradationproductsandheat
stablesaltsfromthehotleanMEAsolution.Thisisdoneviaasemicontinuousbatchdistillationof
the MEA.SodaashfromtheSodaAshFeedSystem(V101)ispumpedby theSodaAshPump (G
108)andfedtotheMEAReclaimersystemtocombinewiththeacidicimpuritiesandformsodium
salts, freeing the MEA for recycle into the Stripper (C102) bottom. Cooled residue from E106 is
removedandtruckedoffsitefordisposal.
AnAmineStorageTank(D101)isprovidedtostoreaminesolutioninventoriesfromallofthepilot
plant equipment during shutdowns. It also serves to receive excess amine solution from the pilot
plantanddispensemakeupaminesolutionviatheAmineFillPump(G106)backintothepilotplant
systems.
AconcreteAmineSump(D102),equippedwithanAmineSumpPump(G107),isalsoprovidedto
collect aminecontaining drains from the pilot plant equipment and return them into the Amine
StorageTank(D101).Thesumpalsoallowsforfreshaminemakeupsolutionpreparation.
13.7 DESIGNCASEEQUIPMENTDESCRIPTION
Detailedequipmentspecifications,layoutanddimensionsareprovidedinAppendixHofthisreport.
Table1310isanequipmentlistofthe1%PCCPilotPlant.
Table1310PCCPilotPlantMajorEquipmentList
VESSELS & TANKS: Ht or Total
======== Design Conditions Inside Tan/Tan Equip
Plt ------------------- Material of Quantity Diameter Length Width Length Number Cost
No. Item No. Item Name Type PSIG deg F Construction per Lot Units Ft Ft Ft Ft of Lots $1000
1100 C-100 Feed Scrubber/Cooler Vert 5.0 450 304SS 1 Vessel 5.0 59.0 1
- Scrubber Pall Rings 3.5 inch 304SS 589.0 Ft3 1
- Support Plates 304SS 39.3 Ft2 2 @ 5.0 1
- Hold-Down Plates 304SS 39.3 Ft2 2 @ 5.0 1
- Liq Distributors 304SS 39.3 Ft2 2 @ 5.0 1
- Chimney Trays 304SS 19.6 Ft2 1 @ 5.0 1
- Demister Pads 316SS 19.6 Ft2 1 @ 5.0 1
1100 C-101 Flue Gas Absorber Vert 5.0 450 316SS+316SS Top 1 Vessel 5.0 150.0 1
- Absor SulzerPak 252.0 SulzerPak SS 1413.7 Ft3 1
- Washing Pall Rings 3.5 inch SS 392.7 Ft3 1
- Bubble Cap Trays 316SS 0.0 Ft2 0 @ 5.0 1
1100 C-102 Amine Stripper Vert 25.0 450 316SS+316SS Top 1 Vessel 2.0 112.0 1
- Strip Pall Rings 3.5 inch 304SS 197.9 Ft3 1
- Washing Pall Rings 3.5 inch 304SS 31.4 Ft3 1
- Bubble Cap Trays 316SS 0.0 Ft2 0 @ 2.0 0
1100 C-103 Stripper Reflux Drum Vert 25.0 450 316SS 1 Vessel 2.0 7.5 1
1100 C-106 Condensate Flash Drum Horizont 50.0 450 Carbon Steel 1 Vessel 6.0 15.0 1
1100 C-108 Carbon Drum(Part of V-102) Vert 110.0 450 316SS 1 Vessel 2.0 10.0 2
1100 D-101 MEA Storage Tank Cone Roof Atm 450 316SS 1 Vessel 7.0 12.0 1
SHELL & TUBE EXCHANGERS AND AIR COOLERS:

======================================== Physical Arrangement Total
Design PSIG Des Temp, deg F Material Of Construction Total ------------------------- Equip
Plt ---------------- ---------------- ------------------ Duty Bare Tube In In Total Cost
No. Item No. Item Name Type Shell Tube Shell Tube Shell Tube MMBtu/Hr Area, Ft2 Series Parallel # Req $1000
1100 E-100 Fd Scrub 2nd Stg Wash Cooler P&F 75 100 450 450 304SS 1.01 220 1 1 1
1100 E-101 Lean/Rich Exchanger P&F 112 121 450 450 316SS 4.07 1065 1 1 1
1100 E-102 Lean Amine Cooler P&F 112 100 450 450 316SS 1.06 143 1 1 1
1100 E-103 Stripper OH Condenser Weld P&F 28 100 450 450 316SS 1.22 55 1 1 1
1100 E-104 Stripper Reboiler Kettle 50 90 450 450 316SS 316SS 3.42 445 1 1 1
1100 E-105 Abs OH Water Wash Cooler P&F 114 100 450 450 316SS 0.55 166 1 1 1
1100 E-106 Reclaimer Kettle 150 90 450 450 316SS 316SS 0.68 114 1 1 1
1100 E-108 Stm Condensate Cooler P&F 46 100 450 450 NA 304SS 0.72 43 1 1 1
1100 E-109 Fd Scrub 1st Stg Wash Cooler P&F 75 100 450 450 NA 304SS 0.80 172 1 1 1
1100 E-110 Abs InterCool Circ Cooler P&F 74 100 450 450 NA 316SS 1.00 268 1 1 1
COMPRESORS, BLOWERS & DRIVERS: Material Of Construction Design Capacity Total

============================== Design Conditions ---------------------- ------------------------------------------ Driver Equip
Plt ------------------- Wheel or Des Flow Inlet Delta P Comp ---------------- Total Cost
No. Item No. Item Name Type PSIG deg F Impel'r Casing SCFM PSIA PSI BHP HP Type # Req $1000
1100 K-101 Flue Gas Blower Cent. 2.0 450 CS CS 8755 14.3 2.3 133 146 Motor 1
PUMPS & DRIVERS: Material Of Construction Design Capacity Total

================ Design Condition ---------------------- ----------------------------------------- Driver Equip
Plt ------------------- Wheel or Des Flow Inlet Delta P Pump ------------------ Total Cost
No. Item No. Item Name Type PSIG deg F Impel'r Casing GPM PSIG PSI BHP HP Type # Req $1000
1100 G-100 Fd Scrub 2nd Stg Wash Pump Cent. 75 304SS CS 105 22.8 37.0 3.5 3.9 Motor 2
1100 G-101 Rich Amine Pump Cent. 128 316SS CS 92 8.8 104.4 8.6 9.5 Motor 2
1100 G-102 Lean Amine Pump Cent. 112 316SS CS 92 5.0 91.7 7.6 8.4 Motor 2
1100 G-103 Absorb OH Water Wash Pump Cent. 114 316SS CS 229 63.8 34.8 7.2 7.9 Motor 2
1100 G-104 Stripper Reflux Pump Recip. 105 316SS CS 3 10.5 79.7 0.2 0.2 Motor 2
1100 G-105 Fd Scrub 1st Stg Wash Pump Cent. 51 304SS CS 83 8.3 28.2 2.1 2.3 Motor 2
1100 G-106 Amine Fill Pump Cent. 84 316SS CS 92 1.8 67.5 6.0 6.7 Motor 1
1100 G-107 Amine Sump Pump V Cent. 32 316SS CS 81 1.8 15.7 1.2 1.4 Motor 1
1100 G-108 Soda Ash Feed Pump(w V-101) Cent. 51 CI CS 20 1.7 33.9 0.7 0.7 Motor 1
1100 G-109 Condensate Return Pump Cent. 103 CS CS 9 32.8 54.7 0.4 0.5 Motor 2
1100 G-110 Abs InterCooler Circ Pump Cent. 74 316SS CS 92 28.9 30.2 2.5 2.8 Motor 2
1100 G-111 Absorb OH VOC Wash Pump Cent. 101 316SS CS 119 62.1 24.1 2.6 2.9 Motor 2
1100 G-112 PCC CW Booster Pump V Cent. 82 CS CS 953 -0.5 67.2 57.4 63.8 Motor 2
PACKAGED & MISC EQUIPMENT: Total

============================= Design Cond Equip
Plt ---------------- Total Cost
No. Item No. Item Name Type PSIG deg F Mat Of Construct Design Capacity Remarks # Req $1000
--- -------- -------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------------ ---------------------------- ---------------------------------- -------
1100 V-102 Carbon + Pre&Post Filters Pkg 110 450 Kill CS 8 GPM of Lean Amine 5 Micon Cotton Pre&Post Filters 4
1100 V-101 Soda Ash Feed System Pkg Pkg Atm 450 CS 25 Gallon System Mixing Vessel + Agitator 1
1100 L-101 Flue Gas Fd & Exhaust Ducts Duct Atm 450 CS 380 Ft 2' W x 2' H Ducting 1
NOTES:
85Pilot_01% Des:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Design Operation with 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading DS-EQUIP-100-Design 0
REV DATE REVISIONS PROC. ENG UNIT ENG MAJOR EQUIPMENT LIST
13.7.1 FlueGasBlower(K101)
TheFlueGasBlower(K101)isdesignedtoboostthepressureofthefluegasslipstreamfromthe
HRSGto1.14bara(16.6psia)attheFeedScrubberinlet.Thisisrequiredtoovercomethepressure
dropsintheFlueGasScrubber(C100)andFlueGasAbsorber(C101).Thedesignedcapacityofthe
Flue Gas Blower is 225 Sm3/min (7,960 scfm) or about 1% of the NGCC power plant output at a
pressuredifferentialof0.14bar(2psi).
Thefluegasfeedtothescrubberissetbytheflowcontroller(FC)atthedischargeoftheK101,with
excessfluegasventedthroughabypasstotheatmosphereviathestack.Thisprovidestheflexibility
for evaluating the various feed scrubber and flue gas absorber turn down operations. Flue gas
temperatureandpressuremonitoringareprovidedattheinletandoutletofK101.
13.7.2 FlueGasScrubber(C100)
Thefeedscrubberis1.6m(5ft)indiameterandcontainstwopackedbedsof4.6m(15ft)height
each,asshowninAppendixH.Thepackedbedsarefilledwith3.5inchstainlesssteel(SS)Pallrings.
Theyareseparatedbyachimneytray,whichcollectsthetopbedliquidforapumparound/cooler
circuitandforpurging.Manwaysareprovidedatthetopandatthebottomofeachbedforloading
andremovalofthepacking.
Tominimizecolumnheight,apipearmtypeliquiddistributorwithspraynozzlesisusedforliquid
distributionforthescrubberpackedbeds.Thedesignliquidloadingfortheabsorptionbedsisabout
370L/min/m2(9gpm/ft2).Thistypeofdistributorcanhandleupto2,000L/min/m2(50gpm/ft2)of
liquid rate and has a lower scrubber height requirement compared to deck or troughtype liquid
distributors.
The flue gas scrubber is designed to condition the flue gas to meet the sulfur specifications for
aminesolventsandtocoolandcondensewaterfromthefluegas.SOxinthefluegascanpotentially
degrade the amine solvent and increase the solvent loss if it remains in the absorber feed. The
condensedwaterisrelativelycleanandcanbeusedascoolingtowermakeup.
The scrubber consists of two scrubbing sections, each with one packed bed. The lower bed is
primarilyforSOxremoval,whennecessary.Forsulfurremovaloperations,causticorotherlicensor
specifiedscrubbingsolutionisinjectedintothetopofthelowerpackedbed,whereitflowsdown
thepackedbedandcontactstheincomingfluegascountercurrentlytoreactwithandremoveany
sulfurcontainingspecies.Thetemperatureofthefluegasexitingthelowerbediscontrolledbyheat
removal via an external pumparound heat exchanger (E109). The pumparound liquid is drawn
from the scrubber bottom and pumped (G105) back to the top of the lower bed via E109. A
temperaturecontroller(TC)abovethelowerbedvariesthebypassaroundE109tocontroltheflue
gastemperatureatslightlyabovethefluegasdewpointtominimizewaterlosstothecausticwaste
solution.
The top wash bed provides the final washing of the flue gas for SOx and any entrained caustic
solution.Additionally,wateriscondensedbyheatremovalaroundexchanger(E100).Cooled38C
(100 F) water from E100 is injected on top of the top bed, where it is contacted with the vapor
fromthelowerbed.Thewaterflowissettoprovideminimumliquidwettingofthepackedbed.The
pumparoundliquidisdrawnfromthechimneytrayatthebottomofthetopbedandpumpedbyG
100backtothetopofthelowerbedviaE100.Approximately5minutesofliquidsurgeisprovided
atthechimneytraytoprotectthepumparoundpump.
Ademisterpadatthescrubbervaporexitfurtherminimizesanypotentialofcontaminantcarryover
intotheabsorber.
13.7.3 FlueGasAbsorber(C101)
TheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)isdesignedtoremove85%oftheCO2fromthepowerplantfluegas
slipstreamusing30wt%MEAsolution.TheFlueGasAbsorberhasabottomCO2absorptionsection
andanupperwashsection.Ithasadiameterof1.6m(5ft).FluegasisfedtothebottomofC101,
whilelean30wt%MEAsolutionentersthecolumnfromthetopoftheabsorptionsection.TheMEA
solutionandfluegasarecontactedcountercurrentlyoverthreeidenticalpackedsectionsseparated
bychimneytraystoremove85%ofthefluegasCO2.
Tominimizecolumnheight,apipearmtypeliquiddistributorwithorificesisusedforliquidfeedand
distributionfortheabsorberpackedbeds.Thedesignliquidloadingfortheabsorptionbedsisabout
200L/min/m2(5gpm/ft2).Thistypeofliquiddistributorcanhandleupto400L/min/m2(10gpm/ft2)
ofliquidrateandhasalowerscrubberheightrequirementcomparedtodeckortroughtypeliquid
distributors.
Therequiredabsorptionbedheightisestimatedatabout21.9m(72ft).Theweightofasinglebed
ofthisheightwouldposeproblemsinbedsupport.Itpotentiallycanalsoleadtoproblemsinliquid
maldistributionduetotheexcessiveheight.TheCO2absorptionsectionofC101isthereforesplit
into three identical packed sections separated by chimney trays, as shown in Appendix H. The
packed beds are filled with SS structured packing to minimize bed pressure drop. Manways are
provided at the top and at the bottom of each bed for loading and removal of the packing. The
threebeddesignalsoprovidesflexibilityintheevaluationoftheabsorptionpackingperformanceby
providingadditionaldatapointsforthefollowingparameters:
More composition and temperature points from each of the three bed sections for
determiningtheabsorptionperformanceateachbedheight.
Absorption temperature can be varied by including interstage cooling to evaluate

absorptionperformanceatlowersolventtemperature.
Differenttypesofpackingcanbeusedineachbedtotesttheirrelativeperformance.
Theabsorptioncolumnisequippedwithtemperatureandpressureindicatorsatthetopandbottom
andineachofthechimneytraysectionstomeasurethevaporandliquidtemperaturesandvapor
pressures.GassamplescanalsobetakenattheselocationstodeterminetheCO2removalefficiency
ateachpackedsection.Liquidsamplescanbedrawnfromeachofthechimneytraystomonitorthe
amineCO2loadingandconfirmtheCO2removalefficiency.
Eachofthetwoabsorptionsectionchimneytraysprovidesapproximately3minutesofliquidsurge
toprotecttheinterstagecoolerpump(G110),whentheabsorberisoperatingininterstagecooling
mode. The liquid drawn from the top absorption bed is pumped by G110 and cooled by the
interstage cooler E110 and returned to either one of the two lower absorption beds. The liquid
drawrateiscontrolledbythechimneytrayliquidlevel.Theinterstagecoolingmodeisusedwhen
evaluatingtheeffectofabsorptiontemperaturesateachabsorptionbed.Duringnormaloperation,
thechimneytrayliquidisreturnedtothelowerabsorptionbedviaanexternalsealloop.
TheCO2deficientfluegasleavesthetopoftheabsorptionsectionandintotheupperwashsection,
whereitiscontactedwitharecirculatingwaterstreamcountercurrentlyovertwo3m(10ft)beds
packedwith3.5"(90mm)SSPallrings.Thisremovesnearlyalloftheresidualentrainedandvolatile
MEAinthefluegas.Thecleaned,treatedfluegas,whoseVOCshouldnotexceed1ppmVtomeet
theVOClimitsof0.0011g/MJ(0.0025lb/MMBtu)perTable108,leavesthetopoftheAbsorber's
washsection.
Thewaterwashstream,warmedbythehotfluegasandbythelatentheatofcondensingmoisture,
isdrawnfromthelowerwashbedchimneytray,thencirculatedbytheWashWaterPump(G103)
throughtheWashWaterCooler(E105)andreturnedtothetopofthelowerwashbed.Excesswash
water is purged to the cooling tower or is combined with the rich amine at the absorber bottom.
Thepurgerateisregulatedbythechimneytraylevelcontroller.
The topabsorberwashbedprovidesthefinalwaterwashfor thetreatedfluegas,ifneeded.The

washwateriscollectedatthetopwashchimneytrayandreturnedtothetopofthetopwashbed
onflowcontrol.Thewaterflowissettoprovideadequatewettingofthewashbed.Excesswateris
purgedtoseweronlevelcontrol.
Makeupwaterisaddedtobothwashbedsviatherecirculationloopsonflowcontrol.
TheFlueGasAbsorberisconstructedofstainlesssteeltoprovideflexibilityfortestingvariousamine
solventswithdifferentlevelsofcorrosiveness.
13.7.4 RichAminePump(G101A/B)
TheRichAminePump(G101)isprovidedtotransfertherichamineleavingthebottomofC101to
theAmineStripper(C102)withenoughpressureboosttoovercomethepressuredropacrossthe
Rich/LeanAmineExchanger(E101),thehydrostaticheadassociatedwiththeheightoftheAmine
Stripper,andoveralllinelosses.A10%flowcontingencyisaddedforthedesignofthepump.One
operatingpumpandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.5 Rich/LeanAmineExchanger(E101)
TheRich/LeanAmineExchanger(E101)isaPlateandFrame(P&F)typeofexchangerprovidedto
recover energy from the hot regenerated lean amine (from the Amine Stripper C102) by pre
heatingtherichaminefromtheAmineAbsorber(C101).
Stainless steel is typically used for plate and frame type exchangers. Because of its small size, the
incrementalcostofusingstainlesssteelissmall.
13.7.6 AmineStripper(C102)
RichsolutionpumpedfromtheFlueGasAbsorberisstrippedofCO2intheAmineStripper(C102)to
liberate the CO2 and regenerate lean amine for recirculation to the Flue Gas Absorber. C102
consists of three packed lower stripping sections for removing CO2, and a packed upper wash
sectionforremovingentrainedandvolatizedMEA.
Duetothelimitedspaceinsidethe0.7m(2ft)diameterstrippercolumn,nozzleinsertsareprovided
onthestripper.Feednozzleswithapipeextensionareused.Asshowninthedatasheetsforthe
AmineStripperC102,thepipeextensioniscutatoneendforliquidflow.Thenozzlewiththepipe
extensionisinsertedintothestrippernozzleinsertandboltedtotheinsertforeaseofremovalfor
maintenanceorreplacement.Thisdesignenablesthemaintenanceofthenozzlewithouttheneed
toenterthestrippercolumn.
The required stripping bed height is 19.2 m (63 ft). Similar to the Flue Gas Absorber, the Amine
Stripper requires multiple packed sections to avoid any bed support and liquid maldistribution
issues. As shown in Appendix H, the stripping section of C102 is split into three identical packed
sections, separated by chimney trays. These packed beds are filled with SS Pall ring packing.
Manways are provided at the top and at the bottom of each bed for loading and removal of the
packing. Like the Flue Gas Absorber, by providing additional data measurement points this design
providesflexibilityintheevaluationofthestripperpackingperformance.
Thestrippingcolumnisequippedwithtemperatureandpressureindicatorsatthetopandbottom
andineachofthechimneytraysectionstomeasurethevaporandliquidtemperaturesandvapor
pressures. Gas samples can also be taken at these locations to determine the CO2 stripping
efficiencyforeachpackedsection.Liquidsamplescanbedrawnfromeachofthechimneytraysto
monitortheamineCO2loadingandconfirmtheCO2strippingefficiency.
Eachofthetwostripping sectionchimneytraysprovidesapproximately3minutesofliquidsurge.
During normal operation, the chimney tray liquid is returned to the lower stripping bed via an
externalsealloop.Thestripperreboilersteamrateiscontrolledbyeithertemperaturecontrolleron
thetwochimneyliquiddraws.
The chimney tray below the lower stripping bed is used as surge for feeding the stripper reboiler
E104.Theliquidflowsbygravitytothestripperreboiler.OverheadvaporfromC102iscooledwith
CW in the Stripper Overhead Condenser (E103) before it is sent to the Stripper Overhead Reflux
Drum(C103).TherefluxleavingasthebottomsofC103containsmostlywaterandisreturnedto
thetopoftheAmineStripperswashsectionbyflowcontrol.ExcesswaterispurgedbyC103level
control.
The regenerated lean amine leaves the bottom of the Amine Stripper hot at 123 C (253 F) and
passesthroughtheRich/LeanAmineExchanger(E101),whereitiscooledbytherichaminefrom
theFlueGasAbsorber.
The Amine Stripper is constructed of stainless steel to provide flexibility for testing various amine
solventswithdifferentcorrosivenesslevels.
13.7.7 StripperReboiler(E104)
The Stripper Reboiler (E104) is a kettletype reboiler, heated with 4.1 bara (60 psia) steam to
generatethevaporusedtostriptheCO2fromtheMEAsolution.Thesourceofthesteamusedto
heat the reboiler is the superheated IP steam from the NGCC steam cycle. This IP steam, at 14.6
bara/197C(212psia/387F)istoohottobeuseddirectlyintheStripperReboilerandisfirstlet
downinpressureto4.1bara(60psia)beforeitisdesuperheatedtonearsaturationconditionsat
145 C (293 F) with condensate from the reboiler. The reboiler steam rate is controlled by
temperaturecontrollerslocatedonthetopandmiddlebedchimneyliquiddraws.Theoperatorcan
selectthecontrollerbyacontrollerselector.
ThecondensateleavingtheStripperReboileriscollectedintheCondensateFlashDrum(C106)and
cooledbyCWintheSteamCondensateCooler(E108).Thecooledcondensateisthenpumpedby
theCondensateReturnPump(G109)andthebulkofitissenttotheFlueGasAbsorbertobeused
as makeup wash water in the Flue Gas Absorbers wash section. The remainder of this cooled
condensateisusedtodesuperheattheIPsteam,asmentionedearlier.
SincetheStripperReboilerisconnecteddirectlywiththebottomoftheAmineStripper,thereboiler
mustbeelevatedsuchthatthehighliquidlevelinthereboilerisatthesameelevationasthehigh
liquidlevelinthestripperbottom.Liketheotherequipment,theStripperReboilerisconstructedof
stainlesssteeltoprovideflexibilityfortestingvariousaminesolventsofdifferingcorrosiveness.
13.7.8 LeanAminePump(G102A/B)
TheLeanSolutionPump(G102)isprovidedtotransfertheleanamineleavingE101tothetopof
the Flue Gas Absorber. It has to provide enough of a pressure increase to overcome the pressure
drop across the Lean Amine Cooler (E102), the hydrostatic head associated with the Flue Gas
Absorber height, and overall line losses. The pump is designed for a 10% flow contingency. One
operatingpumpandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.9 LeanAmineCooler(E102)
TheLeanAmineCooler(E102),asshowninAppendixH,isaP&Ftypeheatexchangerprovidedto
cooltheleanMEAsolutionbeforeitisrecycledbacktotheabsorberforCO2removal.
13.7.10 FeedScrubber1stStageWashCooler(E109)
The107C(226F)fluegasfromtheFlueGasBloweriscooledto49C(120F),abovethefluegas
dewpointtemperature,bydirectheatexchangewithcold37C(99F)causticsolutionthroughthe
1ststagewashbed.Thecausticsolutionisheatedtoabout49C(120F)bytheheatexchangerand
iscollectedatthebottomofthescrubber.ThehotcausticisrecirculatedthroughE109,whereitis
cooledback to37C (99 F)andreturned tothe topofthe1ststagewash bed. E109is acooling
waterP&Ftypeheatexchanger.
13.7.11 FeedScrubber2ndStageWashCooler(E100)
The49C(120F)fluegasfromthe1ststagewashbedisfurthercooledto41C(106F)toreduce
the amount of water going to the Flue Gas Absorber C101 by contacting with 37 C (99 F) wash
wateratthe2ndstagewashbedinthescrubber.Heatremovalisachievedbyexchangingheatwith
coolingwaterinE100.Thehotwashwateriscooledto37C(99F)andreturntothetopofthe2nd
stagewashbed.E100isacoolingwaterP&Ftypeheatexchanger.
13.7.12 SteamCondensateCooler(E108)
E108isacoolingwaterP&Ftypeheatexchanger.Itisdesignedtocoolthesteamcondensatefrom
the Steam Condensate Drum C106 to 38 C (100 F) for desuperheating and for reuse as wash
water.
13.7.13 AbsorberInterstageCirculationCooler(E110)
E110isnotnormallyoperated.Itoperateswhentheabsorberisoperatingintheinterstagecooling
mode. E110 provides cooling to the amine liquid from the top absorber bed to allow for the
evaluationoftemperatureeffectsonamineloading.ItisacoolingwaterP&Ftypeheatexchanger.
13.7.14 StripperRefluxDrum(C103)
The Stripper Reflux Drum (C103) separates the twophase fluid from the Stripper Overhead
Condenser (E103). The vapor phase consists of mainly CO2 product. The liquid phase is mostly
water,whichisrecycledasrefluxtothestripper.Thestripperrefluxdrumoperatesat1.4bara(21
psia)and38C(100F).Itisaverticaldrumwithavapor/liquiddisengagementsectionabovethe
feed nozzle and a liquid surge section below the feed nozzle. The top section is provided with a
demistertoreduceamineandVOCcarryoverintotheCO2product,whichissubsequentlyvented.
The bottom section provides 5 minutes of liquid surge for pump protection. Level control on the
drumprovidespurgingofexcesswaterforreuseanddisposal.
The Stripper Reflux Drum is constructed of stainless steel to provide flexibility for testing various
aminesolventswithdifferentcorrosivenesslevels
13.7.15 CondensateFlashDrum(C106)
The primary function of the Condensate Flash Drum (C106) is to provide disengagement of any
steaminthecondensatefromthestripperreboilerE104.Itisconnectedbyapressureequalization
lineatthedrumvaporoutlettothedesuperheatedsteamlinetoE104.
The condensate from this drum is reused as water wash for the Flue Gas Absorber C101.
Approximately6hoursofliquidsurgevolumeisprovidedinthedrumforthispurpose.
13.7.16 CarbonDrum(C108)
TheCarbonDrum(C108)isusedfortheremovalofanyorganiccontaminantsfromtheleanamine
streamusingactivatedcarbon.TheCarbonDrumisdesignedtotreat5%ofthetotalleanamineto
theabsorber.Twodrumsarerequired,oneoperatingandtheotheronstandby.Thecarbondrums
arereplacedregularlybythesupplierwhenspent.
13.7.17 FeedScrubber2ndStageWashPump(G100A/B)
G100 circulates the wash liquid from the Feed Scrubber C100 2ndstage chimney tray through a
coolerE100andreturnsthecooledwashliquidtothetopofthe2ndstagewashbed.Thepumpis
designedfora10%flowcontingencyandtoovercomepressuredropsduetostatic,exchangerand
linelosses.Oneoperatingpumpandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.18 AbsorberOverheadWaterWashPump(G103A/B)
G103circulatesthewashliquidfromtheFlueGasAbsorberC101bottomwashbedchimneytray
throughacoolerE105andreturnsthecooledwashliquidtothetopofthebottomwashbed.The
pump is designed for a 10% flow contingency and to overcome pressure drops due to static,
exchangerandlinelosses.Oneoperatingandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.19 StripperRefluxPump(G104A/B)
G104pumpstheaminestripperoverheadrefluxfromtheStripperRefluxDrumC103backtothe
top of the amine stripper. The pump is designed for a 10% flow contingency and to overcome
pressure drops due to static and line losses. One operating pump and one spare 100% pump are
required.
13.7.20 FeedScrubber1stStageWashPump(G105A/B)
G105 circulates the bottoms liquid from the Feed Scrubber C100 through a cooler E109 and
returnsthecooledwashliquidtothetopofthe1ststagewashbed.Thepumpisdesignedfora10%
flow contingency and to overcome pressure drops due to static, exchanger and line losses. One
operatingpumpandonespare100%operatingpumparerequired.
13.7.21 AmineFillPump(G106)
G106pumpstheleanaminefromtheAmineStorageTankD101tothetopofthetopabsorberbed
intheabsorbercolumnC101.Thepumpisdesignedfora10%flowcontingencyandtoovercome
pressuredropsduetostatic,exchangerandlinelosses.One100%operatingpumpisrequired.
13.7.22 AmineSumpPump(G107)
G107pumpstheaminefromtheAmineSumpD102tothetopoftheAmineStorageTankD101.
Thepumpisdesignedfor300L/min(80gpm).One100%operatingpumpisrequired.
13.7.23 SodaAshFeedPump(G108)
G108pumpssodaashtotheAmineReclaimerE106fromthesodaashstoragedrum.One100%
operatingpumpisrequired.
13.7.24 CondensateReturnPump(G109A/B)
G109pumpsthecooledcondensatefromtheCondensateFlashDrumC106tothetwowashbeds
at the top of the Flue Gas Absorber C101. The condensate is used as wash water makeup and is
injectedintothewashwaterpumparoundloop.Thepumpisdesignedfora10%flowcontingency.
The pump is specified as a reciprocating pump due to the low flow and high discharge pressure.
Oneoperatingpumpandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.25 AbsorberIntercoolerCirculationPump(G110A/B)
G110isusedintheabsorberintercoolermodetocirculatetheliquidfromthetopabsorptionbed
chimneytraytothelowerabsorptionbedsthroughacoolerE110.Thepumpisdesignedfora10%
flow contingency and to overcome pressure drops due to static, exchanger and line losses. One
operatingandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.26 AbsorberOverheadVOCWashPump(G111A/B)
G111isdesignedtocirculatethewashliquidfromthetopwashbedchimneytrayoftheabsorber
C101andreturnthewashliquidtothetopofthetopwashbed.Asecondarydischargerouteleads
tothesewer.Thepumpisdesignedfora10%flowcontingencyandtoovercomepressuredropsdue
tostatic,exchangerandlinelosses.Oneoperatingpumpandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.27 PCCCWBoosterPump(G112A/B)
G112isdesignedtoboostthepressureofcoolingwaterfromtheCWheaderfordeliverytothetop
ofthecoolingtower.Thepumpisdesignedfora10%flowcontingencyandtoovercomepressure
dropsduetostaticandlinelosses.Oneoperatingpumpandonespare100%pumparerequired.
13.7.28 FiltrationSystem(V102)
A slipstream of the cooled lean solution is circulated through a filtration system to remove any
degradation and corrosion products in the solution. This filtration system consists of an activated
carbon absorption drum (C108), which is preceded by a 5m feed filter followed by a 5m post
filter.
13.7.29 AmineReclaimingFacility(E106/V101)
An Amine Reclaimer is provided to remove decomposition and degradation products and heat
stablesaltsfromthehotleanMEAsolution.Thisisdoneviaasemicontinuousbatchdistillationof
the MEA, where IP steam from the NGCC steam cycle is used intermittently to provide the
reclaimingheat.
ASodaAshAdditionSystemisincludedaspartoftheReclaimingFacility.SodaashfromtheSoda
AshFeedSystem(V101)ispumpedbytheSodaAshPump(G108)andfedtotheAmineReclaimer
systemtocombinewiththeacidicimpuritiesandformsodiumsalts,thusfreeingtheMEA.
13.7.30 AmineStorageTank(D101)
An Amine Storage Tank (D101) is provided to store the system inventory in the event of a plant
shutdown.Thisstoragetankisanatmospheric,coneroofedtanksizedtoprovidestorageforamine
collected in the column bottoms, chimney trays and amine piping. The total amine inventory is
estimatedfromthecolumnliquidstoragevolumes,plus150%allowanceforpipinginventory.
13.7.31 AmineSump(D102)
AconcreteundergroundAmineSump(D102)isprovidedtocollectdrainageforrecoveryofamine
andforpreparationofMEAmakeupsolution.
13.8 PROCESSDATASHEETSFORDESIGNCASEOPERATION
EquipmentdatasheetsanddrawingsareprovidedinAppendixH.
13.9 PRELIMINARYPILOTPLANTSUPPORTFACILITYDESIGN
Cost allowances for PCC pilot plant support facilities, such as the pilot plant control center and
laboratorytestingfacilities,areincludedinNexantspreliminarydesign.Tominimizeanyimpactson
the Poza Rica NGCC plant, these facilities are housed separately and independently of the NGCC
plantintheirowntrailersonthepilotplantlocation.
13.9.1 ConceptualPilotPlantControlCenter
Figure135depictsNexantsconceptuallayoutoftheMEApilotplantcontrolcenterforcapitalcost
estimation purposes. The control centers equipment is housed in a 3.6 m x 15 m (12 ft x 50 ft)
trailer. Housing the equipment in a trailer adds mobility to the control center, which could not
otherwisebeachievediftheequipmentwashousedinabuilding.Shouldthereariseaneedforthe
PCCpilotplanttoberelocated,thecontroltrailercanbeeasilyrelocatedalongwiththepilotplant.
Thecontroltrailerisexpectedtobelocatednearthepiperack,wherecontrolandinstrumentation
cablesfromthepilotplantequipmentcanbeconnectedtothecontroltrailer.
Forthepurposeofestimatingcapitalcostallowances,thefollowingmajorequipmentisassumedto
beincludedinthecontrolcenter:
Multifunctioncontroller
Operatordisplayunits
UninterruptedPowerSupply(UPS)
OperatorWorkstations
Dataserver
Besidestheessentialcontrolequipment,thetrailercomesfullyequippedwithheating,ventilation
andairconditioning(HVAC)equipmentandbathroomfacilities.
A cost allowance is included for an administrative center housed in two separate, but identically
sized trailers. These are to be located next to the control trailer. One of the two admin trailer
layouts is shown in Figure 135. The other admin trailer layout is not shown, but is similar except
thatitconsistsmainlyofofficesforthepilotplantoperationmanager,administrationassistant,and
engineers.
Figure135PCCPilotPlantControlRoomandAdministrationTrailers
50'
ElevatedPlatformWalkway
HVAC HVAC
ControlRoom Toilet
UPS Printer
Operators'Workstations
Server/Electronic
Sink
12'
EquipmentRoom Control Trailer

FilingCabinets
Server
PLC
ControlStations
Lockers
FilingCabinets
HVAC HVAC
Stair
HVAC HVAC HVAC

Shower
ConferenceRoom Administration Trailer Technicians'

Workstations
Sink
Chemist's Foreman's
12' Office Office
Toilet Toilet
FilingCabinets
Printer
HVAC
50'
13.9.2 ConceptualPilotPlantLaboratoryFacility
Figure 136 depicts Nexants conceptual layout of the PCC pilot plant laboratory facility for cost
estimationpurposes.Thefacilitysequipmentishousedintwoseparate3.6mx15m(12ftx50ft)
trailers.Thelaboratoryfacilityincludesthefollowingmajorequipment:
TotalOrganicCarbon(TOC)Analyzer
GasChromatographyMassSpectrometer(GCMS)
LiquidChromatographyMassSpectrometer(LCMS)
FumeHoods
TheTOCAnalyzertakesaminesamplesfromthePCCpilotplantandtestsfortheamountofCO2in
theliquid.ItisusedtodeterminetherichandleanCO2loadingoftheamineandtoensurethereis
nomajordeviationfromtheexpectedCO2loadings.
TheGCMStakesgassamplesfromboththetreatedfluegasandtheCO2productgasandanalyzes
themforthepresenceofvolatileorganiccompound(VOC)emissions,suchasammonia,aminesand
degradationproducts,suchasnitrosaminesandnitramines.Thistestingiscriticaltoensurethatthe
gasesleavingthepotentialfullsizePCCplantmeetsemissionsstandards,regardlessofthetypeof
amineitmightbeusing.
TheLCMStestsliquidsamplesobtainedfromthechimneytraysofthecolumnsandvariousother
liquid lines for the presence of degradation products. Currently, it is not well known how many
degradation products form from aminebased CO2 capture of oxygenrich gas, such as NGCC flue
gas. Performing LCMS on the liquids will identify and quantify the degradation products in the
amine solution and help determine the amine makeup rate required to compensate for the
degradationlosses.Additionally,thePCCplantperformancecanbecorrelatedagainstthequantity
oftheaminedegradationproductsinformationthatcanthenbeusedtodeterminetheoptimal
frequencyofrunningtheaminereclaimertomaximizePCCplantperformance.
Like the control trailer, the laboratory trailers come equipped with HVAC units and bathroom
facilities.
Figure136PCCPilotPlantLaboratoryTrailers
50'
HVAC
Fume cabinets Printer Technician's
Sink
Hoods Counter Desk
AccessCabinets
Mech&Elec
GCMS
12' LabTrailer #1
HVAC
Technician's TOCAnalyzer AnalyticalApparatusCounter Emer
Desk
cabinets Locker Shower
Stair
cabinets
Lockers
Technician's AnalyticalApparatusCounter
Desk
AccessCabinets
Mech&Elec
LabTrailer #2
HVAC
12' LCMS
Fume Counter Technician's

Sink Printer Desk
Hoods cabinets
HVAC
50' ElevatedPlatformWalkway
13.10 NGCCPLANTMODIFICATIONSREQUIREDFORPCCPILOTPLANTINSTALLATION
ThePCCpilotplantisdesignedtobeselfcontainedandhaveasminimalanimpactonthePozaRica
NGCCplantaspossible.However,theNGCCplantstillsharesanumberofinterfaceswiththePCC
pilot plant and therefore modifications are still needed for the pilot plant to operate. The major
unitsandsummariesoftheirfunctionsarepresentedbelow:
Flue Gas Ducting New ductwork is required to route 1% of the flue gas leaving the HRSG as a
slipstreamtothePCCpilotplant.Thetreatedfluegasisventedtotheatmospherefromthetopof
theabsorberandisnotroutedbacktotheexistingstack,sonoreturnductingisnecessary.Ducting
costsareincludedwithinthePCCpilotplantestimates.
IP Steam Extraction Nexant determined that the LP steam (4.8 bara [69 psia]) did not have
sufficient pressure to overcome the pressure drop and meet the reboiling steam pressure
requirements(4.1bara[60psia])ofthepilotplant.Also,ahigherpressuresteamsupply(10.3bara
[150psia])isneededperiodicallyforaminereclaimingoperation.Thenexthigherlevelofsteam(IP),
at12bara(174psia),isthereforeextractedandusedinthePCCreboiler.Attheextractionpointof
themainIPsteamline,aholeisdrilledandthePCCsteamlineisweldedontoextractaportionof
theIPsteamandrouteittothePCCreboiler.New76mm(3inch)pipingisinstalledtoroutethe
extractedsuperheatedIPsteamfromtheNGCCHRSGtothepilotplantdesuperheaterandfromthe
desuperheatertotheCO2regeneratorcolumnsreboiler.
PCC CW Piping New 152 mm (6 inch) CW piping is installed to route cooling water from the
existingcoolingtowerstothePCCplant.AstheseCWpipesarelocatedinbelowgroundtrenches,
theNGCCplantmodificationsalsoincludediggingtrenchesinordertolaytheCWpipesleadingto
thePCCpilotplant.Thetotalpipelength,includingCWsupplyandreturn,isapproximately600m
(2,000 ft). The piping and trenching designs are preliminary and purely conceptual for cost
estimation purpose. Final piping configuration and details regarding trenching will be determined
duringtheFEEDstudyphase.
RoadAccess and Parking LotInordertoplacethePCCpilotplantequipment,newaccessroads

willhavetobepavedinordertoallowtruckaccessintothepilotplantsite.Thetotallengthofthe
new access roads is about 100 m (320 ft). Again, the road access designs are preliminary and
conceptualforcostestimationpurposes,basedonsuperficialobservationofthePozaRicasite.Final
roadaccessdesignwillbedeterminedduringtheFEEDstudyphase.
13.11 PRELIMINARYPCCPILOTPLANTPLOTPLAN
13.11.1 PCCEquipmentPlacement/IntegrationGuidelines
TheFlueGasBlower,FlueGasScrubberandMEAPCCabsorbertowerlocationsaremostcriticaldue
to the significant and sizeable flue gas ducting interconnection and exhaust/stack features. These
components need to be located as close as possible to one other and to the existing stack to
minimizetheductworkrequirementsandtheassociatedpressuredrop.
Apiperack,whichconsolidatesthevariousPCCplantspiping(CWpiping,steam/condensatelines,
aminepiping,etc.)isprovided.Thepiperackissituatedabovegroundandshouldbelocatedclose
to the PCC pilot plants equipment. The various pumps that the PCC pilot plant uses can be at
groundlevelandlocateddirectlyunderneaththeabovegroundpiperack.
The PCC pilot plant requires CW, which could be drawn from the existing cooling towers excess
capacity.Newcoolingwaterpipingwillneedtobe drawnfrom theexistingcoolingtowers.These
are pipes that will be routed from the existing cooling towers to the PCC pilot plant and to be
locatedinbelowgroundtrenches.
ThecablesthatlinkthePCCpilotplantsvariousunitstothecontrolsystemsaremountedonthe
pipe rack. These cables either start from or terminate at the pilot PCC plants control trailer. The
controltrailershouldthereforebelocatedclosetothepiperack.
13.11.2 PreliminaryPCCPilotPlantLayout
BasedonNexantsvisittothePozaRicaNGCCplantsite,itwasdeterminedthattherewasample
space available just across the road to the north of the flue gas stack. Nexant thus recommends
using that site for the placement of the PCC pilot plant due to its close proximity to the flue gas
stack.Figure137illustratesthepreliminaryPCCpilotplantlayoutbasedonNexantsdesign,while
Figure138depictstheaerialviewoftheentirePozaRicaNGCCplantwiththepilotplantlocated
withinit.
The flue gas duct carrying the 1% flue gas slipstream will be drawn from the NGCC stack and
extendednorthwardsabovegroundandacrosstheroadtotheFlueGasBlower(K101)toboostthe
fluegaspressuretoovercomethepressuredropacrosstheFlueGasScrubber(C100)andFlueGas
Absorber (C101). The Flue Gas Blower (K101), Flue Gas Scrubber (C100) and Flue Gas Absorber
(C101) are connected via the flue gas ducting and located close to one another per the reasons
mentionedinSection13.11.1.
The pipe rack, and similarly the PCC pilot plant, is extended northwards for about 29 m (95 ft).
Pumpsareplacedatgroundlevelbeneaththepiperacktominimizespaceusage.Thecontroltrailer
islocatedclosetothepiperack,whereitisplacedrightwherethepiperackterminates.Thetwo
admin trailers and two lab trailers are placed north of the control trailer. The five trailers are
orientatedeastwestlengthwiseandextendforabout42m(140ft)northwards.
InordertoplacethePCCplantsequipmentonsite,itisnecessarytohaveroadaccesstotruckin
theunits.Currently,thereisroadaccesstothewestandsouthofthepilotplantsite,butnottothe
east.Itisthereforerequiredforroadstobebuilteastofthepilotplantsuchthattherecanbeaccess
bytruckcarryingthePCCplantequipment.Figure137depictsthenewroadaccess,indottedred
line,eastofthepilotplant.Thisnewroadwillextendnorthwardsbyabout72m(235ft),followed
by a 90 turn and extending westwards by about 26 m (85 ft) before it merges with the existing
road.
Figure137PCCPilotPlantLayout
VESSELS Exchangers Compressors and Blowers Pumps Packaged & Miscellaneous Equipment
Equipment ID Description Equipment ID Description Equipment ID Description Equipment ID Description Equipment ID Description
C-100 Feed Scrubber/Cooler E-100 Feed Scrubber Circ Cooler K-101 Flue Gas Blower G-100A/B Flue Gas Cooling Circ Pump V-101 Soda Ash Feed System Package
C-101 Flue Gas Absorber E-101 Rich/Lean Amine Exchanger G-101A/B Rich Amine Pump V-102A/B Carbon Filters
C-102 Amine Stripper E-102 Lean Amine Cooler G-102A/B Lean Amine Pump L-101 Flue Gas Fd & Exhuast Ducts
C-103 Stripper Overhead Receiver E-103 Stripper Condenser G-103A/B Wash Water Pump
C-106 Condensate Flash Drum E-104 Stripper Reboiler G-104A/B Stripper Reflux Pump
D-101 MEA Storage Tank E-105 Wash Water Cooler G-105A/B Fd Scrub 1st Stg Wash Pump
D-102 Amine Sump Pump E-106 Reclaimer G-106 Makeup Amine Pump
E-108 Steam Condensate Cooler G-107 Amine Sump Pump
E-109 Fd Scrub 1st Stg Wash Cooler G-108 Soda Ash Pump
E-110 Abs Inter-Cool Circ Cooler G-109A/B Condensate Return Pump
G-110A/B Abs Intercooler Circ Pump
G-111A/B Absorb OH VOC Wash Pump
G-112A/B PCC CW Booster Pump
Figure138AerialViewofPozaRicaNGCCwithPCCPilotPlant

FlueGasBlower Scrubber/ ControlTrailer CoolingWaterPump LaboratoryTrailer CO2 RegenerationPlant NewCTCWLine PCCSteam/Condensate
CO2 Absorber (BelowGround) Line
FlueGasDucting
14. OVERALLPILOTPLANTPERFORMANCEANDCOSTESTIMATES
14.1 POZARICANGCCPERFORMANCEWITHPCCPILOTPLANTOPERATION
Figure141summarizesthePozaRicaNGCCsteamcycleoperationandperformance,whenthePCC
pilotplantisinoperation,aspredictedbytheThermoFlexmodel,basedonthemoreconservative
designcaseoperation(Descase).
The single Siemens/Westinghouse W501F GT is operating at the same throughput as the prePCC
retrofitcase,firing1,680GJ/hr[LHV](1,595MMBtu/hr[LHV])ofnaturalgas.Basedonthemodel,it
generatesapproximately166MWeofpower.ExhaustfromtheGTgoesthroughasingleHRSGand
produces roughly 261,300 kg/hr (576,000 lb/hr) of 79 bara/525 C (1,152 psia/977 F) HP steam,
19,600kg/hr(43,300lb/hr)of14bara/298C(198psia/569F)IPsteam,plus14,800kg/hr(32,500
lb/hr)of5bara/179C(72psia/354F)LPsteam.
Wheninoperation,about1,500kg/hr(3,300lb/hr)superheatedIPsteamfromtheHRSGisrouted
to the PCC pilot plant for amine regeneration uses. The three existing STGs still receive the same
amountofHPandLPsteam,butabout10%lessIPsteamcomparedtotheprePCCoperation.Asa
result,powerproductionfromeachSTGdropsby0.1MWefrom27.5MWeto27.4MWe.Eachof
thethreeexistingsurfacecondenserdutiesandtheirassociatedCWloadalsodropsby1.1GJ/hr,or
about0.5%fromtheprePCCcase.
BecausetheMEAPCCpilotplantonlyrequiressaturatedsteamat4.1bara(60psia),theIPsteam
extracted is desuperheated with about 167 kg/hr (368 lb/hr) of condensate to nearsaturation
temperaturebeforethesteamissenttothePCCpilotplanttobeusedforCO2regeneration.
Figure141PozaRicaNGCCSteamCyclePerformancewithMEAPCCPilotPlantinOperation(DesignCase)
POWER BALANCES:
G104 A/B MW
CW Pump Generation:
CW Return
701 704 34 Numbers in Black are Calculated Values. Stm Turb Gen 82.27
Total Gen 248.84
RFI RFI Calc
Natural Filtered GT
Gas Amb Air Exhaust CW Supply NGCC Parasitic Loads:
Mol Wt Vol % Vol % Vol % HP BFW Pump
N2 28.01 1.01 75.99 73.26 G102 A/B IP BFW Pump
Surf Cond Pump
O2 32.00 0.00 20.39 12.32 One of Three Identical STG Units G103 A/B Condensate Pump
CO2 44.01 0.81 0.03 3.81 DMW Pump Hot Condensate Recycle Pump
Argon 39.95 0.00 0.92 0.89 642,142 PPH River Water Pump
H2S 34.08 0.0330 0.00 0.00 1.29 psia 1.29 psia Filtered Water Pump
Demin
CH4 16.04 89.97 0.00 0.00 110 oF 110 deg F NGCC CW Pump Power Consumptions
Water
C2H6 30.07 6.65 0.00 0.00 35,938 PPH NGCC CT Fan Power Consumptions
Tank
C3H8 44.10 1.04 0.00 0.00 51 90 deg F Transformer Losses
iC4 58.12 0.22 0.00 0.00 NGCC Misc Consumption Allowance
nC4 58.12 0.20 0.00 0.00 E102 52
C5's 72.15 0.08 0.00 0.00 Surface
C6's 86.18 0.00 0.00 0.00
Condenser
SO2 64.06 0.00 0.00 0.0011 192,031 PPH
Steam 18.02 0.00 2.67 9.72 1 1,117 psia 209.359 MMBtu/Hr 0.995
Total MPH 4,355 121,261 125,840 84 psia
Total LB/Hr 77,694 3,477,073 3,554,768 315 deg F
28.0 MW Gross
0.6 MW Gen Loss
27.4 MW Net
13,319 PPH 10,847 PPH
25
174 psia 61 psia
565 deg F 350 deg F
32,542 PPH
19 84 psia 84 psia
39,956 PPH 315 deg F 315 deg F
174 psia 32,542 PPH
565 deg F 71 psia 22
39
354 deg F C103
LP Stm Drum
/ Dearator
NNF MP Steam De- 3,342 PPH 678,080 PPH
150 psia Superheater 174 psia 110 deg F
370 deg F 565 deg F
1% Pilot PCC Plant
43,297 PPH 32
195 psia 650,361 PPH
NNF 3,342 PPH 568 deg F 84 psia
3,709 PPH 100 deg F LP Steam De- 174 psia 315 deg F
Pilot PCC Reboiler Superheater
60 psia 565 deg F 1,302 psia
303 deg F 24
1% Pilot PCC Plant
12 C105
6 C101 BD Flash
368 PPH 1,258
23 Drum
100 deg F HP Steam Drum HP BD
1% Pilot PCC Plant 37 28,805 PPH
Cooled Pilot Plant
Reboiler Condensate
MP BD
1,595 MMBtu(LHV)/Hr
15
215 psia 45 84 psia
BD To WWT
474.7 psia 701 576,094 PPH 579,961
38
77 oF 1,152 psia 1172 604,899 PPH G102 A/B
GT Nat Gas
977 deg F 976 C102 MP BFW 3,519,221 Lbs/Hr Total HRSG Flue Gas Vent to V-101:
MP Steam Drum Pumps 14.7 psia Mol Wt MPH Mol% Wet
195.1 deg F N2 28.01 92,188 73.26%
20 Flue Gas Vent
1023 lb/sec Est @ 59 F Amb T from Flue Gas flow O2 32.00 15,504 12.32%
3,477,073 lb/hr @ Actual Amb T 34 CO2 44.01 4,793 3.81%
14.7 psia Amb Pressure 14.5 psia Inlet Pressure 9,570 2003 GT Des Spec Argon 39.95 1,121 0.89%
DesuperHt BFW
F GT Combustor 9,570 Btu/kW-Hr GT Ht Rate 17 18 26 Steam 18.016 12,232 9.72%
57.0 % RH ------------------- -------- --------
Ambient Air 45,462 PPH Total MPH 125,838 100.00%
G101 A/B
704 232 psia 229 psia 0 lbs/hr Total LB/Hr 3,554,768
GT Generator HP BFW
787 deg F 2229 deg F Pumps
AC Inlet
Filter 166.6 MW
8 V-101
162.8 HRSG-1 2
Air Comp K101
30
Stack 35,547 Lb/Hr
Gas Turbine 13 29 195.1 deg F
9 1% Pilot PCC Plant
K-101
K-101 Flue Gas Booster
Per HRSG-1 4 5
3,554,734 3,554,387 lbs/hr Blower
15.14 15.39 psia
33 MP ECON
HP EVAP
PREHTR 0 4/26/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report RC
POZA RICA NGCC Plant Operating Data
HP Econ 2 & 3 Bypass 1xW501F with 3,554,670 Lb/Hr 1141 F Flue Gas at 90 F Amb T & 57% RH
11
1% Pilot PCC Design Case at 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading
908.3 MMBtu/Hr (Flue Gas Cooling) Total 30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW at 85% CO2 Recovery
Overallpowerbalance,CWandCTloadsofthePozaRicaNGCCwithPCCpilotplantoperationare
summarized in Table 141. Existing prePCC performance is shown for comparison purposes. Two
columns are shown for the postPCC pilot plant performance, one representing the more
conservativedesigncase,andtheotherrepresentingtheexpectedoperationcase,asexplainedin
Section13.5.
Table141PostPCCPilotPlantPozaRicaNGCCOverallBalanceandPerformance
Post-PCC Post-PCC
Overall Poza Rica NGCC Performance: MEA PCC Pilot (Design (Expected
Plant Pre PCC Operation) Operation)
Flue Gas Feed and CO2 Recovery Rates:
Flue Gas Feed Rate, mTPD (STPD) N/A 387 (427) 387 (427)
CO2 in Pilot PCC Feed Gas, mTPD (STPD) N/A 23 (25) 23 (25)
CO2 in Recovered, mTPD (STPD) N/A 20 (22) 20 (22)
CO2 Recovery Rate, % 0 85% 85%
Steam Consumption Rates:
Reboiler Steam (4.1bara/151C), mTPD (STPD) N/A 40 (45) 36 (39)
Reboiler Steam, ton/ton CO2 Recovered N/A 2.07 1.82
Existing Siemens/Westinghouse GT 166,570 166,570 166,570
Existing Siemens Steam Turbine (Total for 3 operating) 82,500 82,272 82,300
Total Gross Generation 249,070 248,842 248,870
Existing HP & IP BFW Pumps 1,047 1,047 1,047
Existing Condensate & Hot Cond Recycle Pumps 100 100 100
Existing Raw Water & Filtered Water Pumps 159 160 160
Existing Cooling Water Pumps 3,626 3,626 3,626
Existing Cooling Tower Fans 1,350 1,350 1,350
Transformer Loss Allowance 730 729 729
Misc Existing NGCC Loss Allowance 200 200 200
PCC Pilot Plant CO2 Capture Loads 0 162 156
Total NGCC/PCC Electrical Loads 7,213 7,375 7,369
Net Poza Rica Power Export, kW 241,857 241,467 241,501

Power Export, kW -- -391 -357
Post-PCC Post-PCC
(Design (Expected
Poza Rica CW/CT Duty Breakdown: MEA PCC Pilot Plant Pre PCC Operation) Operation)
Existing NGCC CW/CT Duty, GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr) 666 (631) 662 (628) 663 (628)
New PCC CW/CT Duty, GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr) 0 6 (5) 5 (5)
Total Poza Rica CW/CT Duty, GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr) 666 (631) 668 (633) 668 (633)
AscanbeseenfromTable141,duetothesmallsize(1%fluegasslipstream)ofthepilotplant,the
impact on overall NGCC plant operation is minimal. Also, there is very little difference in
performancebetweenthePCCpilotplantdesignoperationandexpectedoperationcases.Sincethe
equipmentsizingandcostsareestimatedbasedonthedesignoperationcase,thevaluesreported
henceforthwillreferonlytothedesignoperationcase.
14.1.3 OverallWaterBalances
The overall water balance for the Poza Rica NGCC plant with PCC pilot plant operation is
summarized in Figure 142. The total estimated raw river water withdrawal is about 347 m3/hr
(1,528gpm).Thisrepresentsanincreaseofjust3m3/hr(12gpm)comparedtothewaterusageof
theexistingNGCCplantwithoutPCCpilotplantoperation.
Figure142PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCOverallWaterBalance
Post 1% Pilot PCC Retrofit Simplified CT Evaporat'n Loss for
Overall Incremental Water Balance dissipating Surface Condenser
Diagram Cooling Loads
1. Existing river water pumps

and supply pipeline max 1,084 GPM
capacity is 1550 gpm.
1,355 GPM
Existing
River Cooling Tower Existing CT
(5 Cycles of Blowdown
Water 271 GPM
Conc.)
PCC Feed 1 GPM
Scrubber PCC MEA-free Cond Purge
1,528 GPM Condenser + Pilot PCC
Cooling Duties =
633 MMBtu/Hr
CT
1,497 GPM Blowdowns &
Feed Water Other Waste
Treatment: Water to WWT
Clarifier & Feed Water Treat Purge 31 GPM & Disposal
Filter
PCC Absorber Wash Water Purge 7 GPM
Purge from Exist ACF/RO/ED

22 GPM
PCC MEA Makeup Wash
Absorber Water
Wash
7 GPM
Existing NGCC
Incremental HRSG BFW
AFC/RO/ED System MU for PCC Reboiler
94 GPM Avg 7 GPM
1x200 GPM RO Steam Extraction
PCC Stripper + DI Water
Reboiler Steam 2x88 GPM ED
Condensate
Steam
0 4/26/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report RC
65 GPM Avg Rev. Date Revision BY
Poza Rica NGCC With 1% Scale Pilot Plant
Misc NGCC 50 GPM OVERALL WATER BALANCE DIAGRAM
Makeup 1% Pilot PCC Design Case at 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading
Allowance Exist NGCC DI
Job Rev.
Water Usage
No. DRAWING No. No.

14.1.4 EmissionsandDischarges
Emissions
ThePCCpilotplantwillemittreatedfluegasfromthetopoftheabsorbercolumnandseparated
CO2fromthestripperrefluxdrum.BothofthesegasesmaypotentiallycontainVOCemissions,
stemmingfromtheamineanditsdegradationproducts.Bydesigningawaterwashsectionontothe
topoftheabsorberandusingalltherecycledreboilercondensateasthewashingmedium,the
aminecontentofthetreatedfluegasisexpectedtobelessthan1ppmV.ThePCCpilotplantis
designedtobeabletoreducethewashwaterflowinordertotesttheminimumwashwater
quantityrequiredtomeettheamineemissionslimit.
Nitrosaminesandnitramines,bothdegradationproducts,areknowncarcinogens.Theexact
concentrationsofthesedegradationproductsintheemissionsareunknownduetothelackof
publisheddata.Withsystemsinplacewheregassamplescanbetakenforanalyticalmeasurement
todeterminetheemissionlevelsofthesedegradationproducts,thepilotplantissetuptotestfor
theirconcentrationsinthetreatedfluegasandCO2vent.
LiquidDischarges
ThePCCpilotplantusessteamfromtheNGCCplanttoprovidethereboilingdutytostripofftheCO2
fromtherichaminesolutioninthestrippercolumn.Thereboilersteamcondensateisnotreturned
tothepowerplantbutratherusedaswashwaterfortheabsorberandultimatelypurgedtothe
wastewatertreatmentfacility.Tooperatethepilotplant,additionalmakeupwaterisrequiredand
ithastogothroughtheNGCCplantsexistingfiltrationandelectrodialysis(ED)watertreatment
systems,generatingincrementalwastethatisalsopurgedtotheexistingwastewaterfacilityfor
treatment.
Thereboilercondensatethatisusedforwaterwashremovesmostofthevolatileandentrained
MEAinthetreatedfluegas.Thewashwaterisexpectedtocontainabout8kg/hr(18lb/hr)ofMEA.
Thiswater,dependingonthepowerplantoperatorswillingness,canbeusedaswatermakeupto
theMEAstoragetankand/orasmakeupwatertotheCT.Thetotalestimatedwaterdischargefrom
thepilotplanttotheexistingwastewatertreatmentfacilityisabout46L/min(12gpm),which
wouldrequireanestimatedadditional2%moretreatmentchemicals.
SolidWasteDischarge
AsshowninTable133,thesolidwastegeneratedbythePCCpilotplantconsistsofthereclaimer
wastethatcontainsthedegradationproducts,spentactivatedcarbonandthespentfiltermediums.
Thesewasteproductsareassumedtobehazardousandhavetobedisposedofappropriately,most
likelyviaincineration.Ahazardouswastedisposalcompanycanbecontractedtocollectand
transportthesolidwastetoanincinerationfacility.InMexico,PEMEXmostlikelyhasexperience
hiringwastedisposalcompaniestoremovehazardousproductsfromtheirrefineries.Itistherefore
recommendedthatthePCCpilotplantoperatorapproachPEMEXforaccesstosuchdisposal
companies.
14.2 POZARICANGCCPCCPILOTPLANTCOSTESTIMATION
14.2.1 CostEstimationBasis
The capital cost of the MEAbased PCC pilot plant is estimated, with a target accuracy of +/ 30
percent,usingamajorequipment(ME)factoredestimationapproachbasedonthePCCpilotplant
equipmentlistpresentedinTable1310.
FortheMEfactoredestimate,MEmaterialandlaborcostsweredevelopedfromequipmentsizes,
quantitiesanddesignparametersdefinedbytheconceptualMEAPCCpilotplantdesigndescribedin
theprevioussections.BulkmaterialandlaborcostswerefactoredfromtheMEcosts.Thesumof
the ME and bulk material costs, including shipping costs, forms the Total Direct Cost (TDC). The
constructionindirectcost,factoredfromthetotaldirectlaborcost,isaddedtotheTDCtocomeup
withtheTotalFieldCost(TFC).Vendorstartupsupportcost(factoredfromMEcost),HomeOffice
cost(factoredfromtotalfieldcost),andcontingency(factoredfromtotalfieldcost)areaddedtothe
TFCtocomeupwiththeTotalPlantCost(TPC).
Basedonequipmentdefinedbytheconceptualdesign,largeandspecialtyequipmentmaterialcosts
were scaled from historical data and vendor budgetary quotes for similar services. Costs for
standardequipmentweregeneratedwithcommercialcostestimationsoftware(ASPENInPlantCost
Estimator).NonewquotationsspecifictothisPCCdesignweresolicited.Installationlaborforeach
MEwasfactoredfromhistoricaldatabyequipmenttype.
Costs for bulk materials, such as instrumentation, piping, structure steel, insulation, electrical,
painting, concrete and site preparation associated with the major equipment, were factored from
MEcostsbasedonhistoricaldataforsimilarservices.Installationlaborforeachbulkcommoditywas
factoredfromhistoricaldatabytype.Theinstrumentationcostfactorisincreasedsignificantlyover
typicalcommercialplantfactorstoaccountfortheextensiveinstrumentationincludedforthispilot
plantdesign.
Construction indirect cost was factored from total direct labor costs based on historical data.
Construction indirect cost covers the cost for setup, maintenance and removal of temporary
facilities, warehousing, surveying and security services, maintenance of construction tools and
equipment,consumablesandutilitiespurchases,andfieldofficepayrolls.
Alaborproductivityfactortypicalofnewconstructionwasusedforestimatingcapitalcosts.Labor
productivity and costs (wages, fringe benefit costs, payrollbased taxes and insurance premiums),
usedtocalculatetheinstallationcostsat2015pricelevels,arebasedonNexantsexperienceand
datafrompastsimilarprojects.
14.2.2 CapitalCost
Table142summarizestheestimatedcapitalcostforthePCCpilotplant.ValueslistedinTable142
areJanuary2015capitalcostsforU.S.GulfCoast(USGC)locations,brokendownbyequipmenttype.
Based on Nexants inhouse historical data, the installed cost for a Mexico location can vary
anywhere from 80% to 120% of the USGC cost. For this study, it is assumed that the Mexico
installedcostsarethesameastheUSGCinstalledcosts.
Cost allowances, in addition to the pilot plant TFC, are included to account for the NGCC plant
modificationcosts.CostallowancesfortheNGCCplantmodifications,asdescribedinSection13.10,
arereportedasasinglelinecostitemadditionaltotheTFC.Similarly,costallowancesadditionalto
theTFCaregivenforthepilotplantsupportfacilitiesdescribedinSection13.9.Theseincludethe
control and laboratory testing equipment plus trailer costs, which are reported as single line cost
itemsinadditiontotheTFC.
A contingency of 30% for the PCC pilot plant is used in the cost estimate to cover potential
additional costs that are not yet defined in this design, such as those for equipment and facilities
associatedwithturndown,startup,normal/emergencyshutdownandothertransientoperations,as
wellastransportationequipmentcosts.
Factoring in all of the abovementioned costs, the estimated TPC for the PCC pilot plant is about
$22.1million.
Table142MEAPCCPilotPlantEstimatedTotalPlantCost
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Phase 1 Feasibility Study For Post Combustion CO2 Capture
CLIENT: World Bank NEXANT JOB: A02484
FILE: Poza Rica 1% Pilot Plant Cost Estimate.xls LOCATION: US Gulf Coast
SHEET:
QTY BY: Nexant AREA/SITE: Poza Rica NGCC With 1% Scale Pilot Plant PRODUCTIVITY FACTOR:
EST BY: Nexant PLANT: MEA CO2 RECOVERY LABOR WAGE RATE (US$):
DATE: 28-Apr-16 ACCOUNT: COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
CHECK: SUBJECT: 2014 Cost Estimate Details
COST MEAS UNIT COSTS D HIRE TOTAL MHRS * COSTS IN U.S.$1000

CODE DESCRIPTION QTY Unit MATL LABOR SC/Other UNIT MH S/C D HIRE Equipoment BULK LABOR SC/Other TOTAL
PROCESS EQUIPMENT & DUCTWORK
C COLUMNS & INTERNALS 3 EA 1,438 0 356 0 1,794

C&D VESSELS, TANKS & STORAGE FACILITIES 3 EA 57 0 3 19 78
E HEAT EXCHANGERS 10 EA 221 0 12 0 233
K COMPRESSORS, BLOWERS, FANS & DRIVERS 1 EA 519 0 3 0 522
G PUMPS & DRIVERS 23 EA 185 0 49 0 234
V OTHER EQUIPMENT - MEA FILTER PACKAGES 4 EA 66 0 11 0 78
V OTHER EQUIPMENT - SODA ASH MIX & INJ PKG 1 EA 6 0 4 0 10
L OTHER EQUIPMENT - DUCTWORK 1 EA 0 108 86 0 194
FREIGHT 5 % 125 125

TOTAL PROCESS EQUIPMENT & DUCTWORK 46 EA 2,616 108 526 19 3,268
INSTRUMENTS %
PIPING %
STEELWORK %
INSULATION %
ELECTRICAL %
CONCRETE %
BUILDING %
SITEWORK %
PAINTING %
TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS 5,938
SUBTOTAL DIRECT COSTS 9,206
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION INDIRECT COSTS % 1,818
SUBTOTAL FIELD COSTS 11,025

OFFPLOT PLANT MODs - CW & Steam Lines 400
STARTUP VENDOR REPRE % 272
LICENSE & ROYALTIES % 0
HOME OFFICE COSTS % 2,288
OTHER FACILITIES - Control & Lab Trailer Allowances 3,000
TOTAL CONSTRUCTED COST WITHOUT INSURANCE & CONTINGENCY 16,985
INSURANCE/WARRANTY/BURDEN/FEE 0.0 % 0
CONTINGENCY (Mobile & Fire Protect Equip, Etc.) 30.0 % 5,096
TOTAL PLANT COST 22,081
NOTES:
85Pilot_01% Des:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL Design Operation with 0.36 RA & 0.16 LA Loading DS-COST-100-Design 0
REV DATE REVISIONS PROC. ENG UNIT ENG CAPITAL COST SUMMARY (Short)
14.2.3 OperatingandMaintenanceCosts
The operating and maintenance (O&M) costs for the MEA PCC pilot plant are allocated as either
fixedorvariableoperatingcosts.
FixedO&Mcostsareessentiallyindependentoftheactualcapacityfactor,numberofhoursofplant
operationoramountofkilowattsproduced.Theyconsistmainlyofcostsofemployeesalaries,taxes
andinsurances.Forthisstudy,thefollowingareassumedforallcases:
6. 4new24/7(operator)positionsat4.65shifts/positionfor18totaladditionalemployeesat
$40,000peryearsalaryplusbenefits.
7. 10 new 8/5 employees at $40,000 per year salary plus benefits. These include staff that
providesadministrative andengineeringsupport, aswellaslabtechniciansworkinginthe
laboratorytrailer.
8. Maintenancematerialandlaborequalto2.5%ofCAPEX.
9. Annualoperatingcostallowanceforinsuranceat1%ofCAPEX.
10. Annualoperatingcostallowanceforpropertytaxat1%ofCAPEX.

Variable O&M costs are directly proportional to the PCC pilot plant throughputs and include the
purchase costs of the pilot plants process consumables, catalysts and chemicals. The incremental
processconsumablescomprisetheadditionalsuppliesusedbytheNGCCpowerplanttosupportthe
PCCpilotplantoperation.Theseinclude:additionalrawwaterimport,theadditionaldisposalcost
forwastewaterdischargesandthesalerevenue(ordisposalcost)associatedwiththecapturedCO2
product.TherevenuelossesduetoreducedNGCCplantpowerexport,stemmingfromthePCCpilot
plantsIPsteamandparasiticpowerconsumptions,arealsoconsideredprocessconsumables.
CatalystsandchemicalscostsincludeMEAsolventmakeupcosts,additivesandfiltersreplacement
anddisposalcosts,aswellasthecostofchemicalsusedprimarilyforwatertreatment(feedwater,
BFW,CWandwastewatertreatments).
Theassumptionsusedincalculatingthevariablecostsforthisstudyare:
Annualonstreamfactor(AOF)of8,000hoursperyear(91.3%)
Rawriverwaterpricedat$74/1,000m3or$0.38/1,000gallons
Treatedwastewaterisdischargedbacktotheriverat$7.4/1000m3or$0.038/1000gallons
Wholesaleexportpowerpriceof$0.05/kilowatthour(kWh)
CO2haszeroworth(norenewablecreditsnorsaleofCO2forEORpurposes)
MakeupMEAcostfordegradationlossesat$3,300/mT($3,000/ST)whichincludes
$1,100/mT($1,000/ST)allowanceforoffsitereclaimerwastedisposal.
MEAMakeupforwashwaterlossesat$2,200/mT($2,000/ST)
Makeupsodaashcostat$330/mT($300/ST)whichincludes$110/mT($100/ST)allowance
foroffsitereclaimerwastedisposal.
Table143summarizestheestimatedannualincrementalO&Mcostsandpercentagebreakdownfor
the Poza Rica NGCC with the MEA PCC pilot plant in operation. It should be noted that cost
information for actual process consumables, chemicals and catalysts is not available for the Poza
Ricaplant.ValuesshowninTable143arebasedontypicalunitcostsobtainedfrompastprojects.
ThePCCpilotplantsannualO&Mcostis$2.5million.ThefixedO&Mcosts,at$2.1million,makeup
thebulkofthesecosts,at84%ofthetotalO&Mcosts.AbouthalfofthefixedO&Mcostsstemfrom
theoperatinglaborandoverheadcosts,consistingofthewagespaidtothePCCplantoperatorsand
other staff. These costs total $1.1 million, equivalent to 53% of the total fixed O&M costs. The
remaining47%ofthefixedO&Mcostsconsistofthemaintenancelaborandmaterial,insuranceand
propertytaxes,whichareestimatedbasedonapercentageofthePCCpilotplantscapitalcost.
ThevariableO&Mcostsmakeuptheremaining16%ofthetotalincrementalO&Mcosts,atabout
$0.41million.Theprocessconsumablestotal$0.16 million,whilethe catalystsand chemicalscost
$0.25 million. The export power losses make up almost all (98.5%) of the process consumables
costs. The costs of the other process consumables, i.e. the raw water import and waste water
disposalcosts,areminimal(1.5%)comparedtotheexportpowerlosses.Similarly,thebulkofthe
catalystsandchemicalscostsconsistofamine/additivemakeupanddisposalcosts(89%),whilethe
watertreatmentchemicalsandfilterreplacementsarerelativelyminorcosts(11%).
Table143EstimatedO&MCostsforPCCPilotPlantOperation
Post-PCC (Design
Operation)
Annual Operating Cost: MEA PCC Pilot Plant $1,000/year %
PROCESS CONSUMABLE COSTS (VARIABLE):
River Water Import 2.2 0.1
Process Waste Water Disposal 0.1 0.0
CO2 Product Export - -
Export Power Losses 156.2 6.1
TOTAL PROCESS CONSUMABLES 158.5 6.2
CATALYSTS & CHEMICAL COSTS (VARIABLE):
Water Treating Chemicals 18.7 0.7
PCC Amine/Additives Makeup & Disposal 223.1 8.8
PCC Carbon/Filters/Dessicant Replace & Disposal 7.4 0.3
TOTAL CAT & CHEMICALS 249.3 9.8
FIXED COSTS:
Operating Labor 744.0 29.2
Maintenance Labor 331.2 13.0
Maintenance Material 220.8 8.7
Overhead Charges 400.0 15.7
Insurance & Property Tax 441.6 17.3
TOTAL FIXED COSTS 2,137.6 84.0
TOTAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST 2,545.4 100.0
14.3 PRELIMINARYASSESSMENTOFSOCIAL,ENVIRONMENTALANDHEALTHIMPACTSOF
THEPCCPILOTPLANT
An environmental and social impact study will be carried out as part of the Phase II study. This
sectionprovidesonlypreliminarycomplementaryremarksonthepotentialimpacts.
14.3.1 OperationalandSocialImpacts
Sizedforcapturingonly1%ofthetotalfluegasleavingthenominal160MWegasturbine,theMEA
basedPCCpilotplantisexpectedtohaveaminimalphysicalimpactontheexistingPozaRicaNGCC
plantsoperations,asshowninthe chartspresentedinSection 11.3(Impact ofPilotPlantSizeon
OverallPowerPlantPerformance].
However, the design, construction and operation of the PCC pilot plant could have significant
beneficial longterm social impacts on the development and deployment of CCUS in Mexicos
electricityandoilandgasindustries,intermsofhumancapacitybuilding,technologytransferand
productivity enhancement. Mexican stakeholders will benefit from indepth knowledge of various
stateoftheart CO2 capture technologies, through discussions and potential collaborations with
differentPCCtechnologyprovidersatthePCCpilotplant.Additionally,thesestakeholders,through
the PCC pilot plant, will gain valuable handson experience regarding the engineering design,
constructionandoperationofaCO2capturefacility.Thisthenleadstoabetterunderstandingofthe
overallrisksassociatedwithimplementingPCCinMexico.Thelessonslearned,theknowledgebase
created and the experience gained through the PCC pilot plant are essential for developing large
scalePCCprojectsinMexicointhelongertermfuture.
As was envisioned by the Mexico CCUS roadmap, it is expected that there will be considerable
technology transfer impacts as a result of implementing the Poza Rica PCC pilot plant. Besides
bringinginnewtechnologydevelopmentandimplementationknowhowintoMexico,thePCCpilot
plantwillalsohelpopenthedoortointernationalcooperationandpartnershipwithMexicointhe
CCUSsector,whichinturnwillhelpadvanceMexicosoverallCCUSgoals.
14.3.2 EnvironmentalImpacts
While aminebased PCC from power plant flue gas is recognized as being the most advanced PCC
technology and is most likely one of the best approaches for nearterm PCC retrofit applications,
there are still hurdles that must be considered before widespread deployment can occur. Among
themistheenvironmentalandhealthimpactfromitspotentialairemissionsduringoperation.Itis
critical to understand, characterize, and regulate any potential emissions that could be caused by
thesetechnologies.ManyofthecurrentlyoperatingPCCpilotplantshavetheireffortsfocusedon
investigating and understanding the potential air quality emissions impacts of aminebased PCC
technologies39,40. Progress is being made in facilities such as the Technology Centre Mongstad
1
(TCM) ,41andtheCommonwealthScientificandIndustrialResearchOrganisations(CSIRO)PCCpilot
plants in Australia2,42. Lessons learned from the currently operating plants will be valuable to the
Mexicanstakeholdersinunderstandingtheseissues.
Through the experience of TCM, the Mexican entities can learn how to structure and obtain an
emissionanddischargepermit,whichmostlikelywillberequiredinordertoconstructandoperate
thefacility.ItshouldbenotedthatasimilarEmissionsandDischargePermitwasissuedforTCMs

39AnneK.Morken,et.al.,EmissionResultsofAminePlantOperationsfromMEATestingattheCO2TechnologyCentre
MongstadGHGT12,EnergyProcedia63(2014)60236038
40AssessingAtmosphericEmissionsfromAminebasedCO2PostcombustionCaptureProcessesandtheirImpactsonthe
EnvironmentACaseStudyFinalReport,May2014,GlobalCCSInstitute
41www.tcmda.com
42www.csiro.au
operation in 2011. This permit regulated the emissions of amines, ammonia, aldehydes and other
fluegasrelatedspecies43.Duringthetestingoperations,specialattentionwaspaidtotheemissions
ofnitrosaminesandnitramines,productsthatareformedpartlythroughthedegradationofamines
within the CO2 capture process itself and partly through atmospheric reactions involving OH
radicals.Nitrosaminesandnitraminesareknowncarcinogens.Theiremissionscharacteristicsmust
be understood, quantified, and if necessary, controlled to minimize any adverse health and
environmentalimpacts.
InarecentGHGT12paper44,TCMreportedemissionresultsfromaPCCcapturepilotplanttesting
programoperatedwithanMEAsolventsystem.ThetestcapturedCO2fromafluegasofacombined
heat and power (or cogeneration) plant, with a composition that is similar to that from a typical
NGCC plant. The test program was conducted over a period of several months. Very low amine
(MEA) emissions, in the parts per billion (ppb) range, were reported throughout the whole test
program. Atmospheric emissions of MEAbased degradation products, such as nitrosamines and
nitramines,werebelowdetectablelevels.Finally,atmosphericemissionsofammonia,whichisvery
volatile,wereinthelowppmrange,withtheemissionsofotherknowncompoundsallbeinginthe
lowppbrange.
Ifvalidated,theexpectedemissionsfromthefuturePozaRicaPCCpilotplantoperationsshouldbe
rathersimilartotheTCMemissions,whichareveryencouragingresults.
43YolandiMaree,et.al.,EstablishmentofKnowledgeBaseforEmissionRegulationforCO2TechnologyCentre
MongstadGHT11,EnergyProcedia2013
44SeeReference39
15. PCCPILOTPLANTSPECIALOPERATIONSDESCRIPTIONS
AsdetailedanalysisanddesignofspecialoperationsofthePCCpilotplantareoutsidethescopeof
work for this phase, this section will provide only a brief toplevel discussion of the envisioned
special process operating procedures. Equipmentspecific startup and shutdown details will be
definedduringFEEDpreparationandnotdiscussedhere.Thespecialoperatingscenariosconsidered
hereinclude:
Startup
HotStandbyOperation
ColdStandbyOperation
Shutdown

15.1 STARTUP
Figure151isasimplifieddiagramoftheMEAPCCpilotplant,showingthemajorstartupprocess
sequences with stream flows and equipment in GREEN. Process lines and equipment not in
operationareshowninRED.
ReferencingFigure151,thefollowingisasimplifieddescriptionofthemajorstepstostartupthe
coldPCCpilotplantafterithasbeenshutdownpreviously.
[1] ChecktoensurethatCWflowsareestablishedthroughallcoolers,andthatthesteamflow
totheStripperReboiler(E104)isshutoff.
[2] Fill the Flue Gas Scrubber/Cooler (C100) with water condensate through the existing
condensatepurgeline,ifnecessary.
[3] Start both Flue Gas Cooling Circulation Pumps (G100 and G105) to establish water
circulationthroughtheFeedScrubberCirculatingCoolers(E100andE109)andC100.
[4] Ifnecessary,filltheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)withsolutionpumpedbytheAmineFillPump
(G106)fromtheMEAStorageTank(D101).
[5] Start the Rich Amine Pump (G101) to establish MEA circulation through the Rich/Lean
AmineExchanger(E101)tofilltheAmineStripper(C102).
[6] StarttheLeanAminePump(G102)toestablishMEAflowthroughE101,butbypassaround
the Lean Amine Cooler (E102) initially, before returning back to the Flue Gas Absorber
(C101) to complete MEA circulation between the Flue Gas Absorber (C101) and Amine
Stripper(C102).
[7] When MEA levels in the Flue Gas Absorber and the Amine Stripper bottoms reach their
respectivedesiredsetpoints,shutdowntheAmineFillPump(G106)tostopflowfromthe
MEAStorageTank(D101).
[8] StarttheAbsorberOverheadWashWaterPump(G103)andAbsorberOverheadVOCWash
Pump(G111)toestablishwatercirculationthroughtheWashWaterCooler(E105)andto
theFlueGasAbsorberoverheadwashsection.
[9] Start the Stripper Reflux Pump (G104) to pump water from the Stripper Overhead Reflux
Drum (C103) to establish water recirculation through the Stripper Overhead Condenser
(E103)backintoC103.
[10]StartthesteamflowtotheStripperReboiler(E104)toheatuptheoverallPCCsystem.
[11]WhentheAbsorberbottomreaches49C(120F),closethebypassaroundtheLeanAmine
Cooler(E102)tocooltheleanaminetoapproximately38C(100F)beforereturningtothe
FlueGasAbsorber.
[12]Start thefluegasflowslipstreamflowfromthestacktothePCCpilotplant andstartthe

FlueGasBlower(K101).
[13]Slowly close off the Startup Vent from the Flue Gas Absorber (C101) overhead and from
theStripperOverheadRefluxDrum(C103)overhead.
[14]MonitorthePCCpilotplantuntilitreachesstableoperation.
15.2 HOTSTANDBYOPERATION
WhenthecompositionofthefluegascomingfromtheNGCCplantisoutofadjustment,resultingin
an unacceptably high oxygen concentration, the flue gas slipstream can be diverted either
automaticallyormanuallytobeventedintheexistingstacktominimizeMEAoxidativedegradation
losses. The PCC will then go into a Hot Standby operation until the NGCC operation is normalized
andthefluegasisbackonspecification.IntheHotStandbymode,theMEAPCCpilotplantwillbe
in hot recirculation operating mode. While the PCC can stay on Hot Standby mode for extended
periods,itisnoteconomicalandshouldonlybeconsideredasanemergencyshorttermtemporary
operation.
Figure152showsasimplifieddiagramshowingtheHotStandbyrecirculationprocesssequencesfor
thePCCpilotplant.Referencingthefigure,thefollowingisasimplifieddescriptionofthemajorHot
Standbysteps:
[1] ShutoffthefluegasflowfromthefluegasstacktotheMEAPCCpilotplant.
[2] ShutdowntheFlueGasBlower(K101).
[3] ReducetheFlueGasScrubber(C100)circulationtoaminimumaslimitedbytheturndown
capacity of the Flue Gas Cooling Circulation Pumps (G100 and G105). Reduce the MEA
circulation to a minimum as limited by the turndown capacities of the Rich Amine Pump
(G101)andLeanAminePump(G102).ReducetheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)washwater
circulationtoaminimumaslimitedbytheWashWaterPumps(G103)turndowncapacity.
[4] Continue steam import to the Stripper Reboiler (E104) to maintain temperature in the
AmineStripper(C102).
[5] TheMEAPCCpilotplantisnowinHotStandbyrecirculationmode.
15.3 COLDSTANDBYOPERATION
The Poza Rica NGCC power plant can operate at near prePCC pilot plant retrofit mode with
maximumnetpowerexportbybypassingandputtingthePCCpilotplantintoColdStandbymode.
The PCC pilot plant will basically follow the shutdown procedure, as described in Section 15.4,
except that the vessels and columns will not be drained or vented. The PCC plant will cool slowly
duetoheatlosses.
ThePCCplantwillentertheColdStandbymodewheneversteamfromtheNGCCplantisshutoff,
whichhappenswhenevertheNGCCplantisshutdown.
15.4 SHUTDOWN
Figure 153 is a simplified diagram for the MEA PCC pilot plant, showing the major shutdown
process sequences with stream flows and equipment in GREEN. Process lines and equipment that
arenotinoperationareshowninRED.
Referencing Figure 153, the following is a simplified description of the major shutdown steps to
preparethePCCformaintenanceorforanextendedshutdownperiod:
[1] ShutoffthefluegasflowfromthefluegasstacktotheMEAPCCpilotplant.
[2] ShutdowntheFlueGasBlower(K101).
[3] Shut off the steam flow to the Stripper Reboiler (E104) if Hot Standby is not desired.
Continueallothercirculations,includingcoolingthroughtheCWcoolers.
[4] OpenStartupVentlinesontheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)overhead,andfromtheStripper
Overhead Reflux Drum (C103) overhead to avoid producing vacuum conditions in C101
andC102/C103duringsystemcooldown.
[5] ShutofftheleanMEAflowtotheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)andsendthecooled,leanMEA
from the Lean Amine Cooler (E102) to the onsite MEA Storage Tank (D101) until MEA
inventories in the Flue Gas Absorber and Amine Stripper bottoms are at their respective
minimum levels. Shut down the Rich MEA Pump (G101) and Lean MEA Pump (G102).
DrainandemptytheremainingsystemMEAinventoryintotheMEASump(D102).
[6] PumpoutthewaterinventoryfromthebottomoftheFlueGasFeedScrubber(C100)and
send it to the cooling towers as CW makeup. The remaining water inventory below the
minimumlevelcanbedrainedtothesewertoemptyoutC100.
[7] PumpoutthewashwaterinventoryintheFlueGasAbsorber(C101)topsectionandsend
ittothecoolingtowersasCWmakeup.Inventorybelowtheminimumlevelcanbedrained
totheMEASumptoemptyouttheFlueGasAbsorbertopsection.
[8] PumpoutthewaterinventoryintheStripperOverheadRefluxDrum(C103)andsenditto
thecoolingtowersasCWmakeup.Inventorybelowtheminimumlevelcanbedrainedto
theMEASumptoemptyoutC103.
[9] ThePCCpilotplantisnowdrainedandreadyforextendedshutdown.
Figure151PCCPilotPlantStartupFlowDiagram
==> Red Highlight Equip & Line Not Oper
Startup Vent
==> Green Highlight Dash Line in Oper
==> Green Highlight Equip in Oper
[13]
Recovered CO2
C-103
E-103 Stripper
Stripper VENT
Overhead
C-101 Condenser Receiver
Treated Flue Gas [13]
MEA
STACK
Absorber
Startup G-111 C-102
Vent Absorber OH Stripper
VOC Wash
Condensate G-104
Pump V-102
from Stripper CW Reflux Pump
Carbon/Filter
Reboiler Package
Sewer
E-105 [9]
Wash H2O
G-103
Cooler
CW [8] Absorber OH
Wash H2O
Pump
To CT [10]
E-104
Reboiler
Wash Water to Power Plant
Offsite Storage
Desuperheated
E-102 G-102 Steam
Lean MEA Trim Lean MEA E-101
Cooler Pump Rich/Lean C-106
[6] Exchanger Cond Flash
G-100 [11]
E-100 Drum
FeedScrub 2nd
Stg Wash Circ Feed Scrub 2nd
Stg Wash Cooler
[2] Pump
[5]
CW CW To Absorber
Power Plant Overhead
Water Wash
G-101 IP Steam G-109
E-108
Rich MEA Stm Cond CW Cond Return
C-100 [3] Pump Pump
Cooler
Feed
Scrubber CW OFF-PLOT
1% Flue Gas
V-101
Slipstream [12] G-107 E-106 Reclaimer Waste
K-101 Reclaim Chem
MEA Sump MEA Reclaimer
FG Blower Inject Package
HRSG G-105 Pump (Intermittent)
FeedScrub 1st E-109
Stg Wash Circ Feed Scrub 1st [4]
Pump Stg Wash Cooler
Feed Gas Water
G-106
Condensate
Make-Up MEA
Pump
OFF-SITE
[7] D-101
D-102
MEA PCC Pilot Plant
MEA Storage
Tank
MEA Sump
Startup Process Flow Diagram

Figure152PCCPilotPlantHotStandbyFlowDiagram
Startup Vent
Recovered CO2
C-103
E-103 Stripper
Stripper VENT
Overhead
Treated Flue Gas
STACK MEA
Absorber
Startup G-111 C-102
VOC Wash
Condensate G-104
Pump V-102
Carbon/Filter
Reboiler Package
Sewer
E-105
Wash H2O
G-103
Cooler
CW Absorber OH
Wash H2O
Pump
To CT [4]
E-104
Reboiler Power Plant
Wash Water to
Offsite Storage
Desuperheated
Desuperheated
E-102 G-102 Steam
Steam
Exchanger Cond Flash
G-100
E-100 Drum
FeedScrub 2nd
CW CW To Absorber
[2] Water Wash
G-101 IP Steam E-108 G-109
C-100 [3] Pump Cooler Pump
[1] Feed
Scrubber CW OFF-PLOT
1% Flue Gas
V-101
Slipstream G-107 E-106 Reclaimer Waste
K-101 Reclaim Chem
FG Blower G-105
Inject Package
HRSG Pump (Intermittent)
FeedScrub 1st E-109
Stg Wash Circ Feed Scrub 1st
Feed Gas Water
Condensate G-106
Make-Up MEA
Pump
CT or Sewer
D-101
D-102
MEA PCC Pilot Plant
MEA Storage
Tank
MEA Sump
Hot Standby Process Flow Diagram

Figure153PCCPilotPlantShutdownFlowDiagram
Startup Vent
[4]
Recovered CO2
C-103
E-103 Stripper
Stripper VENT
Overhead
Treated Flue Gas [4]
MEA
STACK
Absorber
Startup G-111 C-102
VOC Wash
Condensate Pump V-102
G-104 [8]
Carbon/Filter
Reboiler Package
Sewer
E-105
Wash H2O
G-103
Cooler [7]
CW Absorber OH
Wash H2O
Pump
To CT [3]
E-104
Reboiler Power Plant
Wash Water to
Offsite Storage
Desuperheated
Desuperheated
E-102 G-102 Steam
Steam
[5] Exchanger Cond Flash
G-100
E-100 Drum
FeedScrub 2nd
[5]
CW CW To Absorber
[2] Water Wash
G-101 IP Steam E-108 G-109
C-100 Pump Cooler Pump
[1] Feed
Scrubber [6] CW OFF-PLOT
1% Flue Gas
V-101
Slipstream G-107 E-106 Reclaimer Waste
K-101 Reclaim Chem
FG Blower Inject Package
HRSG G-105 Pump (Intermittent)
FeedScrub 1st E-109
Stg Wash Circ Feed Scrub 1st [5]
Feed Gas Water
G-106
Condensate
Make-Up MEA
Pump
CT or Sewer
D-101
D-102
MEA PCC Pilot Plant
MEA Storage
Tank
MEA Sump
Shutdown Process Flow Diagram

Appendix A
APPENDIXA ACRONYMSANDABBREVIATIONS
C DegreeCelsius
F DegreeFahrenheit
micro
AAP AlstomAdvancedAmineProcess
AFS AlstomAdvancedFlowScheme
AOF AnnualOnstreamFactor
Ar Argon
B/L BatteryLimit
bara bar,absolute
barg bar,gauge
BEP BreakevenPrice
BFD BlockFlowDiagram
BFW BoilerFeedWater
BPT BackPressureTurbine
Btu BritishThermalUnit
CAP AlstomChilledAmmoniaProcess
CAPEX CapitalExpenditure
CCF CapitalChargeFactor
CCUS CarbonCapture,UtilizationandStorage
CFE ComisinFederaldeElectricidad
CH4 Methane
CO Carbonmonoxide
CO2 Carbondioxide
COE CostofElectricity
CSV ControlStopValve
CT CoolingTower
CW CoolingWater
DCC DirectContactCooler
Des DesignCase
DI Deionized
DoD DepartmentofDefense
ED Electrodialysis
EDF lectricitdeFrance
EFG+ EconamineFGPlusTM
EOR EnhancedOilRecovery
EPA U.S.EnvironmentProtectionAgency
EPC Engineering,ProcurementandConstruction
EPRI ElectricPowerResearchInstitute
Appendix A
Exp ExpectedCase
FEED FrontEndEngineeringDesign
ft feet
2
ft squarefeet
GCCSI GlobalCCSInstitute
GCMS GasChromatographyMassSpectrometry
GJ gigajoule
GoM GovernmentofMexico
gpm gallonsperminute
GT GasTurbine
h,hr Hour
H&MB HeatandMaterialBalance
H2O Water
HP HighPressure
HRSG HeatRecoverySteamGenerator
HSS HeatStableSalts
HVAC Heating,VentilationandAirConditioning
IC IntercooledCase
IIE InstitutodeInvestigacionesElctricas
IP IntermediatePressure
ISBL InsideBatteryLimit
kg kilogram
kgmol kilogrammole
KMCDR KansaiMitsubishiCarbonDioxideRecovery
KO Kickoff
kW kilowatt
kWh kilowatthour
lb pound
lbmol poundmole
TM
LCDesign LowCostDesign
LCMS LiquidChromatographyMassSpectrometry
LHV LowerHeatingValue
LP LowPressure
lpm litersperminute
m meter
2
m squaremeter
3
m cubicmeter
ME MajorEquipment
MEA Monoethanolamine
Appendix A
MHI MitsubishiHeavyIndustries
min minute
mm millimeter
MM million
mT metricton
mTPD metrictonperday
mTPY metrictonperyear
MW megawatt
MWe megawattelectric
MWh megawatthour
N2 Nitrogen
Na2CO3 Sodiumcarbonate
NaOH Sodiumhydroxide
NASA U.S.NationalAeronauticsandSpaceAdministration
NCCC NationalCarbonCaptureCenter
NDA NonDisclosureAgreement
NETL NationalEnergyTechnologyLaboratory
NGCC NaturalGasCombinedCycle
3
Nm Normalcubicmeter
NO Nitricoxide
NO2 Nitrogendioxide
NOM NormaOficialMexicana
NOx Oxidesofnitrogen
O&M OperatingandMaintenance
O2 Oxygen
OPEX OperatingExpenditure
OSBL OutsideBatteryLimit
PCC PostCombustion(CO2)Capture
PFD ProcessFlowDiagram
PM ParticulateMatter
ppmV partspermillion,volume
psia poundspersquareinch,absolute
psig poundspersquareinch,gauge
R&D ResearchandDevelopment
RO ReverseOsmosis
RSP RequiredSellingPrice
s Second
scf standardcubicfeet
scfm standardcubicfeetperminute
Appendix A
SEMARNAT SecretaradeMedioAmbienteyRecursosNaturales
SENER SecretaradeEnerga
3
Sm Standardcubicmeter
SO2 Sulfurdioxide
SO3 Sulfurtrioxide
SOx Oxidesofsulfur
SS Stainlesssteel
ST shortton
STG SteamTurbineGenerator
STPD shorttonsperday
STPY shorttonsperyear
TCM TechnologyCentreMongstad(Norway)
TDC TotalDirectCost
TFC TotalFieldCost
TOC TotalOrganicCarbon
TOR TermsofReference
TPC TotalPlantCost
TRL TechnologyReadinessLevel
UPS UninterruptedPowerSupply
USDOE U.S.DepartmentofEnergy
USGC U.S.GulfCoast
VOC VolatileOrganicCompound
vol Volume
y year
Reclaimer deltaReclaimer
Appendix B
APPENDIXB PROJECTWORKSCOPEANDTERMSOFREFERENCE
AppendixBDescriptionoftheServices/TermsofReference
Revision9/25/2015
RevisedWorkScopeandDeliverables
PertheworkscopediscussionswiththeWorldBankonJuly1,2015[reference:Nexantsbiweeklyupdateof
7/3/2015],NexantrevisedthestudyworkscopeofthisAppendixAtoreflect(1)forTask3,Nexantisgoingto
design the CO2 capture pilot plant based on a generic amine process with flexibility to test the top tier
technologiesidentifiedinTask3,and(2)thatbecauseofthetightprojectschedule,Task3willbecarriedout,
totheextentpossible,inconcurrencewithTask1.Task3deliverables,intermsoftechnicalcontent,willnot
bechanged.
WORKSCOPE:
TASK1:TECHNOLOGYSELECTION,EVALUATIONANDRECOMMENDATIONOFBESTAVAILABLENGCC
PCC
1.1 PlantandSiteDataRequisitionandPreparationofaStudyDesignBasis(Original)
These will be preproject kickoff meeting activities. A detailed plant/site data requisition form will be
preparedandsenttotheWorldBankandCFEwithinoneweekaftercontractsigning.Akickoffmeetingand
site visit shall be scheduled for Mexico one week after receiving the plant/site data from the World
Bank and CFE. Forschedulingpurposes,itisanticipatedthatitwouldtakeapproximatelytwoweeksforthe
WorldBank/CFEteamtocompletethedatarequest.Thus,itisanticipatedthattheprojectkickoff(KO)and
sitevisitshalltakeplaceattheendoffirstmonthaftercontractsigning.
Upon receiving the relevant plant/site data from World Bank/CFE, Nexant will perform a site evaluation
exercise, assuming a typical advanced MEA based CO2 capture process requirement as needed, to select
either the Poza Rica or the Dos Bocas plant as the basis for the study. Results of the site evaluation and
recommendationwillbereviewedwiththeWorldBankandCFEteamstocomeupwithanagreeduponsite
for the study. Nexant shall prepare a preliminary Study Design Basis document based on the selected
site, for discussion during the KO meeting with the World Bank/CFE project team. This document shall
include,butnotlimitedtothefollowing:
o Sitelocationandplantlayout
o Corresponding site elevation above sea level, atmospheric pressure, design dry bulb temperature
(DBT)andcoincidentwetbulbtemperature(WBT)
o Extrememaximumandminimumtemperaturesforequipmentandoperationprotections
o Totalannual(365days)anddaily(24hours)precipitations
o Designpeakgustwindspeedandtypicaldirection(windrose)
o Siteconditions(Clearandlevel?)
o Existingfoundationtype(Piling,spreadfooting?)
o Gasturbinebeingusedandmodesofoperations(descriptions)
o Naturalgascompositions
o HRSGheatandmaterialbalances
o SteamturbinegeneratorThermalKit
Turbinecycleheatandmaterialbalances(H&MB)atdifferentloads
H&MBatdifferentcondenserpressure
LPlaststagebladesizeandannulusarea
Appendix B
LPlaststageexhaustlosscurve
DescriptiononanymajorcyclemodificationsfromtheoriginalH&MBconfiguration
o Detaileddescriptionanddatafromthelatestcycleheatrateperformancetest
o Fluegascomposition,flowrate,temperature,andpressureatHRSGexitforthevariousmodesofGT
operations
o Existingpowerplantboundariesandplotplan(Autocadplotplandrawing)
o Makeupwatersources,withdrawlimits,watercompositions.
o ExistingNGCCwaterbalances
o Existingpowerplantwastewaterdisposalmethods
o Wastewaterdisposalregulations/specifications
o Powerofftakerequirementsandpenalties
o Sitetransportationlimitations(road,rail,waterway?)
o Commodity(chemicals,rawwater,wastewater,coolingwater,powerandsteam)pricingforpreliminary
economictradeoffevaluations.
The Study Design Basis document will be prepared listing all key relevant site conditions, existing NGCC
plant design and operations, utilities availability (e.g., source of steam, electricity, water, etc.), and the
anticipated PCC pilot plant design guidelines and process requirements. The document shall serve the
followingpurposes:
(a) as a reference point from which technical data and information will be solicited from the technology
developers as inputs to the Technology Evaluation and Recommendation activities, (b) as the study basis
for a frontend fullscale integrated plant CO2 capture assessment activity as part of the technology
evaluation process, as requested by the World Bank project team, and (c) as the design basis for the
conceptualpilotplantdesignofTask3activity.
Preliminary Site Selection Evaluation and Recommendation Based on the plot plans, design and
operational data provided for both sites (Poza Rica and Dos Bocas), Nexant will perform a preliminary site
evaluation,basedontypicalMEAbasedfullsizePCCrequirements,todetermineandrecommendasitefor
the study. A summary of the evaluation and recommendation will be sent to the World Bank and CFE
teams,followedbyateleconferencecalltodiscussandfinalizethestudysiteselection,asneeded.
Note:TheaboveisthedescriptionofTask1,Section1.1,asincludedintheoriginalTermsofReference.Due
to lengthy delays in the provision of plant/site data by CFE and a decision by CFE on July 24, 2015, not to
includetheDosBocassite,theactualactivitiesandtimelineshavesubstantiallydeviatedfromthosedescribed
above.
Asaresultofthesedevelopmentsaswellastheincorporationofarevisedapproachtowardsthedesignofthe
pilotplant,amendmentstotheTermsofReferencehavebeenmadeasindicatedbelow.
1.2 PROJECTMEETINGANDSITEVISIT(AMENDED)

AnofficialProjectKickoffmeetingwasheldviaWebExonJune18,2015.
AProjectReviewandSiteVisitmeetingisscheduledforOctober56,2015.Itisintendedtobeaworking
meeting(i.e.,itwillalsoservethefunctionoflocalcapacitybuilding)duringwhich,Nexantteamwill
workwiththeWorldBank,thelocalCFEteamandmembersoftheProjectTaskForceto:
Appendix B
a. ReviewanddiscusstheplantsitedatacollectedandtheStudyDesignBasisdocumentprepared,
andreviewtheassumptionsNexanthasmadetofillinthegaps.

b. ReviewanddiscussthelistofbestavailablePCCtechnologyvendorsand/ordevelopersto
beincludedinthestudy.

c. ReviewanddiscussNexantspreparedtechnologyscreening/evaluationapproach,criteria
andmethodology;andcollectivelyfinalizingit.
Theabovemeetingwillbeheldattheselectedsite(PozaRica).
1.3 TECHNOLOGYSURVEYQUESTIONNAIREPREPARATION(AMENDED)
Nexant will develop a Technology Survey Questionnaire to collect process information from the leading
CO2 capture technology developers. The responses to the questionnaire, supplemented with the Nexant
teams inhouse knowledge, will form the basis for the technology screening,evaluationandfinalselection
process.
TheprojectteamwilldrawonNCCCsexperienceandcontactstoreachouttovarioustechnologyproviders
ordevelopers,seekingtheirparticipationwiththetechnologyevaluationstudy.BoththeStudyDesignBasis
(SDB) document and the Technology Survey Questionnaire (TSQ) will be sent to the potential technology
developers. The objective of the SDB document is for it to be served as a reference point to ensure
that all technicalinformationanddatasoughtfromthequestionnairearetobeprovidedonthesamebasis.
It is envisioned that postcombustion CO2 capture technologies of interest would most likely be an
advanced amine based solvent process that would have to be either currently in commercial operations,
being designed and/or built for a large scale commercial operation, proven and/or demonstrated in a
pilot or demonstration testing facility. Top technology candidates would include, but not limited to: CO2
Solutions, HTC Purenergy, Fluor Econamine FG+, Shell Cansolv, Aker Solutions, AlstomDow, LindeBASF,
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), Hitachi, Siemens and others of interest to the WorldBankandGoM.
The anticipated questionnaire content shall include, but not limited to the following, of which it will also
bediscussedwithboththeWorldBankandCFEteaminmoredetailduringtheKOmeeting:
Applicability of Technology and Status of Commercialization or
Development:
IsyourCCStechnologyapplicableorappropriateforNGCCfluegasCO2 capture?
Isthetechnologyalreadyincommercialoperation?Orbeingcommercialized?
o Ifso,pleaseprovidedetailedprojectinformation
o If not, please provide detail on current technology developmental status and
plan(Demoplanttestedorpilotplanttested)
WouldyourorganizationbeinterestedtopartnerwiththeGovernmentofMexicofor
largescaleCCSdeploymentinMexico?

Technical Data Request for Process Screening and Evaluation, per provided study site data and
DesignBasis:
Absorberoperationalcharacteristics
Temperatureandpressure
Appendix B
Heatofabsorption
LeanandRichCO2 loading
Liquid/gasratio
Maximumtemperatureinthecolumn
Typeofstructuredpacking
Optimumlocationoffluegasblower
Regeneratoroperationalcharacteristics
Temperatureandpressure
CO2 regeneration(orreboiler)duty
SteamqualityrequiredforCO2 regeneration
Overheadcondenserduty
Solventdegradationandreclaiming
Solventthermaldegradationatregenerationtemperature
OxygendegradationexpectedatNGCCfluegasoxygencontent
Sulfurdegradationexpected
Reclaimingmethodandrequirements
Reclaimedwastedisposalrequirement
Slipstream activated carbon filter requirement and slipstream % of
circulationrate
Others
TypicalSolventmakeuprate
Solventcosts
HeatcapacityofCO2richandleansolvent
Demineralizedmakeupwaterdemand
Specializedservicesrequirement
EnvironmentalandhealthimpactoftheCO2 solvent
Physicalpropertiesofrichsolutionatabsorberbottomstemperature
Density
Viscosity
CO2 vaporpressure
Physicalpropertiesofleansolutionatstripperbottomsandabsorberinlettemperatures
Density
Viscosity
CO2 vaporpressure
Availability,pricing,contentsandpreparationscheduleofdemoprocesspackage
Availability, pricing, contents and preparation schedule of commercialsize plant
processpackage
Performanceguarantees,ifavailable
Appendix B
Additionally,thetechnologyvendors/developerswillbeasked(1)iftheywouldbewillingtoprovideaPoza
Rica sitespecific CO2 capture plant process design package as the basis for developing the overall
integrated conceptual pilot plant design, as activity of Task 3, and (2) the costs and schedule for such an
effort.
1.4 TECHNOLOGYSCREENING,EVALUATIONANDSELECTION(AMENDED)
TheNexantteamwillusethetechnologydevelopersquestionnaireresponsesastherawinformationforthe
technology screening, evaluation and selection process. Based on the data received, the Nexant team will
perform a qualitative technology screening exercise to reduce the number of identified PCC (post
combustion CO2 capture) process technologies down to the top few candidates. Other than the technical
process parameters received per the Questionnaire, screening factors considered may include, but not
limited to, maturity of the technology; number of operating plants; demonstration readiness level if not
commerciallyoperating;willingnesstoworkwithMexicoontechnologytransferandlocalcapacitybuilding,
etc.Whilethequalitativescreeninganalysismayreducethetopcandidatesdowntothetopfew(saythree
orfour,dependingonthenumberofresponsesreceived),itisnotexpectedthattheanalysiswillbeableto
identifyasinglebestPCCtechnology.
Nexant will prepare a methodology and criteria for technology down selection, for review, discussion and
approvalbytheWorldBankandCFE. Finalselectionofthe top threeorfourtechnology candidatesfora
more detailed technoeconomic evaluation, as described below, will be made collectively with the World
BankandCFE.
Followingtheselectionofthetopthreeorfourtechnologies,Nexant,workinginconsultationwiththeWorld
BankandtheCFEteam,willthenconductafollowupcomparativeperformanceevaluationofthecandidate
technologies to come up with a recommended PCC technology for the pilot plant design. The techno
economicevaluationshallbecarriedout,basedonafullscaleNGCC(eitherPozaRicaorDosBocas)plant
design, retrofitted for postcombustion CO2 capture (PCC). The top technology providers will be asked to
provide an estimated fullscale PCC process information package with sufficient details (such as estimated
batterylimitstreamandutilityflows,chemicalandcatalystrequirements,capitalcostsandplansize,etc.)to
allowretrofittingthePCCintoafullscaleNGCCplanttobecarriedoutandoverallefficiencyandcapitalcost
estimationtobeevaluatedbytheNexant/Bechtelengineeringteam.Thedatafromthevarioustechnology
providerswillbeusedasreceivedwithgapstobefilledorsupplementedbyNexantsinhousedataonlyas
necessary.Theretrofittedplantshallcapture85to90%oftheCO2fromtheNGCCfluegas,dependingon
inputs from the technology providers. Fullscale conceptual design information requested from each
candidateisexpectedtoincludethefollowing:
o AsimplifiedplantprocessflowdiagramwithH&Mbalances
o Estimatedplantutilitydemandsummary
o Estimatedcapitalcost
o Estimatedoverallplantcatalystsandchemicalconsumptionsandcosts,and
o Estimatedoveralloperatingcosts.
Thermoflowsoftware(asanalternativetoGateCycle)canbeusedtomodelthenaturalgascombinedcycle
(NGCC)powerplanttoestimateitsoverallperformancebeforeandafterPCCpilotplantretrofitting.
The PCC pilot plant will be fully integrated into the NGCC power station. The Nexant team will identify all
interfacing requirements and define the necessary plant retrofitting modifications required. Examples of
someoftheretrofittingand/orplantmodificationspecificsinclude:
Appendix B
Identifyoptimalpowerplantsteamextractiontieinpoint,
Definelocationoffluegasslipstreamextraction,
DevelopaconceptualdesignoftheNGCCpowerplanttodefinesystemmodificationsandadditional
facilitiesneededtoaccommodatethepilotPCCplant,
DevelopaconceptuallayoutofthePCCpilottodefineallinterfaceswiththepowerplant,including
facilitiesforutilitysupplies,
Defineutilitiesofadditionalequipmentrequiredforintegrationwiththepowerplant,and
Additionalequipmentrequiredforintegrationwithpowerplant.

ItshouldbenotedthatNexantisnotexpectedtoperformdetailedprocesssimulationoftheindividualCO2
capture technology under evaluation. It would have to be done by the technology developer or vendor as
providedtechnicalinputinresponsetoourTechnicalSurveyQuestionnaire.Thetechnologyofchoiceforthe
studywill mostlikelybe basedona proprietarysolventsystem, often time coupledwith processand heat
integrationknowhowsforoptimumoverallprocessperformance;andassuch,detailedprocesssimulation
canonlybecarriedoutbythetechnologydeveloperorvendor.
TASK2:INTERIMREPORTPREPARATIONANDMEETING(AMENDED)
NexantwillanalyzealltheTask1evaluationresults,summarizekeyfindings,andprepareaninterimreport.
Nexant can meet with the World Bank and the CFE team to review and discuss the evaluation findings in
Mexico,asneeded.
TASK3:PILOTPLANTFEASIBILITYDESIGN
3.1 PilotPlantCO2 CapturePlantProcessDesign(Amended)

WorkingwiththeWorldBankandCFEandbasedontheinformationprovidedbythetechnologydevelopers,
NexantwilldetermineanoptimumpilotplantsizeanddevelopaprocessdesignpackageforaCO2capture
pilotplantfacilityatPozaRica,basedonagenericamineprocesswithflexibilitytotestandvalidatethetop
tiertechnologiesidentifiedinTask1.NexantwillbepreparedtodiscussthismatterwiththeWorldBankand
CFEduringthemeetingatPozaRica.
Theprocessdesignpackageisexpectedtocontainthefollowingengineeringdetails:
Simplifiedprocessflowdiagramanddescription
Majorstreamflowheat,materialandutilitybalances
Preliminaryplotplan
Majorequipmentlist,includingequipmentdesignmarginsand/ordescriptionsofpotentialequipment
modifications based on the Questionnaire inputs that may be required to accommodate the 34
technologiestobetested
Specificationofeffluents
Capital and operating cost estimates, including all catalysts and chemicals and utility
consumptionestimates
DetailsofintegrationrequirementsintotheNGCCpowerstation.
Appendix B
3.2 NGCC/PCCPILOTPLANTINTEGRATION

Thermoflow software (as an alternative to GateCycle) can be used to model the natural gas combined
cyclepowerplanttoestimateitsoverallperformancebeforeandafterPCCpilotplantretrofitting.
The PCC pilot plant will be fully integrated into the NGCC power station. The Nexant team will identify
allinterfacing requirements and define the necessary plant retrofitting modifications required.Examples of
someoftheretrofittingand/orplantmodificationspecificsinclude:
Identifyoptimalpowerplantsteamextractiontieinpoint,
Definelocationoffluegasslipstreamextraction,
Develop a conceptual design of the NGCC power plant to define system modifications and
additionalfacilitiesneededtoaccommodatethepilotPCCplant,
Develop a conceptual layout of the PCC pilot to define all interfaces with the power plant,
includingfacilitiesforutilitysupplies,
Defineutilitiesofadditionalequipmentrequiredforintegrationwiththepowerplant,and
Additionalequipmentrequiredforintegrationwithpowerplant.

The capital cost estimates shall include all required plant modifications within the NGCC power station
to accommodate the pilot plant facility. Study capital costs will be based on major equipment factored
estimateswithatargetaccuracyof+/30%.
AspartoftheTask3pilotplantdesigneffort,Nexantteamwillperform apreliminary assessmenton the
social, environmental and health impacts of the pilot plant, and report the findings in the Final Report.
Health and environmental impacts assessment will be focused on potential air emissions, liquid and solid
wastedischarges,ofwhichwewilldraw heavilyfrom pilotoperatingexperienceanddatafrom NCCC and
Mongstad,andinputfromtheselectedtechnologyproviders.Mongstadhasrecentlyreleasedsomeofthe
operatingemissionsinformation.
Socialimpactsonthepilotplanthastobeassessedinthecontextofthelocalsiteandplantconditionsin
terms of potential impact on land and resources, job creation, education, advanced technical skill
development,etc. WeintendtohaveourlocalMexicansubcontractor,AEAIngenieria,workingcloselywith
thelocalteamsofCFEandtheWorldBank,forthisportionoftheefforts.
Also, as part of this study effort, the World Bank and CFE team members are welcomed to visit the U.S.
DOE National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC) facility and hold discussions with its engineering and
operationalstaffstoidentifylessonslearned.
TASK4:FINALREPORT
Nexantwillprepareafinalstudyreportsummarizingallworkperformed.
TASK5:WORKSHOP
Nexant team will conduct a twoday workshop to give presentations on the final report and its
recommendationstotheWorldBankandtheCFEteams,othertaskforcemembersandotherstakeholders.
LocallogisticsandexpensesfortheworkshoparetobearrangedbytheWorldBankandCFEteams.

Appendix B
DELIVERABLES:
Deliverableswillincludethefollowing:
1. Aninterimreport,summarizingworkperformedunderTask1,and

2. A final report, expanding to that of the Interim Report content to include activities performed under
Task3,whichwillprovideallthenecessarydesigninformationtoenableadetailedfeasibilitystudyfora
PCCcapturepilotplantateitherthePozaRicaorDosBocassitetoproceedtoPhaseII.Thereportwill
include:
a. Rationaleforthedeterminationofthepilotplantsize
b. DescriptionofthePCCtechnology
c. Plantdescription/conceptualdesign
d. Identificationandestimationofmainprocessparameters
e. Processflowdiagram
f. Facilityrequirements,includingpower,waterandsteam
g. Equipmentlist
h. Plotplanshowingplantareas.Buildingsanddescriptionofoverallspacerequirements
i. Estimateofcapitalandoperatingcosts
j. Assessmentofthepotentialsocial,environmentalandhealthimpactsofthepilotplant(i.e.,
potential emissions of amine solvent degradation products, and other potential liquid and
solidswastedischarges)
k. Furtherrecommendationresultingfromthisstudy.

3. A final twoday workshop presentation to the Project Task Force, CFE and other stakeholders,
presentingtheworkperformedperthefinalreportcontent.

Appendix C
APPENDIXC QUESTIONNAIRETOPCCLICENSORS
1. Post-Combustion Carbon Capture (PCC) Technology

1.1 Technology Name Licensor to fill in
1.2 Technology Licensor Licensor to fill in
1.3 Brief Description of PCC Technology Licensor to provide
process chemistry/characteristics.
1.4 Simplified process flow diagram(s) Licensor to provide
showing process configuration, major
equipment & systems.
1.5 Published articles on technology Licensor to provide
1.6 PCC Plant Battery Limit Definition:
1.6.1 Flue gas feed Delivered from NGCC as specified in
Design Basis (DB)
1.6.2 Treated flue gas Vent to atmosphere though PCC
onsite vent stack
1.6.3 CO2 product Feed to offsite CO2 Compression /
Dehydration Unit
1.7 Battery Limit (B/L) major stream Licensor to show stream flow rates,
composition and material balance compositions, pressures and
temperatures for the following major B/L
streams: flue gas feed, treated flue gas
vent, and CO2 product
1.8 Expected Material of construction:
1.8.1 Absorption vessels Licensor to provide
1.8.2 Absorption vessel internals Licensor to provide
1.8.3 Regeneration vessels Licensor to provide
1.8.4 Regeneration vessel internals Licensor to provide
1.8.5 Rich solution handling pipes, Licensor to provide
pumps and heat exchangers
1.8.6 Hot lean solution handling pipes, Licensor to provide
1.8.7 Cold lean solution (specify Licensor to provide
maximum allowable temperature,
F) handling pipes, pumps and
heat exchangers
1.8.8 Expected corrosion rate for Licensor to provide
carbon steel material, if used, for
rich solution services, mils/year
hot lean solution services, mils/yr
Appendix C

cold lean solution services, mils/yr
2. Commercial Status
2.1 Approximate absorbent/solution
characteristics:
2.1.1 Aqueous or non-aqueous Licensor to provide
solution?
2.1.2 Absorbent type? (Amine, salt, Licensor to provide
others)
2.1.3 Solvent type if not water? Licensor to provide
2.1.4 Typical solution strength, wt% Licensor to provide
absorbent
2.1.5 Typical lean solution loading, lbs Licensor to provide
of CO2 per gallon of lean solution
2.1.6 Typical rich solution loading, lbs Licensor to provide
of CO2 per gallon of rich solution
2.1.7 Approximate lean solution Licensor to provide
density, lbs/gallon
2.1.8 Approximate lean solution Licensor to provide
viscosity, cp
2.1.9 Approximate rich solution Licensor to provide
density, lbs/gallon
2.1.10 Approximate rich solution Licensor to provide
viscosity, cp
2.1.11 Maximum operating temperature Licensor to provide
to avoid excessive degradation, oF
2.1.12 Typical reboiling duty, Btu/lb of Licensor to provide
CO2 Recovered
2.2 For Natural Gas Combined Cycle

(NGCC) flue gas application:
2.2.1 Typical flue gas temperature at Licensor to provide

B/L, oF
2.2.2 Typical % CO2 recovery? Licensor to provide
CO2 per gallon of rich solution
2.2.5 Typical reboiling duty, Btu/lb of Licensor to provide
Appendix C
CO2 recovered
2.2.6 Optimum feed gas ppmV SOx Licensor to provide
2.2.7 Maximum feed gas ppmV SOx Licensor to provide
2.2.8 Typical degradation losses, lbs Licensor to provide
absorbent per lb SOx in feed gas
2.2.9 Typical degradation losses, lbs Licensor to provide
solvent (if any) per lb SOx in feed
2.2.10 Maximum feed gas O2 content, Licensor to provide
vol%
2.2.11 Typical O2 degradation losses, Licensor to provide
lbs absorbent per lb O2 in feed
2.2.12 Typical O2 degradation losses, Licensor to provide
lbs solvent (if any) per lb O2 in feed
2.2.13 Typical NOx degradation losses, Licensor to provide
lbs absorbent per lb NOx in feed
2.2.14 Typical NOx degradation losses, Licensor to provide
lbs solvent (if any) per lb NOx in
feed
2.3 For coal-fired boiler flue gas Licensor to fill out Item 2.3 if no data for
application: NGCC applications
2.3.1 Typical flue gas temperature at
B/L, oF
2.3.2 Typical % CO2 recovery?
2.3.3 Typical lean solution loading, lbs
2.3.4 Typical rich solution loading, lbs
2.3.5 Typical reboiling duty, Btu/lb of
CO2 recovered
2.3.6 Optimum feed gas ppmV SOx
2.3.7 Maximum feed gas ppmV SOx
2.3.8 Typical degradation losses, lbs
2.3.9 Typical degradation losses, lbs
2.3.10 Maximum feed gas O2 content,
vol%
2.3.11 Typical O2 degradation losses,
lbs absorbent per lb O2 in feed
2.3.12 Typical O2 degradation losses,
Appendix C
lbs solvent (if any) per lb O2 in feed

2.3.13 Typical NOx degradation losses,
lbs absorbent per lb NOx in feed
2.3.14 Typical NOx degradation losses,
lbs solvent (if any) per lb NOx in
feed
2.4 # of Pilot Plant operating experiences Licensor to provide
2.5 Largest Pilot Plant Experience:

2.5.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal, NG or Licensor to provide
simulated)
2.5.2 Flue gas flow, MMSCFD (wet) Licensor to provide
2.5.3 Flue gas feed CO2/O2/H2O Licensor to provide / /
concentration, Vol%
2.5.4 CO2 recovery, % of feed CO2 Licensor to provide
2.5.5 B/L Flue gas feed temperature, F Licensor to provide
CO2 per gallon of lean solution
2.5.8 Typical lean solution temperature Licensor to provide
entering absorber, F
2.5.9 Typical rich solution temperature Licensor to provide
exiting absorber, F
2.5.10 Typical stripper/regenerator Licensor to provide
bottom temperature, F
2.5.11 Approximate reboiling duty, Licensor to provide
Btu/lb of CO2 recovered
2.5.12 Plant location Licensor to provide
2.5.13 Current plant status (operating or Licensor to provide
shutdown)
2.5.14 Possible plant visit? (Yes or No) Licensor to provide
2.6 What is the smallest Pilot Plant size Licensor to provide

needed to generate reliable data for
scale up to full size Demo Plant, % of full
size Demo Plant capacity
2.7 Would you be interested to provide a Licensor to provide

detailed process design package in case
Appendix C
we wish to design the pilot plant

specifically for your technology? (Terms
will be negotiated at that time)
2.8 # of Demo Plant operating experiences Licensor to provide
2.9 Largest Demo Plant Experience:

2.9.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal or NG) Licensor to provide
2.9.3 Flue gas feed CO2/O2/H2O Licensor to provide
concentration, Vol%
exiting absorber, F
2.9.10 B/L Flue gas feed temperature, F Licensor to provide

2.9.13 Current status (operating or Licensor to provide

shutdown)
2.9.14 Possible plant visit? (Yes or No) Licensor to provide
2.10 Number of Process Design prepared Licensor to provide
2.11 Largest FEED Package Prepared:

2.11.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal or Licensor to provide
NG)
concentration, Vol%
Appendix C
2.11.5 B/L Flue gas temperature, F Licensor to provide

exiting absorber, F
2.11.12 Plant Location Licensor to provide
2.11.13 Current status (on-going or Licensor to provide

completed)
Licensor to provide
2.12 Number of Process Design prepared Licensor to provide
2.13 Largest PCC Plant Process Design:

2.13.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal or Licensor to provide
NG)
concentration, Vol%
2.13.5 B/L Flue gas feed temperature, Licensor to provide

o
F
2.13.8 Current status (on-going or Licensor to provide
completed)
Appendix C
3. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size Design Flue Gas Feed

3.1 Flue gas composition and molar flow As shown in PCC Design Basis (DB)
rate at PCC battery limit (B/L)
3.2 Minimum B/L flue gas feed pressure, psia Licensor to specify if DB pressure is not
acceptable
3.3 Maximum B/L flue gas feed temperature, Licensor to specify if DB temperature is
o
F not acceptable
4. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC CO2 Product Specification

4.1 Expected CO2 product composition or
molar flow rate at PCC B/L (before CO2
Compression Unit)
4.1.1 Lbmoles/hr or vol% CO2 By difference
4.1.2 Lbmoles/hr or vol% H2O (Note Licensor to specify

4-1)
4.1.3 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV O2 Licensor to specify
4.1.4 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV NOx Licensor to specify
4.1.5 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV SOx Licensor to specify

4.1.6 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV Solvent Licensor to specify
(Note 4-1)
4.1.7 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV N2 + Ar Licensor to specify
4.2 Total lbmoles/hr Licensor to specify
4.3 Expected pressure at PCC B/L, psia Licensor to specify

4.4 Expected temperature at PCC B/L, oF Licensor to specify
(Note 4-1) : Water and solvent will be recycled back to PCC from
CO2 Compression.
Appendix C
5. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC Utility & Commodity Consumptions

5.1 Continuous low pressure (LP) reboiling Licensor to specify
steam import, lbs/hr
5.1.1 Mininum B/L pressure, psia Licensor to specify
5.1.2 Minimum B/L temperature, oF (no Licensor to specify

less than 10 oF above saturation)
5.2 Intermediate pressure (IP) steam import, Licensor to specify

lbs/hr
5.2.1 Continuous or intermittent Licensor to specify
5.2.2 Frequency & duration if Licensor to specify

intermittent
5.2.3 Minimum B/L pressure, psia Licensor to specify
5.2.4 Minimum B/L temperature, oF (no Licensor to specify

less than 10 oF above saturation)
5.3 Reboiling steam condensate return flow, Licensor to specify

lbs/hr
5.3.1 B/L pressure, psia (not less than Licensor to specify
130 psia)
5.3.2 B/L temperature, oF Licensor to specify
5.4 Process water import to PCC, lbs/hr Licensor to specify
5.4.1 Quality required, filtered river Licensor to specify

water or steam condensate
5.5 Cooling water (CW) at PCC B/L

5.5.1 CW Flow, lbs/hr Licensor to specify
5.5.2 CW Temperature to PCC, oF 81.5. see Design Basis (DB)
5.5.3 CW Temperature from PCC, oF Licensor to specify (Max 95 F, see DB)

Licensor to specify
5.6 PCC Power Consumption, kWe: Licensor to specify
Appendix C
5.6.1 Flue Gas Blower(s), kWe per Licensor to specify

Blower
5.6.2 Spare Blower Licensor to specify Yes or No
5.6.3 Rich Solution Pump(s), kWe per Licensor to specify

pump
5.6.4 Spare Rich Solution Pump Licensor to specify Yes or No
5.6.5 Lean Solution Pump(s), kWe per Licensor to specify

pump
5.6.6 Spare Lean Solution Pump Licensor to specify Yes or No
5.6.7 Other large motor (>200 kWe per Licensor to identify & provide each kWe
motor) driven machine, kWe
5.6.8 Total PCC onsite continuous Licensor to specify
power consumption, kWe
5.7 PCC Instrument Air Demand, SCFM Licensor to specify (see DB for supply
pressure & temperature)
5.8 Waste water export from PCC, lbs/hr Licensor to specify
5.8.1 List of impurities and Licensor to specify

concentration (wt%, ppmW, BOD
or COD)
6. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC Plot Plan Area Requirement

6.1 Estimated plot plan dimensions for Licensor to specify
absorption area, W (ft) x L (ft)
regeneration area, W (ft) x L (ft)
solvent preparation & storage tank
area, W (ft) x L (ft)
trace contaminant removal system and
vent stack area, W (ft) x L (ft)
6.5 Other separately locatable process or Licensor to specify
support system area, W (ft) x L (ft)
Appendix C
7. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC Operating Requirement

7.1 New PCC plant operator positions
required
7.1.1 # of control room PCC operator Licensor to specify
position (24/7= 24 hours/day & 7
days/week per position)
7.1.2 Outside operator position (24/7) Licensor to specify
7.1.3 Laboratory position (8/5 = 8 Licensor to specify

hrs/day & 5 days/wk per position)
7.1.4 Plant Engineering position (8/5) Licensor to specify
7.2 Absorbent makeup: (Can be reported as absorbent cost

per lb CO2 recovered)
7.2.1 Makeup rate, lbs absorbent per Licensor to specify
lb CO2 recovered
7.2.2 Absorbent cost, $ per lb Licensor to specify
7.3 Solvent makeup: (Can be reported as solvent cost per

lb CO2 recovered)
7.3.1 Makeup rate, lbs solvent per lb Licensor to specify
CO2 recovered
7.3.2 Solvent cost, $ per lb Licensor to specify
7.4 Other chemical consumptions, name & (Can be listed and reported as total
consumption rate (or total cost) per lb chemical cost per lb CO2 recovered)
CO2 recovered
7.5 Solid waste to offsite disposal:

7.5.1 Waste rate, lbs wet solids per lb Licensor to specify
CO2 recovered
7.5.2 Wt % Water Licensor to specify
7.5.3 Hazardous chemical? (Yes or Licensor to specify

No)
7.5.4 Disposal method (Land-fill, Licensor to specify
incineration, etc)
7.5.5 Expected disposal cost, $ per lb Licensor to specify
dry solids

Appendix C
8. Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC Estimated Capital Cost

8.1 Cost type (capacity factored from plant Licensor to specify
cost curves or from major equipment
costs)
8.2 Total cost in end of 2014 US$ Licensor to provide
8.3 Number of parallel PCC trains in above Licensor to provide

total cost
8.4 Number of parallel PCC trains required Licensor to provide
8.5 Cost source type (major equipment cost, Licensor to specify

direct cost, field cost, or installed cost)
8.6 Expected accuracy (+/- ?%) Licensor to specify
8.7 Cost reference location if not based on Licensor to specify

Mexico site
8.8 Approximate total installation manhours Licensor to provide
8.9 Approximate % of the PCC cost is for Licensor to provide

feed pretreatment (if included to meet
PCC needs)
9. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC Equipment Transportation Requirement

9.1 Shop or field fabricated absorber Licensor to specify
9.2 Absorber type (steel, fiberglass, Licensor to specify

concrete, etc)
9.3 Estimated absorber dimensions (if shop Licensor to specify
fabrication):
9.3.1 Maximum sectional diameter, ft Licensor to specify
9.3.2 Total vessel height, ft Licensor to specify
9.3.3 Total vessel weight, short tons, ft Licensor to specify
9.4 Shop or field fabricated regenerator Licensor to specify
9.5 Regenerator type (steel, fiberglass, Licensor to specify

concrete, etc)
9.6 Estimated regenerator dimensions (if Licensor to specify
shop fabrication):
9.6.1 Maximum sectional diameter, ft Licensor to specify
9.6.2 Total vessel height, ft Licensor to specify
9.6.3 Total vessel weight, short tons, ft Licensor to specify
Appendix C
10. PCC Process Characteristics

10.1 Aqueous or non-aqueous solution Licensor to specify
10.2 Absorbent flammability Licensor to provide
10.3 Solvent flammability Licensor to provide
10.4 Absorbent toxicity Licensor to specify
10.5 Solvent toxicity Licensor to provide
10.6 List of trace contaminants Licensor to provide

(including degradation by-products) and
the corresponding concentrations
expected in the treated flue gas being
vent to the atmosphere
Appendix D
APPENDIXD DESIGNBASISDOCUMENT
Appendix D
Poza Rica NGCC Power Plant, Mexico

Pre-Feasibility Study Basis
For the Addition of Post Combustion CO2 Capture
By
101 Second Street, Suite 1000, San Francisco, CA 94105-3672 USA

tel: +1 415 369 1100 fax: +1 415 369 0894
Revision A, October 1, 2015

(Issued for Oct 5 Review)
Appendix D
Contents
Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................230
1.1 Project Description.....................................................................................................230
2. POZA RICA NGCC POWER PLANT POST COMBUSTION CARBON
CAPTURE PHASE 1 PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY BASIS..................................................231
2.1 General .......................................................................................................................231
2.1.1 Brief Plant Description ......................................................................................... 231
2.2 Design References .....................................................................................................236
2.3 Meteorological Data...................................................................................................237
2.4 Natural Gas Characteristics........................................................................................238
2.4.1 Natural Gas Composition ...................................................................................... 238
2.5 NGCC Plant Study Basis ...........................................................................................239
2.5.1 Gas Turbine Design Criteria ................................................................................. 239
2.5.2 Gas Turbine Air Compressor Design Basis .......................................................... 241
2.5.3 Steam Cycle Design Criteria ................................................................................. 242
2.5.4 Steam Turbine Low Pressure Stage Annulus........................................................ 244
2.5.5 Steam Turbine Condenser Design Data ................................................................ 244
2.6 Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) .................................................................245
2.7 Estimated Heat and Material Balance For Existing NGCC Operation ......................248
2.8 Cooling Water & Cooling Tower ..............................................................................250
2.8.1 Cooling Water ....................................................................................................... 250
2.8.2 Cooling Tower ...................................................................................................... 250
2.9 Water Supply and Waste Water .................................................................................251
2.10 Balance of Plant .........................................................................................................251
2.11 NGCC Plant Parasitic Loads......................................................................................252
2.12 Environmental Emissions Requirements ...................................................................253
2.13 Process Screening Methodology and Basis (Later) ...................................................253
2.14 PCC Process Economic Evaluation Methodology And Basis ...................................254
2.14.1 Cost Estimation ..................................................................................................... 254
3. PCC PLANT DESIGN BASIS................................................................................256
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................256
Appendix D
3.2 Site Related Conditions..............................................................................................259

3.3 Meteorological Data...................................................................................................259
3.4 PCC Feed and Product Properties ..............................................................................259
3.4.1 PCC Feed (Flue Gas) Properties ........................................................................... 259
3.4.2 Recovered CO2 Properties .................................................................................... 260
3.4.3 Exhaust Gas Disposition ....................................................................................... 261
3.5 PCC Utilty Requirements ..........................................................................................261
3.5.1 NGCC Power Plant Steam Pressure Levels .......................................................... 261
3.5.2 Low Pressure Steam .............................................................................................. 262
3.5.3 Intermediate Pressure (IP) Steam.......................................................................... 262
3.5.4 Steam Condensate Return ..................................................................................... 262
3.5.5 Cooling Water ....................................................................................................... 263
3.5.6 Process Water........................................................................................................ 263
3.5.7 Instrument Air ....................................................................................................... 263
3.6 Process Waste Streams ..............................................................................................263
3.6.1 Process Condensate ............................................................................................... 263
3.6.2 Reclaimer Byproducts ........................................................................................... 264
3.7 Environmental/Emissions Requirements ...................................................................264
3.8 PCC Plot Area Requirements.....................................................................................264
3.8.1 Flue Gas Handling Area (FGHA) ......................................................................... 265
3.8.2 Regeneration Area (RA) ....................................................................................... 265
3.8.3 Solution Storage Area (SSA) ................................................................................ 265
3.9 Estimated Full Size PCC Capital Cost .......................................................................267
3.10 Overland Transportation Size Limitations (to be Confirmed By CFE) .....................267
4. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................268
Appendix D
List of Figures
Figure 2-1 Map of Poza Rica Site ............................................................................................... 232

Figure 2-2 Aerial View of Poza Rica Site .................................................................................. 233
Figure 2-3 Overall Plot Plan of Poza Rica Site........................................................................... 234
Figure 2-4 Site Plan of Poza Rica Power Island ......................................................................... 235
Figure 2-5 Locations of the GT, ST, & HRSG ........................................................................... 236
Figure 2-6 Model 501F Performance Evolution ......................................................................... 239
Figure 2-7 Picture of the Poza Rica HRSG unit ......................................................................... 247
Figure 2-8 Component Details of the Poza Rica HRSG unit...................................................... 247
Figure 2-9 NGCC Process Flow Diagram .................................................................................. 249
Figure 3-1 Location of Poza Rica NGCC Plant Site................................................................... 256
Figure 3-2 Poza Rica NGCC Flow Configuration (With-PCC and CO2
Compression/Dehydration) ................................................................................................. 258
Figure 3-3 Poza Rica NGCC Aerial View .................................................................................. 266
Appendix D
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Meteorological Data ................................................................................................... 237
Table 2-2 Natural Gas Composition ........................................................................................... 238
Table 2-3 W501F Gas Turbine Specifications............................................................................ 240
Table 2-4 Tuxpan/Poza Rica Gas Turbine Performance Test Data ............................................ 241
Table 2-5 Ambient Air Quality ................................................................................................... 242
Table 2-6 100%, 75% and 50% Design Load Cases .................................................................. 242
Table 2-7 Steam Turbine Condenser Design Data ..................................................................... 244
Table 2-8 Steam Turbine Condenser Duty Estimates (reference 9) ........................................... 245
Table 2-9 HRSG Steam Evaporator Design Parameters............................................................. 246
Table 2-10 Plant Distribution Voltages ...................................................................................... 252
Table 2-11 NGCC Plant Parasitic Loads .................................................................................... 252
Table 2-12 Environmental Targets ............................................................................................. 253
Table 3-1 Site Condition ............................................................................................................. 259
Table 3-2 Meteorological Data ................................................................................................... 259
Table 3-3 Poza Rica NGCC Flue Gas Composition and Flow Rate........................................... 260
Table 3-4 Recovered CO2 Properties .......................................................................................... 261
Table 3-5 NGCC Power Plant Steam Conditions ....................................................................... 262
Table 3-6 Environmental Targets ............................................................................................... 264
Appendix D
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Nexant, Inc. (Nexant), in association with Bechtel Corporation, The National Carbon Capture
Center (NCCC) (a pilot plant testing facility sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, and
managed and operated by the Southern Company, a major U.S. power generation utility) in the
U.S. and AEA Ingeniera of Mexico, have been contracted by the World Bank (WB) to provide
Consulting Services to carry out a pre-feasibility study 1) to assess and recommend the most
commercially available post-combustion capture technology for natural gas combined cycle
(NGCC) power plants in Mexico, and 2) to develop a conceptual design for a CO2 capture pilot
plant, which will be located at the 243 MW Poza Rica NGCC generating station in the State of
Veracruz.
Mexico has made considerable progress in moving its carbon capture, utilization and storage
(CCUS) agenda forwards at both the policy and utility levels as evidenced by the recently
completed CCUS Roadmap. A 2011 study by SENER estimated that Mexico has a theoretical
capacity of 10 Giga tons of CO2 storage in oil reservoirs and/or saline aquifers. Work is in
progress to estimate the effective storage capacity. However, the country still needs to undertake
substantial efforts in order to deploy CCUS technology at scale to realize its benefits.
World Banks current Technical Assistance program for Mexico is structured to facilitate
demonstration of CCUS in a small scale project. The project will build a knowledge and
experience basis for a larger demonstration project and advance the application of CCUS in the
power generation and oil & gas sectors. The project has two phases. The Phase I is a pre-
feasibility study. The Phase II will comprise design, procurement, construction, operation and
closure/ dismantling of a capture pilot plant, producing 5-50 tonnes/day of CO2 (to be confirmed
later) captured from a flue gas slip stream coming from the 243-MW natural gas combined cycle
(NGCC) generating station at Poza Rica, Veracruz, Mexico. This would be the first such pilot
plant in Mexico akin to the CO2 Technology Centre Mongstad (TCM) in Norway. The duration
of this pilot project will be three years (2016-2019). Mexico is making considerable progress in
moving its carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS).
The primary purpose of this document is to define the design basis to be used for the pre-
feasibility study.
Appendix D
2. POZA RICA NGCC POWER PLANT POST COMBUSTION CARBON

CAPTURE PHASE 1 PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY BASIS
2.1 GENERAL
2.1.1 Brief Plant Description
The objective of the pre-feasibility study is to evaluate and recommend the most commercially
available technology for retrofitting the Poza Rica NGCC power plant with post-combustion CO2
capture (PCC) to recover 85% of the CO2 in the flue gas. The CO2 recovered from the PCC
process will be compressed and dehydrated for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR). This section
describes the study basis for the overall NGCC pre-feasibility study. Section 3 will describe the
basis for the design and integration of the PCC process into the NGCC power plant.
The Poza Rica power plant was converted to a natural gas combined cycle plant (NGCC) as part
of Project 216 - RM Central Combined Cycle Poza Rica. The converted power plant has a total
nominal output of 243 MWe consisting of a 163 MWe gas turbine, a Heat Recovery Steam
Generator (HRSG) unit and three 27 MWe steam turbines.
The gas turbine is a Siemens/Westinghouse W501F model gas turbine originally purchased and
installed at the Central Tuxpan power plant north of Poza Rica, Mexico. It was relocated from
the Central Tuxpan power plant to the Poza Rica site as part of Project 216. The new HRSG unit
recovers heat from the gas turbine exhaust by generating steam for power production in the
steam turbines. The steam turbines are existing units located at the Poza Rica power plant.
These units are retrofitted and modernized for the NGCC plant. The converted NGCC plant has
a nominal gross generating capacity of 243 MWe of electricity and operates as a base-loaded unit
with annual on-stream capacity factor of 80 percent.
The plant location and the relative location of the major components of the Poza Rica NGCC
plant are shown in the following figures. The location of the Poza Rica NGCC plant is shown in
Figure 2-1. An aerial view of the Poza Rica plant is shown in Figure 2-2. Figure 2-3 is the
overall plot layout of the Poza Rica NGCC Plant. Figure 2-4 is the site plan showing the major
units of the NGCC plant including the three cooling towers. Figure 2-5 is an enlarged plot layout
showing the relative locations of the GT, ST and the HRSG.
Appendix D
Figure 2-1 Map of Poza Rica Site
Tuxpan
Power
Plant
Poza Rica
NGCC
Power
Plant
Appendix D
Figure 2-2 Aerial View of Poza Rica Site
Appendix D
Figure 2-3 Overall Plot Plan of Poza Rica Site
Property Limit
PEMEX Wells
Camp
Power Island
(dashed area)
Cooling Towers
Temporary Facility Construction Area
Hazardous
Waste Storage
Distribution
Warehouse
Fuel Oil
Mexico National Highway Tuxpan
Task1:TechnologySelection,EvaluationandRecommendation 234
Appendix C
Figure 2-4 Site Plan of Poza Rica Power Island
Appendix C
Figure 2-5 Locations of the GT, ST, & HRSG
Steam Gas HRSG

Turbines Turbine
2.2 DESIGN REFERENCES

A compilation of reference information received from Comison Federal de Electricidad (CFE),
the World Bank (WB) and references from literature search on the Poza Rica NGCC plant are
shown in Section 4 for the pre-feasibility study.
Appendix C
2.3 METEOROLOGICAL DATA

Operations for five different metrological conditions are provided by CFE and are summarized
in Table 2-1. The summer design conditions shown in Table 2-1 will serve as the design
conditions for the NGCC/PCC plant material balance and system design for the pre-feasibility
study. The summer design conditions correspond to the HRSG Design Guarantee case (Case 1
in reference 3). The winter design and summer extreme conditions are for specifying equipment
design limits and personnel protection considerations.
Table 2-1 Meteorological Data

(References 8, 9 and 28)
Description Summer Winter Summer Winter Annual

Design Design Extreme Extreme Average
Barometric Pressure, 1.013 1.013 1.013 1.013 1.013
bara (psia) (14.69) (14.69) (14.69) (14.69) (14.69)
Dry Bulb, oC (F) 32 oC 15 oC 43 oC 8 oC 25 oC
(90 oF) (59 oF) (109 oF) (46 oF) (77 oF)
Wet Bulb, oC (F) 25.3 oC 14 oC 24.2 oC 8 oC 22.8 oC
(77.5 F) (57.2 oF) (75.5 F) (46 oF) (73 oF)
Relative Humidity, % 57% 92% 21% 100% 81%
Appendix C
2.4 NATURAL GAS CHARACTERISTICS
2.4.1 Natural Gas Composition

Table 2-2 shows the design natural gas composition for the pre-feasibility study. This
composition is provided by CFE (Reference 1) and is the most current natural gas composition
available for the Poza Rica site.
Table 2-2 Natural Gas Composition

(Reference 1)
Component Volume Percent

Nitrogen, N2 1.01
Carbon Dioxide, CO2 0.81
Methane, CH4 89.97
Ethane, C2 H6 6.65
Propane, C3 H8 1.04
n-Butane, C4 H10 0.22
i-Butane, C4 H10 0.20
n-Pentane, C5 H12 0.04
i-Pentane, C5 H12 0.04
H2 S* 0.03
Total 100.00
HHV, Btu/scf 1,069
Btu/lb 22,741
LHV, Btu/scf 965
Btu/lb 20,531
*0.2 Grains S/100 SCF
Appendix C
2.5 NGCC PLANT STUDY BASIS
2.5.1 Gas Turbine Design Criteria

The model W501F gas turbine was original developed and manufactured by Westinghouse.
The first commercial production has a simple cycle (SC) performance rating of 150 MWe and
34.9% LHV efficiency. It is currently produced by Siemens and has evolved from the original
150 MWe nominal output to the current 200 MWe nominal output with increasing SC
efficiencies. The performance evolution of the model W501F is shown in figure 2-6 below.
Figure 2-6 Model 501F Performance Evolution

(Reference 34)
Typical performance specifications for the W501F gas turbines and the current equivalent
Siemens model SGT6-PAC 5000F gas turbines are shown in Table 2-3. These are obtained
from vendor and other published literatures with simple cycle power output increased to 232
MW by 2013.
Appendix C
Table 2-3 W501F Gas Turbine Specifications
GasTurbines
Reference 31 32 33 36
GasTurbine GasTurbine
Westinghouse Siemens
WorldHandbook WorldHandbook
Description
PublicationYear 1997 20042005 2008 2013
Westinghouse SiemensSGT6 SiemensSGT6
SiemensW501F
GTModel 501F PAC5000F PAC5000F
ISOBaseRating kW 160,000 198,300 196,000 232,000
HeatRate(SC) Btu/kWh,LHV 9,610 8,985 9,059 8,794
HeatRate(CC) Btu/kWh,LHV 6,429
FuelFlow lbs/sec 23
FuelPressure psig 475to500
AirFlow lbs/sec 961
PressureRatio 15.0 17.4 17.0 18.9
ExhaustFlow lbs/sec 1,102 1,108 1,215
o
ExhaustTemperature F 1,083 1,070 1,079 1,100
TurbineSpeed rpm 3,600 3,600 3,600
No.ofCompressorStages 16 16
No.ofTurbineStages 4 4
No.ofCooledStages 6 3
RotorInletTemperature 2,330 2,330
The Poza Rica W501F gas turbine was originally purchased and installed in the Tuxpan power
plant in Veracruz, Mexico as GT unit #7 and was relocated from the Tuxpan power plant to the
Poza Rica NGCC power plant as turbine unit #4. Thermal performance test was performed by
Siemens/Westinghouse In November 24, 2003 for equipment guarantee at the Tuxpan power
plant (reference 18). A summary of the 2003 performance test data is shown in Table 2-4
below.
Appendix C
Table 2-4 Tuxpan/Poza Rica Gas Turbine Performance Test Data
GasTurbines
Reference 18
SiemensWH
PerformaceTest
SpecforTuxpan
Description W501FGT
PublicationYear Nov.24,2003
SiemensWH
GTModel W501F
ISOBaseRating kW 162,544
HeatRate(SC) Btu/kWh,LHV 9,570
HeatRate(CC) Btu/kWh,LHV
GTTestReferenceConditions:
GTOperatingMode BaseLoad
GTCondition New&Clean
BarometricPressure psia 14.69
o
InletAirTemperature F 94.6
RelativeHumidity % 54.0
GTFeedComposition SeeTable22
NetFuelLHV Btu/lb 20,537
o
GTFuelTemperature@B/L F 60
GTExhaustLoss inH2O(static) 5.6
Frequency Hz 60.0
PowerFactor 0.90
The test report package also included GT power output correction curves for variations in
barometric pressure, air temperature, humidity, and fuel carbon/hydrogen ratio (reference 16).
2.5.2 Gas Turbine Air Compressor Design Basis

The gas turbine air compressor is driven by the gas turbine to provide air for the combustion of
the natural gas fuel. The compression ratio is 15 for the earlier models of the W501F gas
turbine and has increased to 17 to 19 for the later models as shown in Table 2-3. For this study,
a design compression ratio of 15.79, as given in the 2008 Siemens-Westinghouse GT load curve
for the Poza Rica W501F (reference 11), will be used.
A design air flow of 1023 lbs/sec, as calculated by subtracting the fuel flow from the flue gas
flow given for the HRSG guarantee Case 1 (reference 3), will be used for this study.
Appendix C
The design ambient air quality is shown in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5 Ambient Air Quality
Air composition, mole % (reference 1)

Argon
CO2 0.03
O2 20.9
N2 78.0
Moisture 1.07
Total 100.00
2.5.3 Steam Cycle Design Criteria

Steam at three pressure levels (HP, IP, and LP) are generated in a single HRSG to feed the three
Siemens steam turbines. Each steam turbine produces a nominal 27 MWe of power for a total
of 81 MWe for the steam cycle. Steam flows and conditions to the three Siemens steam
turbines are shown in Table 2-6 for the design guarantee case which represents NGCC
operations at Summer Design conditions as defined in Section 2.3.
Table 2-6 100%, 75% and 50% Design Load Cases
Case 1 2 3
Design Design Design

Description Guarantee Guarantee Guarantee
(100% Load) (75% Load) (50% Load)
Reference 3 3 3
Gross Power Output
Gas Turbine Power Output (reference 9) MWe 162.8 122.1 81.4
Steam Turbine Power Output, Each MWe 26.7 *** ***
No. of Steam Turbines 3.0 3.0 3.0
Steam Turbine Power Output, Total MWe 80.1 *** ***
Gross Output MWe 242.9 *** ***
Gas Turbine
Flue Gas Flow lbs/hr 3,554,697 3,212,102 2,674,179
o
Flue Gas Temperature F 1,141 1,026 1,026
Flue Gas Pressure psia 15.1 15.0 14.9
Appendix C
HP Superheated Steam From HRSG

Mass Flow Rate from HRSG lbs/hr 579,955 430,195 359,526
Volumetric Flow Rate from HRSG ACF/hr 412,502 415,512 403,018
Pressure at HRSG psia 1,202 885 747
o
Temperature at HRSG F 976 976 946
No. of Steam Turbines 3 3 3

Mass Flow Rate to Each Steam Turbine lbs/hr 193,318 143,398 119,842
Pressure to Each Steam Turbine psia 1,137 830 695
o
Temperature to Each Steam Turbine F 973 973 943
HP Superheated Steam P (HRSG to ST Inlet) psi 65 55 52
IP Superheated Steam From HRSG

Pressure at HRSG psia 208 182 151
o

Pressure to Each Steam Turbine psia 185 144 117
o
IP Superheated Steam P (HRSG to ST Inlet) psi 23 38 34
LP Superheated Steam From HRSG

Pressure at HRSG psia 83 70 58
o

Pressure to Each Steam Turbine psia 69 50 40
o
Appendix C
LP Superheated Steam P (HRSG to ST Inlet) psi 14 19 17
Condensate Flow From Each ST lbs/hr 218,151

Pressure psia 1.29
* Steam pressures to the steam turbines are not available for the 75% and 50% load design
cases. The HRSG to steam turbine inlet P for the 75% and 50% load cases are estimated by
prorating the 100% load HRSG to ST inlet P by the square of the respective steam volumetric
flow ratios.
** The steam temperatures to the steam turbines are not available for the 75% and 50% load
design cases. For approximation, HRSG to steam turbine inlet T is assumed to be identical to
100% operation.
***Part load steam turbine gross output will be calculated by NGCC power plant simulation
model
2.5.4 Steam Turbine Low Pressure Stage Annulus

LP last stage annulus size is 1857.46 mm (73.13 inches) as specified by CFE
2.5.5 Steam Turbine Condenser Design Data

CFE provided the following design data for the steam turbine condenser (Table 2-7).
Table 2-7 Steam Turbine Condenser Design Data
Reference Reference 17
Steam Turbine Condenser Manufacturer Siemens
Type 2 Pass
Cooling Surface, m2 (ft2) 2,930 (31,540)
Steam Flow, Normal, mt/hr (lbs/hr) 100 (220,460)
Steam Flow, max., mt/hr (lbs/hr) 120 (264,550)
3
CW Flow, m /hr (gpm) 7.000 (30,820)
o o
CW Inlet Temperature, C ( F) 27.5 (81.5)
Number of Tubes 6,550
Tube ID, mm (inches) 21 (0.8268)
Vacuum Pump Capacity @ 30 Torr (each), m3/hr (cfm) 300 (177)
No. of Vacuum Pumps 2 Elmo
Table 2-8 summarizes the Poza Rica NGCC surface condenser duties for the five ambient
condition operations at 100% throughputs. Expected variations in surface condenser duties,
cooling water flows and exit temperatures are also shown in Table 2-8.
Appendix C
Table 2-8 Steam Turbine Condenser Duty Estimates (reference 9)
Case 1 10 4 7 13
Design
Guarantee Winter Summer Annual Winter
Description
(100% Design Extreme Average Extreme
Load)

CondensateFlowFromEachST,
218,151 228,169 210,330 220,515 231,352
(lb/hr)
Pressure,(psia) 1.29 0.94 1.21 1.22 0.79
Temperature,(oF) 110 100 108 108 94

Reference Reference Reference Reference Reference
CondenserCWFlow
9 9 9 9 9
Flow/condenser,mt/hr 7,354 7,053 7,099 7,534 7,182
Flow/condenser,lbs/hr 16,213,069 15,549,705 15,649,353 16,609,456 15,833,437
Flow/condenser,gpm 32,426 31,099 31,299 33,219 31,667
o
T,( F)* 13.50 14.94 13.50 13.50 14.94
TemperatureInlet,(oF)* 81.5 81.5 81.5
TemperatureOutlet,(oF)* 95.0 95.0 95.0
Qcw/condenserbyCWFlow,
218 232 211 224 237
(MMBtu/hr)
Qcw/condeserbySTHMB,
209 N/A N/A N/A N/A
(MMBtu/hr)

*Forcases10and7,onlyCWTaregiven,nodataonCWinletoroutlettemperatures.
2.6 HEAT RECOVERY STEAM GENERATOR (HRSG)
In the NGCC plant, the hot flue gas from the gas turbine exhaust flows through the HRSG to
recover additional heat by steam generation before discharging to the stack or to the PCC when
CO2 capture is implemented. The operating conditions of the HRSG steam evaporators for the
Poza Rica NGCC plant are shown in Table 2-9. Saturated steam at three pressure levels (HP,
IP, and LP) are produced in the HRSG for the steam turbines.
Appendix C
Table 2-9 HRSG Steam Evaporator Design Parameters
Reference Reference 3. Case 1

Steam Turbine Siemens
(3x27 MWe nominal)
HRSG Steam Conditions, (references 3)
From steam evaporators
HP Steam, bara/oC (psia/F) 90.02/303.3 (1,305/578)
o
IP Steam, bara/ C (psia/F) 14.59/197.2 (212/387)
o
LP Steam, bara/ C (psia/F) 5.97/158.9 (86.5/318)
Boiler BD, % 3
Deaerator Operating Pressure, bara (psia) 5.97 (86.5)
BFW Supply Temperature, oC (oF) 44.4 (112)
The saturated steam from the evaporators are superheated in the HRSG and then distributed to
the three steam turbines for power production. The superheated steam conditions were
previously shown in Table 2-6.
Figure 2-7 is a pictorial of the HRSG unit. Figure 2-8 is a schematic of the HRSG showing the
external and internal major components of the HRSG unit
Appendix C
Figure 2-7 Picture of the Poza Rica HRSG unit
Figure 2-8 Component Details of the Poza Rica HRSG unit
Appendix C
2.7 ESTIMATED HEAT AND MATERIAL BALANCE FOR EXISTING NGCC OPERATION
Due to the slight difference in ambient temperatures (94.6 oF vs. 90 oF) and relative humidity
(54% vs. 57%) between the 2003 GT design specifications vs. this studys design basis as
discussed in Sections 2.4 through 2.6, a preliminary heat and material balance (H&MB) for the
existing Poza Rica 100% load Design Guarantee Case 1 operation is carried out to verify the
validity of the assumptions. Results from the H&MB are summarized in Figure 2-9 together
with the corresponding Case 1 values from CFE (reference 3) for comparison. As shown, the
calculated value as fairly consistent with the CFE values. Final H&MB for the 100% and
turndown operations will be determined by the Thermo-Flow simulation model.
Appendix C
Figure 2-9 NGCC Process Flow Diagram
POWER BALANCES:
G104 A/B MW
CW Pump Generation:
704 CW Return
701 34 Numbers in Black are Calculated Values. Stm Turb Gen 80.3
Total Gen 243.2
RFI RFI Calc RFI Flue G. 246
Natural Filtered GT Emission
Gas Amb Air Exhaust Specificat'n CW Supply
Mol Wt Vol % Vol % Vol % Vol% Wet
N2 28.01 1.01 75.99 73.26 73.15 G102 A/B
O2 32.00 0.00 20.39 12.32 12.17 One of Three Identical STG Units Surf Cond Pump
G103 A/B
CO2 44.01 0.81 0.03 3.81 3.756 654,453 DMW Pump
Argon 39.95 0.00 0.92 0.89 0.8809 7.4 Wt% Cond 652,288 lbs/hr
H2S 34.08 0.0330 0.00 0.00 1.29 1.29 psia 1.3 psia
Demin
CH4 16.04 89.97 0.00 0.00 110 110 oF 110 oF 4,606 lbs/hr
Water
C2H6 30.07 6.65 0.00 0.00 202.1 psia 52
Tank
C3H8 44.10 1.04 0.00 0.00 51 60 oF
iC4 58.12 0.22 0.00 0.00
nC4 58.12 0.20 0.00 0.00 E102
C5's 72.15 0.08 0.00 0.00 Surface
C6's 86.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 HRSG-1
Condenser
SO2 64.06 0.00 0.00 0.0011 579,965 Lbs/Hr 579,961
Steam 18.02 0.00 2.67 9.72 10.04 1 1172. psia 1172 207.5 MMBtu/Hr
Total Vol % 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00% 976. deg F 976 208.6 200 lbs/hr
Total MPH 4,355 121,261 125,840 87 psia
o
Total LB/Hr 77,694 3,477,073 3,554,768 318 F
110. deg F
Turb Eff = 80. % Theor Stm Rate 27.3 MW Gross
NGCC D esign Ba sis: (0.5) MW Gen Loss
and gross output of 162.8 MW are from HRSG Case 1 Specifications. 26.7
25
3. Items 1 and 2 are then used to back-calculated the GT natural gas (NG) and air flows, and the GT isentropic efficiency. 312.1 deg F
4. HRSG steam & condensate flows are estimated from HRSG Case 1 heat and material balance (H&MB). HRSG-1 HRSG-1
A 0.5% heat loss is included in the H&MB. 31,240 Lb/H 31,245 31,245 31,240 Lb/Hr 1,826 Lbs/Hr
5. Steam drum blowdowns are assumed to be 1% of steam generation. Deaerator vent is assumed to be 200 lb/hr. 12 78 psia 78 88.7 89 psia 87 psia
6. Steam turbine (ST) efficiency is back-calculated to match HRSG Case 1 ST output of 26.7 MW for each of the three ST generators (STG). 358 deg F 358 319 319 deg F 318 deg F
Generator power loss is assmed to be 2%.
Natural gas and ambient air composition are taken from Request For Information (RFI) table filled by CFE. Exhaust composition are calculated. 19 22
7. HRSG-1 39
43,254 43,254 Lbs/Hr C103
201 201 psia LP Stm Drum
570 570 deg F
/ Dearator
656,894 Lbs/Hr
110 deg F
HRSG-1
579,961 579,965 Lbs/Hr
1305 psia 623,215 32
578 deg F 629,451 Lb/Hr
87 psia
318 deg F
319
24
C105
6 C101 BD Flash
HP BD 23 Drum
HP Steam Drum
5,800 Lbs/Hr
37 1305 psia
578 deg F
1,556 2003 GT Des Spec Sht 43,254 MP BD

1,595 MMBtu(LHV)/Hr 7 43,254 Lbs/Hr 433 Lbs/Hr 4,4 lbs/hr
78,571 lb/hr Siemen SU Diag
15 212 psia 212 psia 45 87 psia
77,694 lbs/hr 387 deg F 387 deg F 318 deg F
BD To WWT
474.7 psia 701 579,961
38
77 oF 585,764 Lbs/Hr G102 A/B
GT Nat Gas
1305 psia C102 MP BFW 3,554,768 Lbs/Hr
578 deg F MP Steam Drum Pumps 14.7 psia
579 195.1 195.1 deg F
20 Flue Gas
3,477,073 lb/hr @ Actual Amb T 9,570 2003 GT Des Spec 34
14.7 psia Amb Pressure 14.5 psia Inlet Pressure N/A HRSG-1 Spec
89.6 oF Amb Temp o DesuperHt 26
89.6 F GT Combustor 9,792 Btu/kW-Hr GT Heat Rate 17 18
57.0 % RH 43,254 HRSG
Ambient Air 43,687 Lbs/Hr Flue Gas RFI
G101 A/B
704 232 psia 229 psia 0 lbs/hr 212 psia Mol Wt MPH Mol% Wet Mol% Dry Mol% Wet
HP BFW
787 deg F 2229 deg F GT Generator 377 deg F Pumps N2 28.01 92,188 73.26% 81.15% 73.15
AC Inlet
Filter 162.9 MW 372 O2 32.00 15,504 12.32% 13.65% 12.17
162.8 HRSG-1
8 V-101 CO2 44.01 4,793 3.81% 4.22% 3.756
K101 2
Air Comp 162.5 2003 Des
Stack Argon 39.95 1,121 0.89% 0.99% 0.8809
Gas Turbine 13 29 30 Steam 18.016 12,232 9.72% 10.04
9
Polytropic Eff =93.5% Isentropic Eff = 85.3 % ------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------
Total MPH 125,838 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Per HRSG-1 721
3,554,734 3,554,768 lbs/hr
4 5 718 CO
SCR
15.14 15.39 psia 874 Cat
Syst
1,141
o
1,141 F 878 Syst MP SH1 MP EVAP
33 4.6 MM (Abs) 37 MM (Abs) MP ECON HR SG_01D_ 1141
HP EVAP 4.65 37 2.7 MM (Abs)
HP SH3 HP SH2 HP SH1
558 F 377 F
LP SH LP EVAP MU WATER
1141 F 344.9 MM (Abs) 559 585,764 373 2.38 PREHTR 0 8/19/2015 Design Basis Preparation RC
35.4 MM (Abs) 60.2 MM (Abs) 81.5 MM (Abs) 343.5 579,961 .75 MM (Abs) 28 MM (Abs) Rev. Date Revision BY
35.6 60.8 81.7 HP ECON 1 HP ECON 2 HP ECON 3 0.75 32.2 134 MM (Abs) Nexant, Inc.
20.0% 34.1% 45.9% 15 MM (Abs) 123 MM (Abs) 36.3 MM (Abs) 132.6 San Francisco, California
15.7 123 34 World Bank Mexican NGCC PCC Study
Calc Flue Gas Temp --> 1106 F 1046 F 964 F 608 F 591 F 587 F 455 F 416 F 373 F 373 F 342 F 195.1 F
HRSG-1 Flue Gas Temp --> 1105 1045 963 609 592 587 456 416 377 376 343 195.1 POZA RICA NGCC Plant Operating Data
HP Econ 2 & 3 Bypass 0 Poza Rica HRSG Design Case (HRSG Case 1) : 32 C Amb T & 57% RH
11 0 1xW501F with 3,554,670 Lb/Hr 1141 F Flue Gas at 90 F Amb T & 57% RH
908.3 MMBtu/Hr (Flue Gas Cooling) Total
Appendix C
2.8 COOLING WATER & COOLING TOWER

2.8.1 Cooling Water
Cooling water (CW) for condenser and PCC cooling is available from the cooling tower at the
following B/L conditions:
Maximum Supply Temperature, oC (oF) 27.5 (81.5)
Maximum Return Temperature, oC (oF) 35 (95)
Maximum Supply Pressure, bara (psia) 5.51 (80)
Minimum Return Pressure, bara (psia) 2.76(40)
CW supply pressure of 80 psia is based on the following assumptions:
Return pressure of 30 psia at grade at the cooling tower
10 psi for supply header pressure drop at the NGCC plant
30 psi PCC exchanger pressure drop
10 psi PCC return header drop
2.8.2 Cooling Tower

The Poza Rica NGCC power plant utilizes three mechanical draft and evaporative recirculating
wet cooling towers. Each tower consists of three cooling cells.
The cooling tower data sheet from reference 20 provided the following design conditions for the
cooling towers:
Barometric Pressure 14.69 psia
Ambient air wet bulb temperature - 23.7 oC (74.6 F).
Ambient air dry bulb temperature - 32.1 oC (89.7 F)
Cooling tower exit air wet bulb temperature - 32.4 oC (90.4F).
The maximum cooling water supply temperature is 27.5 oC (81.5F)
Water circulation 11,000 gpm/cell (33,000 gpm/tower)
Cooling Tower Design Duty 295.5 MMBtu/hr
Estimated CW return temperature at CT design duty operation is 37.5 oC (99.5F) based on 27.5
o
C (81.5F) CW supply temperature and 33,000 gpm circulations per CT.
Reference 1 from CFE provided additional design data on the cooling towers:
Cycles of concentration 4 to 5 (This study will use 5 cycles of concentration)
Appendix C
Water circulation 6,600 gpm/cell. It is assumed that the water circulation rate of
6,600 gpm is the capacity for one CW circulation pump. Two pumps are needed per
cell. Five pumps are operating plus one spare to achieve the 33,000 gpm circulation
rate for each CT.
The estimated cooling tower duty using the 11,000 gpm/cell cooling water circulation and an
assumed T of 13.5 F (95F 81.5 F) is 74.3 MMBtu/hr/cell. Each 3-cell cooling tower
would have a total duty of 3 x 74.3 = 222.9 MMBtu/hr. This duty is consistent with the steam
condenser duties estimated for the five ambient condition cases shown in reference 9. Table 2-8
summarizes the estimated duties for the five ambient condition cases.
2.9 WATER SUPPLY AND WASTE WATER
Makeup Water
The raw water supply is from a Canal de Llamada. Raw water treatment systems include
filtration, activated carbon, deionization and reverses osmosis (reference 1). Makeups for
potable, process, and de-ionized (DI) water are drawn from these water treatment units.
Process Wastewater (to be confirmed)

Water associated with NGCC process and storm water that contacts equipment surfaces is
collected and treated for discharge through a permitted discharge.
Sanitary Waste Disposal (to be confirmed)

Design includes a packaged domestic sewage treatment plant with effluent discharged to the
industrial wastewater treatment system. Sludge is hauled off site.
Water Discharge (to be confirmed)

Most of the process wastewater is recycled to the cooling tower basin. Blowdown is treated for
chloride and metals, and discharged.
2.10 BALANCE OF PLANT
Table 2-10 shows the plant distribution voltages available for the Poza Rica NGCC plant
Appendix C
Table 2-10 Plant Distribution Voltages
Plant Distribution Voltage

Motors below 1 hp 110/220 volt
Motors 250 hp and below 480 volt
Motors above 250 hp 4,160 volt
Motors above 5,000 hp 13,800 volt
Steam turbine generators 24,000 volt
Grid interconnection voltage 345 kV
2.11 NGCC PLANT PARASITIC LOADS

The NGCC plant parasitic loads, as estimated by Nexant based on the assumptions stated below,
are shown in Table 2-11.
Table 2-11 NGCC Plant Parasitic Loads
NGCC Plant Parasitic Load kW

Existing HP & IP BFW Pumps 1,047
Existing Condensate & Hot Cond Recycle Pumps 101
Existing Raw Water & Filtered Water Pumps 159
Existing Cooling Water Pumps 3,626
Existing Cooling Tower Fans 1,350
Transformer Loss Allowance 730
Miscellaneous Existing NGCC Loss Allowance 200
Total Existing Parasitic Load 7,213
In Nexants estimates of the parasitic loads, the following assumptions were made:
For pumps:
o 10% design flow contingency

o 65% pump efficiency
o 95% pump driver efficiency
For boiler feed water pumps:
o Assume 5% blowdown rate
Appendix C
For cooling towers:
o Assume 150 kW per cooling tower fan

o 1 fan per cooling tower cell
o 3 cells per cooling tower
o Total 3 existing cooling tower
2.12 ENVIRONMENTAL EMISSIONS REQUIREMENTS

The assumed emissions limits for the reference NGCC power plant are listed below in Table 2-
12.
Table 2-12 Environmental Targets
Pollutant NOM-085-
SEMARNAT Limit
(Mexico)
NOx 110 mole/mole
(ppmV)
SO2 N/A
Particulate Matter (PM) N/A
VOC 0.0025lb/MMBtu
(EPA Boiler Spec)
Additional requirements are as follows:

1. Wastewater discharge is assumed to meet the minimum U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (U.S. EPA) Effluent Guidelines and Standards.
1.1. Allowable flow rate [site-specific]
1.2. TDS < 30 mg/l daily avg, < 100.0 mg/l for any one day
1.3. pH 6.0-9.0
1.4. Amine Content [site-specific]
1.5. Temperature [site-specific]
2.13 PROCESS SCREENING METHODOLOGY AND BASIS (LATER)

Process screening basis include:
Commercial experience, especially on NGCC derived flue gas
Pressure and temperature of operation
Appendix C
% CO2 captured
Chemical compatibility of treating systems with the feed gas
Process complexity
Relative capital cost and utility requirements
Environmental concerns
2.14 PCC PROCESS ECONOMIC EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND BASIS

The PCC process economic evaluation shall be based on a capital cost plus 7 year operating cost
basis. This method is used to rank the relative economics of the PCC processes. The various
technologies are ranked based on the sum of their capital costs and 7 years worth of operating
costs. The process that incurs the least total cost is considered the most economical.
2.14.1 Cost Estimation

For each selected PCC process, the capital and operating costs are developed as follows:
PCC capital/operating cost
- licensor will develop capital costs and operating costs
- If licensor does not provide costs, the following options can be used depending on
available process details:
Only heat and material balance is available size and cost equipment to
determine the major equipment cost. Previous quotes for similar equipment
can be used to factor and escalate equipment cost. Bulk material and labor cost
are factored and added to the equipment cost to come up with the total direct
cost. Indirect cost is factored from the total direct labor cost. The sum of the
total direct cost and the indirect cost is the total field cost. Add licensor
support and home office costs to arrive at the total installed cost.
Equipment sizes are available - estimate the total installed cost as previously
described. No equipment sizing is required. For costs of NGCC mods and
interconnecting piping, Nexant will develop costs based on NGCC/PCC
interface (fans and additional cooling if required) and interconnecting piping
requirements.
Operating Cost
- Electrical Cost, $kW-hr
- LP Steam Cost, $/lb
Appendix C
- Condensate Worth $/Mlb
- Cooling Water Cost, $/Mgal
- CW Duty Cost, $/MMBtu/hr
- Makeup Raw Water Cost, $/Mlb
- Export Process Water Worth, $/Mlb
- Makeup Solvent Cost, $/lb
- Reclaiming Chemical Cost, $/lb solvent
- Reclaimer Waste Disposal Allowance, $/lb solvent
Contingencies
- Appropriate project and process contingencies will be added to the licensors

provided capital costs to arrive at the total installed cost
- Process contingencies will be adjusted depending on various factors such as PCC

technology readiness, number of existing plants, technology maturity, scale-up risk,
and health, safety and environmental risks
- Project contingencies will be adjusted depending on various factors such as overall

vendor capabilities, vendors commitment to work with CFE and the World Bank,
and the vendor companys overall profile and size.
Appendix C
3. PCC PLANT DESIGN BASIS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The objective of the pre-feasibility study is to evaluate and recommend the most commercially
available technology for retrofitting the Poza Rica NGCC power plant located in Veracruz,
Mexico for post-combustion CO2 capture (PCC) and CO2 sequestration via EOR. The location
of the Poza Rica NGCC plant is shown in Figure 3-1.
Figure 3-1 Location of Poza Rica NGCC Plant Site
Poza Rica
NGCC power
plant
The Poza Rica NGCC plant is a retrofitted plant. It includes one natural gas fired
Siemens/Westinghouse model W501F gas turbine (GT) producing a nominal 163 MWe of
electricity. It is equipped with a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) to recover waste heat
Appendix C
from the GT exhaust and generate superheated steam feeding three 27 MWe steam turbines to
produce additional power. The power plants total generating capacity is 243 MWe nominal.
The PCC plant will be designed as an add-on to the Poza Rica NGCC power plant to recover
85% of the CO2 in the NGCC flue gas. New process/utilities tie-ins and retrofit to the NGCC
power plant will be added as required. Projected largest-single train size equipment will be used
to maximize economy-of-scale. Vessels exceeding transportation size limits will be field
fabricated. Equipment is designed for a 30-year plant life. Rotating equipment critical to the
continuous plant operation are spared to support the high availability required of the NGCC
operations. Where sparing is not feasible, alternate PCC operation will be identified to maintain
continuous NGCC power plant operation.
Figure 2-2 shows the interface between the Existing NGCC power plant and the add-on PCC and
CO2 compression/dehydration plants.
Appendix C
Figure 3-2 Poza Rica NGCC Flow Configuration (With-PCC and CO2 Compression/Dehydration)
CO2 Compressed
Purification CO2 toEOR
POZARICANGCCPlant Vent Pipeline
CoolingWaterReturn
Natural CO2 Compression&

Gas SteamCondensateReturn Dehydration
W501FGas
Turbine
160MWe
Cooling Water ToInterstage
Air Nominal
Cooling
LPSteam
ToCO2
Compression
IPSteam
HPSHSteam
BFW Power
CO2
IPSH Steam Compression
HearRecovery Condensate
Steam
Generator Return
(HRSG) LPSHSteam
SiemensSteam SiemensSteam Treated

SiemensSteam
TurbineNo.1 TurbineNo.2 TurbineNo.3 FlueGasVent
(27MWeNominal) (27MWeNominal) (27MWeNominal)
PCCPlant
Condensate
CO2
NNF
SolidWaste
louvers
(added)
CO2 Solvent WasteWater
Absorber Regen
eration
LPSteam
FGFans
Stack
Appendix C
3.2 SITE RELATED CONDITIONS
Table 3-1 Site Condition
Location Poza Rica, Veracruz, Mexico

Elevation, feet above sea level 164
Topography Level
Seismic Zone 0
Size, acres TBD
Transportation Road and Rail
Water From Canal de Llamada
Access Access by road and rail
CO2 Specification 85% recovery and compressed to 2,215 psia for
Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR). (Study scope limited to
delivery at compression system battery limit only)
3.3 METEOROLOGICAL DATA

Design ambient air conditions are:
Table 3-2 Meteorological Data
Description Summer
Design
Barometric Pressure, bara 1.013
(psia) (14.69)
Dry Bulb, oC (F) 32 oC
(90 oF)
Wet Bulb, oC (F) 25.3 oC
(77.5 F)
Relative Humidity, % 57%
3.4 PCC FEED AND PRODUCT PROPERTIES

3.4.1 PCC Feed (Flue Gas) Properties
Flue gas from the Poza Rica NGCC power plant HRSG outlet is routed through a blower to
boost its pressure before delivering to the new PCC plant. The estimated PCC flue gas feed
composition and flow rate for163 MWe gas turbine gross outputs operating at 32 oC (90 oF)
ambient temperature and 57% relative humidity are shown in Table 3-3 below:
Appendix C
Table 3-3 Poza Rica NGCC Flue Gas Composition and Flow Rate
PCC Design Flue Gas composition, mole %

CO2 3.81
O2 12.32
N2 73.26
Ar 0.89
H2O 9.72
SO2 11 ppmV
NOx 60 ppmV
Total 100.00
Conditions:
Pressure at PCC B/L, bara (psia) 1.15 (16.7)
o o
Temperature at PCC B/L, C ( F) 107.8 (226)
Flow, kg/s (lbs/hr) 447.9 (3,554,770)
Lbmols/hr 125,838
The flue gas composition and conditions shown are from the NGCC HRSG outlet after boosted
through the new blower and delivered at the PCC battery limit. Any additional flue gas
conditioning required by the PCC licensor such as feed temperature, sulfur and moisture control
to meet PCC process requirements, are to be provided by the PCC licensor. If small additional
feed pressure is needed (less than 0.5 psi), licensor is to notify Nexant to adjust the new blower
head to provide the additional pressure.
For the purpose of absorbent or solvent degradation estimation, the NOx concentration shown
can be assumed to compose of 95% NO and 5% NO2
3.4.2 Recovered CO2 Properties

Recovered CO2 from the PCC unit will be sent to a separate CO2 compression unit where it is
compressed and dehydrated before being delivered to the retrofitted NGCC/PCC plant battery
limit for EOR applications. CO2 gas pipeline specifications shown below in Table 3-4 are based
on US NETL/DOE EOR specifications.
PCC plant CO2 product is expected to meet all specifications in Table 3-4 except for H2O
content, pressure and temperature. These will be adjusted in the external CO2 compression unit.
Appendix C
Table 3-4 Recovered CO2 Properties
Product CO2 Specification (for EOR, NETL/DOE)
CO2 95.0 wt% (min)

N2 1.0 vol% (max)
O2 100 ppmV (max)
H2O* 800 ppmV (max)
Ar 1.0 vol% (max)
CH4 1.0 vol% (max)
CO 35 ppmV (max)
H2 1.0 vol% (max)
Pressure, bara (psia)* 152.8 (2215)
Temperature, oC (oF)* 37.8 (100)
* The H2O content and the recovered CO2 pressure and temperature shown in table 3-4 are at the
exit of the CO2 compression/dehydration unit.
3.4.3 Exhaust Gas Disposition

Treated flue gas will be vented to the atmosphere from the PCC unit after CO2 capture. The new
PCC vent point is to be at least 45 meter (148 feet) above grade.
Treated flue gas may contain trace amount of amine and other degradation products depending
on the type of solvent for the PCC process. PCC plant design is to include hydrocarbon
contaminant removal facilities to ensure that flue gas exhaust meets project VOC emission limits
as specified under the Environmental/Emissions Requirements.
3.5 PCC UTILTY REQUIREMENTS

3.5.1 NGCC Power Plant Steam Pressure Levels
Table 3-5 shows the conditions of the steam generation levels in the existing NGCC power plant
HRSG unit.
Appendix C
Table 3-5 NGCC Power Plant Steam Conditions
Case Design
Power Plant Type NGCC
Steam Turbine Siemens
(3x27 MWe nominal)
HRSG Saturated Steam Conditions
From HRSG Evaporators
o
o
LP Steam, bara/ C (psia/F) 5.97/158.9 (86.5/318)
Deaerator Operating Pressure, bara (psia) 6.11(88.6)
BFW Supply Temperature, oC (oF) 159.4(318)
Superheated Steam to STG
o
o
LP Steam, bara/ C (psia/F) 4.76/177.8 (69/352)
Condenser Pressure, psia (range) 1.3 (0.8 to 1.3)
3.5.2 Low Pressure Steam

Low pressure (LP) steam conditions from the NGCC plant are shown in Table 3-5. Availability
of LP steam from the existing HRSG/steam turbine system is limited. PCC licensor is to specify
the LP steam requirements (quantity and battery limit conditions such as pressure and
temperature) for their specific process requirements. Nexant will be responsible to supply the
required LP steam flow at the required conditions.
For intermittent usages, licensor is to specify flow rate, flow duration, and frequency of usages.
3.5.3 Intermediate Pressure (IP) Steam

Intermediate pressure (IP) steam conditions from the NGCC plant are shown in table 3-5.
Availability of IP steam from the existing HRSG/steam turbine system is limited. PCC licensor
is to specify the IP steam requirements (quantity and battery limit conditions such as pressure
and temperature) for their specific process requirements. Nexant will be responsible to supply
the required IP steam flow at the required conditions.
For intermittent usages, licensor is to specify flow rate, flow duration, and frequency of usages.
3.5.4 Steam Condensate Return

Reboiler and reclaimer steam condensate will be pumped back to the power plant hot at the
following PCC B/L conditions:
Appendix C
Min Pressure, bara (psia) 8.97(130)**

Temperature, oC (oF) Hot
** Based on deaerator pressure of 89 psia + 40 psi P allowance for head and line drops
3.5.5 Cooling Water

Cooling water (CW) for PCC cooling is available from the power plant at the following PCC B/L
conditions:
Maximum Supply Temperature, oC (oF) 27.5 (81.5)
o o
Maximum Return Temperature, C ( F) 35 (95)
Maximum Supply Pressure, bara (psia) 5.51 (80) ***
Minimum Return Pressure, bara (psia) 2.76 (40) ***
*** CW supply pressure of 80 psia is based on the following assumptions:
Return pressure of 30 psia at grade at the cooling tower
10 psi for supply header pressure drop at the NGCC plant
30 psi PCC exchanger pressure drop
10 psi PCC return header drop
Nexant will provide additional CW booster pump if needed.
3.5.6 Process Water

Process water for water wash and solvent reclamation is available from the NGCC plant steam
condensate system to the PCC B/L at 110 oF and 177psig. PCC licensor to specify the quantity
required
3.5.7 Instrument Air

Instrument air is available from the NGCC power plant instrument air receiver (compressed and
dried) with the following PCC B/L conditions:
Maximum Supply Pressure, bara (psia) 7.24 (105)
Maximum Supply Temperature, oC (oF) 37.8 (100)
Maximum Dew Point, oC (oF) -40 (-40)
3.6 PROCESS WASTE STREAMS

3.6.1 Process Condensate
The PCC plant should be designed to minimize purging of solvent-containing process
condensates. Any solvent-containing process condensate should be recycled within PCC as
Appendix C
makeup water for replacement solvent solutions. Non-solvent containing purge water will be
used for Cooling Tower makeup.
3.6.2 Reclaimer Byproducts

Amine based PCC plant sometimes produces a sludge byproduct from the amine reclaimer. This
material is considered hazardous, and is assumed to be trucked offsite for incineration by third
party. Allowance for the cost of reclaiming waste disposal should be provided.
3.7 ENVIRONMENTAL/EMISSIONS REQUIREMENTS

The assumed emissions limits for the reference NGCC power plant are listed below:
Table 3-6 Environmental Targets
Pollutant NOM-085-
SEMARNAT Limit
(Mexico)
NOx 110 mole/mole
(ppmV)
SO2 N/A
Particulate Matter (PM) N/A
VOC 0.0025lb/MMBtu
(EPA limits for PC
Boilers)
Additional requirements are as follows:

Wastewater discharge is assumed to comply with the minimum requirements per U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Effluent Guidelines and Standards.
Allowable flow rate [site-specific]
TDS < 30 mg/l daily avg, < 100.0 mg/l for any one day
pH 6.0-9.0
Amine Content [site-specific]
Temperature [site-specific]
3.8 PCC PLOT AREA REQUIREMENTS

Except for green-field plants, plot space for PCC retrofits tends to be a trial-&-error
exercise. From previous studies for PC power plant retrofits, there is seldom any plot space large
enough to fit the very large PCC in one place. It is normally necessary to break the PCC into
several pieces and try to insert them into different locations to fit. An aerial view of the Poza
Appendix C
Rica NGCC plant is shown in Figure 3-3. The new PCC unit will be located within the boundary
limit of the NGCC plant. Overall plot plan layout will be carryout by Nexant based on PCC
areas specified by licensors. Typical overall plant layout criteria are as followed:
3.8.1 Flue Gas Handling Area (FGHA)

Flue gas handling area includes equipment such as feed cooler, absorber, booster fans and treated
gas vent stacks. These are to be located close to each other with the entire area being located as
close as possible to the flue gas supply source. This is to minimize the power consumption
needed to overcome pressure drop associated with moving the very large amount of low pressure
flue gas, as well as minimize the cost for large ducting and pipe-racks.
3.8.2 Regeneration Area (RA)

Regeneration area includes equipment such as the regenerator (or stripper), overhead condenser,
reflux drum, rich/lean exchangers, lean solution coolers, reboilers, and reclaiming systems.
These are linked to the FGHA through rich and lean solution liquid lines. Since pumping power
is relatively low with liquid piping being relatively inexpensive, the RA can be located away
from the FGHA with small penalty on overall performance and cost. The RA does need to be
located close to the offsite CO2 compression unit if the PCC CO2 is produced at low pressure.
This is to minimize the CO2 compression power consumption and cost by maximize suction
pressure to the first stage CO2 compressor.
3.8.3 Solution Storage Area (SSA)

Most PCC process includes some relatively large solution tanks for storing plant liquid inventory
during shutdowns when vessels need to be entered. The SSA is linked to the FGHA and RA
through liquid lines so the SSA can be located remotely away from both the FGHA and RA with
small penalty on overall performance and cost.
The licensor is to provide the PCC plot area requirements for the FGHA, RA, and SSA
separately to allow placement of these sections into available areas within the NGCC power
plant.
Appendix C
Figure 3-3 Poza Rica NGCC Aerial View
Appendix C
3.9 ESTIMATED FULL SIZE PCC CAPITAL COST

Licensor is to provide estimated installed capital cost for the full size PCC based on mid-2015
cost for Veracruz Mexico location. Licensor can provide alternate cost time frame and location
if desired, but need to specify time and location used. Cost should be reported as material cost
plus labor cost if possible. Also, licensor is to indicate if large vessels are shop-fabricated or
field-fabricated.
Licensor to indicate % other allowances included such as that for insurance/license/royalty, start-
up, home/office engineering, and contingency.
Licensor is to identify approximate cost accuracy (+/- %).
3.10 OVERLAND TRANSPORTATION SIZE LIMITATIONS (TO BE CONFIRMED BY CFE)

The Poza Rica plant site is listed to be landlocked with access by train and highway only.
Maximum overland highway transportable dimension is assumed to be 100 feet long by 12 feet
wide by 15 feet height (including carriage height). Maximum equipment height is 13.5 feet
assuming using 1.5 feet height low boy carriage. Maximum overland highway transportable
weight is 65 tons.
Maximum railway transportable dimension is assumed to be 100 feet long by 12 feet wide by 19
feet height (including railcar height). Maximum equipment height is 15 feet assuming using 4
feet height railcar. Maximum railway transportable weight is assumed to be 130 tons.
PCC licensor is to provide estimated dimension for large shop fabricated vessels such as
absorber and regenerator to allow preliminary assessment of transportation cost allowances.
Appendix C
4. REFERENCES
Received 7-21-2015;
1. BANCO MUNDIAL rev 2 Partially completed data collection request

2. ANEXO 1 Filosofia de Operacion de Planta Plant Operating Philosophy
3. ANEXO 2 Balances Termicos-Casos y Diagrama de Flujo HRSG Heat and Material
Balance
4. ANEXO 3 Filosofia de Operacion Turbinas de Vapor Steam Turbine Operating
Philosophy
Received 7-24-2015;
5. Caracteristicas del Gas Natural Gas Composition and Properties

6. Emisiones de Gases UTG Atmospheric Emission Data
7. Plano General Poza Rica Plot Plan for POZA RICA
8. Balance Termico Propuesta Roma POZA RICA Cogen Heat Balance
9. Diagrama de Fujo Proyecto RM Poza Rica POZA RICA RM Project Flow Diagram
Received 8-3-2015;
10. CURVA DE ARRANQUE TG 163 MW Startup Curve for 163 MW Siemens

Westinghouse gas turbine
11. TOMA DE CARGA TG 163 MW- Load Curve of 163 MW Siemens Westinghouse
Gas Turbine
12. CURVA DE PARO TG 163 MW - Shutdown Curve of 163 MW Siemens
Westinghouse Gas Turbine
13. 216-AE-E-61-PL-0017.dwg - Electrical Single Line & Plot Plan POZA RICA
14. 216-AE-T-11-PL-0001_ARREGLO GENERAL DE LA PLANTA_6.dwg General
Plant Arrangement Drawing (Plot Plan)
15. Corte longitudinal 501FD 501 FD Gas Turbine Cut Out Diagram
16. CURVAS DE CORRECCION TURBOGAS TUXPAN- Correction Curves for Gas
Turbine at Tuxpan
17. Datos Condensador Condenser Design Data
18. Datos de garanta turbogas Tuxpan 501FD Econo Pac Gas Turbine Performance
Guarantee Data
19. Datos y Eventos al incrementar Velocidad y Carga
20. Informacion Torre de Enfriamiento - Cooling Tower Information
21. Informe UTG Tuxpan may'11 Final - Testing to Determine the Corrected Raw Power
and Corrected Gross Heat Rate of Gas Turbine Unit 7 at Tuxpan
22. Parametros operativos turbogas CFE CFE Gas Turbine Operating Parameters
23. Parametros Turbogas CFE Tuxpan Tuxpan Gas Turbine Test Data
24. paramtros en pruebas de aceptacion turbogas TUXPAN - Parameters for Gas Turbine
Acceptance Tests TUXPAN
Appendix C
25. Reporte Pruebas TG Final Gas Turbine Final Test Report
Received 8-5-2015;
26. Curvas Turbinas de Vapor Poza Rica - Steam Turbine Curves for Poza Rica
27. CCC POZA RICA Curso HRSG AP, IP & LP _ Course in HRSG HP, IP and LP steam
Generation
28. CCC POZA RICA GVRC MOM_VOLUMEN 1- Poza Rica HRSG Operating and
Maintenance Manual
29. N71100-04_R.0 - Schematic Diagram of Safety Valves with Settings
30. volumenes de Liquido 3 sistemas - Approximation volumes of the amount of water
required for the hydrostatic test of HRSG.
Other Reference Documents;
31. G. McQuiggan, et al, "Westinghouse's Advance Turbine Systems Program",

Westinghouse Electric Corporation
32. 2004-05 GTW Handbook, p77
33. Siemens Gas Turbine SGT6-5000F Application Overview, Siemens, published 2008
34. J. Xia, et al, Siemens, "SGT6-5000F(W501F) Engine Enhancements to Improve
Operational Flexibility, Power-Gen International 2005 paper
35. NETL QGESS, "CO2 Impurity Design Parameters", Exhibit 2-1, DOE/NETL-
341/011212, January 2012
36. 2013 GTW Handbook, p76
Appendix E
APPENDIXE SUMMARYOFPCCLICENSORSQUESTIONNAIRERESPONSES
Appendix E
Alstom HTC Shell MHI Linde/BASF Fluor
1. Post-Combustion Carbon Capture

(PCC) Technology
1.1 Technology Name Alstom Advanced HTC Low Cost Design Shell Cansolv CO2 KM-CDR Process OASE blue Fluor Econamine
Amine Process (AAP) (LCDesignTM) Capture Technology (FG Plus )
(Dow Ucarsol FGC Integrated with Delta (Absorbent DC-201)
3000) Solvent Reclaimer
(DeltaSolv-2)
1.2 Technology Licensor Alstom Power HTC CO2 Systems Corp Shell Cansolv (Subsidiary of MHI BASF SE/Linde AG Fluor
Shell Projects &
Technologies)
1.3 Brief Description of PCC Technology Y Y Y Y Y Y
process chemistry/characteristics.
1.4 Simplified process flow diagram(s) Y Y Y Y Y Y
showing process configuration,
major equipment & systems.
1.5 Published articles on technology Y Y N Y Y Y
1.6 PCC Feed Definition/Products
Disposition and Battery Limit
Conditions:
1.6.1 Flue gas feed Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.6.2 Treated flue gas Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.6.3 CO2 product Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.7 Battery Limit (B/L) major stream Y Y Y Y Y Y
composition and material balance
1.8 Expected Material of construction:

1.8.1 Absorption vessels Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.8.2 Absorption vessel internals Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.8.3 Regeneration vessels Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.8.4 Regeneration vessel internals Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.8.5 Rich solution handling pipes, Y Y Y Y Y Y
1.8.6 Hot lean solution handling Y Y Y Y Y Y
pipes, pumps and heat
exchangers
1.8.7 Cold lean solution (specify Y Y Y Y Y Y
maximum allowable
temperature, oF) handling pipes,
1.8.8 Expected corrosion rate for Y N N N N N
rich solution services, mils/year
Appendix E

hot lean solution services, mils/yr
cold lean solution services,
mils/yr
2. Commercial Status
2.1 Approximate absorbent/solution
characteristics:
2.1.1 Aqueous or non-aqueous Y Y Y Y Y Y
solution?
2.1.2 Absorbent type? (Amine, salt, Y Y Y Y Y Y
others)
2.1.3 Solvent type if not water? Y Y Y Y Y Y
2.1.4 Typical solution strength, wt% Y Y Y N Y N
absorbent
2.1.5 Typical lean solution loading, N Y N N Y N
lbs of CO2 per gallon of lean
solution
2.1.6 Typical rich solution loading, N Y N N Y N
lbs of CO2 per gallon of rich
solution
2.1.7 Approximate lean solution N Y N N Y N
density, lbs/gallon
2.1.8 Approximate lean solution N Y N N Y N
viscosity, cp
2.1.9 Approximate rich solution N Y N N Y N
density, lbs/gallon
2.1.10 Approximate rich solution N Y N N Y N
viscosity, cp
2.1.11 Maximum operating Y Y N N Y Y
temperature to avoid excessive
degradation, oF
2.1.12 Typical reboiling duty, Btu/lb N Y N Y Y Y
of CO2 Recovered
2.2 For Natural Gas Combined Cycle

(NGCC) flue gas application:
2.2.1 Typical flue gas temperature at N Y N N Y Y
B/L, oF
Appendix E
2.2.2 Typical % CO2 recovery? N Y N Y Y Y

2.2.3 Typical lean solution loading, N Y N N Y N
solution
2.2.4 Typical rich solution loading, N Y N N Y N
lbs of CO2 per gallon of rich
solution
2.2.5 Typical lean solution N Y N Y Y N
temperature entering absorber
2.2.6 Typical rich solution N Y N Y Y N
temperature exiting absorber
2.2.7 Typical stripper/regenerator N Y N N Y Y
bottom temperature, oF
2.2.8 Typical reboiling duty, Btu/lb of N Y N Y Y Y
CO2 recovered
2.2.9 Optimum feed gas ppmV SOx N Y N Y Y Y
2.2.10 Maximum feed gas ppmV SOx N Y N Y Y Y
2.2.11 Typical degradation losses, lbs N Y N N N N
2.2.12 Typical degradation losses, lbs N N N N N N
2.2.13 Maximum feed gas O2 N Y N Y Y Y
content, vol%
2.2.14 Typical O2 degradation N Y N N N N
losses, lbs absorbent per lb O2 in
feed
2.2.15 Typical O2 degradation N N N N N N
losses, lbs solvent (if any) per lb
O2 in feed
2.2.16 Typical NOx degradation N Y N N N N
losses, lbs absorbent per lb NOx
in feed
2.2.17 Typical NOx degradation N N N N N N
NOx in feed
2.2.18 Typical solvent losses, lb per N N N N Y N
lb CO2 recovered
N N N N Y N
2.3 For coal-fired boiler flue gas
application:
2.3.1 Typical flue gas temperature at N N N Y Y Y
B/L, oF
Appendix E
2.3.2 Typical % CO2 recovery? N N N Y Y Y

2.3.3 Typical lean solution loading, N N N N Y N
solution
2.3.4 Typical rich solution loading, N N N N Y N
lbs CO2 per gallon of rich
solution
2.3.5 Typical lean solution N N N Y Y N
temperature entering absorber,
o
F
2.3.6 Typical rich solution N N N Y Y N
temperature exiting absorber, oF
2.3.7 Typical stripper/regenerator N N N N Y N
2.3.8 Typical reboiling duty, Btu/lb of N N N Y Y Y
CO2 recovered
2.3.9 Optimum feed gas ppmV SOx N N N Y Y N
2.3.10 Maximum feed gas ppmV SOx N N N Y Y N
2.3.13 Maximum feed gas O2 N N N Y Y N
content, vol%
losses, lbs absorbent per lb O2 in
feed
O2 in feed
losses, lbs absorbent per lb NOx
in feed
NOx in feed
2.3.18 Typical solvent losses, lb per N N N N Y N
lb CO2 recovered
2.4 # of Pilot Plant operating Y Y N Y Y Y

experiences
Appendix E
2.5 Largest Pilot Plant Experience:

2.5.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal, NG Y Y N Y Y N
or simulated)
2.5.2 Flue gas flow, MMSCFD (wet) Y Y N Y Y Y
2.5.3 Flue gas feed CO2/O2/H2O Y Y N Y Y Y
concentration, Vol%
2.5.4 CO2 recovery, % of feed CO2 Y Y N Y Y Y
2.5.5 B/L Flue gas feed temperature, Y Y N Y Y Y
o
F
2.5.6 Typical lean solution loading, Y Y N N N N
lbs CO2 per gallon of lean
solution
2.5.7 Typical rich solution loading, Y Y N N N N
solution
2.5.8 Typical lean solution Y Y N N Y N
o
F
2.5.9 Typical rich solution Y Y N N Y N
2.5.10 Typical stripper/regenerator Y Y N N Y N
2.5.11 Approximate reboiling duty, Y Y N N Y Y
2.5.12 Plant location Y Y N Y Y Y
2.5.13 Current plant status (operating Y Y N Y Y Y
or shutdown)
2.5.14 Possible plant visit? (Yes or Y Y N Y Y Y
No)
2.6 What is the smallest Pilot Plant size Y Y N Y Y Y

needed to generate reliable data for
scale up to full size Demo Plant, % of
full size Demo Plant capacity
2.7 Would you be interested to provide a Y Y N Y Y Y

detailed process design package in
case we wish to design the pilot plant
specifically for your technology?
(Terms will be negotiated at that time)
Appendix E
2.8 # of Demo Plant operating Y Y N Y Y N

experiences
2.9 Largest Demo Plant Experience:

2.9.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal or N Y N Y Y N
NG)
2.9.2 Flue gas flow, MMSCFD (wet) N Y N Y Y N
2.9.3 Flue gas feed CO2/O2/H2O N Y N Y Y N

concentration, Vol%
2.9.4 CO2 recovery, % of feed CO2 N Y N Y Y N
2.9.5 Typical lean solution loading, N Y N N N N

solution
2.9.6 Typical rich solution loading, N Y N N N N
solution
2.9.7 Typical lean solution N Y N N Y N
o
F
2.9.8 Typical rich solution N Y N N Y N
2.9.9 Typical stripper/regenerator N Y N N Y N
2.9.10 B/L Flue gas feed temperature, N Y N N Y N
o
F
2.9.11 Approximate reboiling duty, N Y N N Y N
2.9.12 Plant location N Y N Y Y N
2.9.13 Current status (operating or N Y N Y Y N

shutdown)
2.9.14 Possible plant visit? (Yes or N Y N Y Y N
No)
2.10 Front End Engineering Design Y Y Y Y Y Y

(FEED) Packages prepared
2.11 Largest FEED Package Prepared:

2.11.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal or Y Y Y Y Y Y
NG)
2.11.2 Flue gas flow, MMSCFD (wet) Y Y N Y Y Y
Appendix E
2.11.3 Flue gas feed CO2/O2/H2O Y Y N Y Y Y

concentration, Vol%
2.11.4 CO2 recovery, % of feed CO2 Y Y N Y Y Y
2.11.5 B/L Flue gas temperature, oF Y Y N Y Y Y

2.11.6 Typical lean solution loading, Y Y N N N N
solution
2.11.7 Typical rich solution loading, Y Y N N N N
solution
2.11.8 Typical lean solution Y Y N N Y N
o
F
2.11.9 Typical rich solution Y Y N N Y N
2.11.10 Typical Y Y N N Y N
stripper/regenerator bottom
temperature, oF
2.11.11 Approximate reboiling duty, Y Y N N Y Y
2.11.12 Plant Location Y Y Y N Y Y
2.11.13 Current status (on-going or Y Y Y Y Y Y

completed)
2.12 Number of Process Design Y Y Y Y Y Y

prepared
2.13 Largest PCC Plant Process

Design:
2.13.1 Flue gas fuel source (coal or Y N N Y Y N
NG)
2.13.2 Flue gas flow, MMSCFD (wet) Y N N Y Y N
2.13.3 Flue gas feed CO2/O2/H2O Y N N N Y N

concentration, Vol%
2.13.4 CO2 recovery, % of feed CO2 Y N N Y Y N
2.13.5 B/L Flue gas feed temperature, Y N N N Y N

o
F
2.13.6 Approximate reboiling duty, Y N N N Y N
2.13.7 Plant location Y N N Y Y N
Appendix E
2.13.8 Current status (on-going or Y N N Y Y N

completed)
3. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC

Design Flue Gas Feed
3.1 Flue gas composition and molar flow Y Y Y Y Y Y
rate at PCC battery limit (B/L)
3.2 Minimum B/L flue gas feed pressure, Y Y Y Y Y Y
psia
3.3 Maximum B/L flue gas feed Y Y Y Y Y Y
temperature, oF
4. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC CO2

Product Specification
4.1 Expected CO2 product composition or
molar flow rate at PCC B/L (before
CO2 Compression Unit)
4.1.1 Lbmoles/hr or vol% CO2 Y Y Y Y Y Y
4.1.2 Lbmoles/hr or vol% H2O (Note Y Y Y Y Y Y

4-1)
4.1.3 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV O2 Y Y N Y Y Y
4.1.4 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV NOx Y Y N Y N Y
4.1.5 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV SOx Y Y N Y N Y
4.1.6 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV Solvent Y Y N N N Y

(Note 4-1)
4.1.7 Lbmoles/hr or ppmV N2 + Ar Y Y N Y Y Y
4.2 Total lbmoles/hr Y Y Y Y Y Y

4.3 Expected pressure at PCC B/L, psia Y Y Y Y Y Y
4.4 Expected temperature at PCC B/L, Y Y Y Y Y Y

o
F
(Note 4-1) : Water and solvent will be recycled back to PCC
from CO2 Compression.
Appendix E
5. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC Utility

& Commodity Consumptions
5.1 Continuous low pressure (LP) reboiling Y Y Y Y Y Y
steam import, lbs/hr
5.1.1 Mininum B/L pressure, psia Y Y Y Y Y Y
o Y Y Y Y Y Y
5.1.2 Minimum B/L temperature, F
(no less than 10 oF above
saturation)
Y
5.2 Intermediate pressure (IP) steam Y Y Y Y Y Y
import, lbs/hr
5.2.1 Continuous or intermittent N N N N N Y
5.2.2 Frequency & duration if N N N N N Y

intermittent
5.2.3 Minimum B/L pressure, psia N N N N N Y
5.2.4 Minimum B/L temperature, oF N N N N N Y

(no less than 10 oF above
saturation)
5.3 Reboiling steam condensate return Y Y Y Y Y Y

flow, lbs/hr
5.3.1 B/L pressure, psia (not less Y Y N Y Y Y
than 130 psia)
5.3.2 B/L temperature, oF Y Y N Y Y Y
5.4 Process water import to PCC, lbs/hr Y N N Y Y Y

5.4.1 Quality required, filtered river Y N N N Y N
water or steam condensate
5.5 Cooling water (CW) at PCC B/L

5.5.1 CW Flow, lbs/hr Y Y Y N Y Y
5.5.2 CW Temperature to PCC, oF Y Y N N Y Y
5.5.3 CW Temperature from PCC, Y Y N N Y Y

o
F
Appendix E
5.6 PCC Power Consumption, kWe:

5.6.1 Flue Gas Blower(s), kWe per Y N N N N N
Blower
5.6.2 Spare Blower Y Y N Y Y Y
5.6.3 Rich Solution Pump(s), kWe Y N Y Y Y N
per pump
5.6.4 Spare Rich Solution Pump Y Y Y Y Y N
5.6.5 Lean Solution Pump(s), kWe Y N Y Y Y N

per pump
5.6.6 Spare Lean Solution Pump Y Y Y Y Y N
5.6.7 Other large motor (>200 kWe Y N Y Y Y Y

per motor) driven machine, kWe
5.6.8 Total PCC onsite continuous Y N Y Y Y Y
power consumption, kWe
5.7 PCC Instrument Air Demand, SCFM Y N N Y Y Y
5.8 Waste water export from PCC, lbs/hr Y Y Y Y Y Y

5.8.1 List of impurities and Y Y Y Y Y Y
concentration (wt%, ppmW, BOD
or COD)
6. Poza Rica NGCC Full-Size PCC Plot

Plan Area Requirement
6.1 Estimated plot plan dimensions for Y Y Y Y Y Y
absorption area, W (ft) x L (ft)
6.2 Estimated plot plan dimensions for Y N N Y Y Y
regeneration area, W (ft) x L (ft)
6.3 Estimated plot plan dimensions for Y N N Y N Y
solvent preparation & storage tank
area, W (ft) x L (ft)
6.4 Estimated plot plan dimensions for Y N N N N Y
trace contaminant removal system
and vent stack area, W (ft) x L (ft)
6.5 Other separately locatable process N N N N Y Y
or support system area, W (ft) x L (ft)
Appendix E

Operating Requirement
7.1 New PCC plant operator positions
required
7.1.1 # of control room PCC Y Y Y Y Y Y
operator position (24/7= 24
hours/day & 7 days/week per
position)
7.1.2 Outside operator position Y Y Y Y Y Y
(24/7)
7.1.3 Laboratory position (8/5 = 8 Y Y Y Y Y Y
hrs/day & 5 days/wk per
position)
7.1.4 Plant Engineering position Y Y Y Y Y Y
(8/5)
7.2 Absorbent makeup
7.2.1 Makeup rate, lbs absorbent Y Y N N Y Y
per lb CO2 recovered
7.2.2 Absorbent cost, $ per lb N Y N N Y Y
7.3 Solvent makeup:

7.3.1 Makeup rate, lbs solvent per lb Y N N N N Y
CO2 recovered
7.3.2 Solvent cost, $ per lb Y N N N N Y
7.4 Other chemical consumptions, name Y Y Y Y Y Y

& consumption rate (or total cost) per
lb CO2 recovered
7.5 Solid waste to offsite disposal:

7.5.1 Waste rate, lbs wet solids per Y N Y N N Y
lb CO2 recovered
7.5.2 Wt % Water N Y Y N N Y
7.5.3 Hazardous chemical? (Yes or Y Y N N N Y

No)
7.5.4 Disposal method (Land-fill, Y Y N N N Y
incineration, etc)
7.5.5 Expected disposal cost, $ per Y N N N N Y
lb dry solids
Appendix E

Estimated Capital Cost
8.1 Cost type (capacity factored from plant Y N N Y Y Y
cost curves or from major equipment
costs)
8.2 Total cost in end of 2014 US$ Y Y Y Y Y Y
8.3 Number of parallel PCC trains in Y Y N Y Y Y

above total cost
8.4 Number of parallel PCC trains Y Y N Y Y Y
required
8.5 Cost source type (major equipment Y N N Y Y N
cost, direct cost, field cost, or installed
cost)
8.6 Expected accuracy (+/- ?%) Y Y Y N Y Y
8.7 Cost reference location if not based on Y N N Y Y Y

Mexico site
8.8 Approximate total installation Y N N N N N
manhours
8.9 Approximate % of the PCC cost is for N N N N Y N
feed pretreatment (if included to meet
PCC needs)

Equipment Transportation
Requirement
9.1 Shop or field fabricated absorber Y Y N N Y Y
9.2 Absorber type (steel, fiberglass, Y Y N N Y Y

concrete, etc)
9.3 Estimated absorber dimensions (if N
shop fabrication):
9.3.1 Maximum sectional diameter, N N N N N N
ft
9.3.2 Total vessel height, ft N N N N N N
9.3.3 Total vessel weight, short tons, N N N N N N

ft
9.4 Shop or field fabricated regenerator Y Y N Y Y Y
9.5 Regenerator type (steel, fiberglass, Y Y N Y Y Y

concrete, etc)
9.6 Estimated regenerator dimensions (if
Appendix E
shop fabrication):
9.6.1 Maximum sectional diameter, N Y N Y Y N
ft
9.6.2 Total vessel height, ft N Y N Y Y N
9.6.3 Total vessel weight, short tons N N N N Y N
10. PCC Process Characteristics N N N N N N
10.1 Aqueous or non-aqueous solution Y Y N Y Y Y
10.2 Absorbent flammability N Y N N Y N
10.3 Solvent flammability N N N Y Y Y
10.4 Absorbent toxicity N Y N N Y Y
10.5 Solvent toxicity Y N N Y Y Y
10.6 List of trace contaminants N Y N Y Y Y

(including degradation by-products)
and the corresponding concentrations
expected in the treated flue gas being
vent to the atmosphere
Appendix F
APPENDIXF 30%MEABASEDPCCPLANTDESIGNFORPOZARICANGCC
30%MEACO2RecoveryPFDandMajorStreamHMB.285
CO2CompressionPFDandMajorStreamHMB...286
MEACO2RecoveryEquipmentList287
CO2CompressionEquipmentList288
PostPCCRetrofitPozaRicaNGCCPlantMechanicalEquipmentList..289
Task1:TechnologySelection,EvaluationandRecommendation 284
Appendix F
K-101 C-100 G-100 E-100 E-105 G-103 C-101 G-101 G-106 D-101 E-102 V-102 G-102 G-107 D-102 E-101 V-101 C-102 E-106 E-104 E-103 G-104 C-103 C-106 G-109
Feed Gas Feed Feed Feed Absorber Absorber Absorber Rich Amine Makeup Amine Amine Lean Amine Lean Amine Lean Amine Amine Sump Amine Rich/Lean Packaged Stripper Reclaimer Reboiler OVHD CW Reflux Reflux Cond Cond
Blower Scrubber Scrubber Scrubber OH Wash OH Wash Pump Pump Storage Tank Trim Cooler Filters Pkg Pump Pump Sump Amine Soda Ash Condenser Pump Drum Flash Return
H2O Pump Cooler H2O Cooler H2O Pump Exchanger Feed Syst Drum Pump
Recovered CO2
Treated Flue Gas 3
117 F 2,152 STPD 100% CO2
2 CO2 COMP
14.9 psia 100 F
STACK
1. ppmV MEA C-103 21.4 psia
CW E-103
V-102
7
Recycle Wash Water from 11,142 LB/Hr 213 F Water from CO2 Comp
Stripper OVHD
27.4 psia 3,410 LB/Hr
CO2 COMP
100 F
80 F 65,334 LB/Hr 76,476 LB/Hr G-104
POWER PLANT
C-101 Excess Water Purge
Makeup Wash Water NNF LB/Hr
OFF-PLOT
120 F E-105 G-103
117 F
6 100 F 12,373 LB/Hr Recycle Wash Water to Absorb

Top & MEA Solution Makeup
Purge Wash Water to 120 F 15.3 psia C-102
Stripper Reflux NNF LB/Hr CW
NNF LB/Hr Purge Wash Water from
Absorber
4
105 F 45 PSIG
Power Plant
105 F 139 F 256 F LP Steam
Fee d G as Blo wer (K- 101 ) e xte rnal to CO 2 A bsor pti on Pla nt 15.8 psia 15.8 psia 28.3 psia
C-100 237 F E-104

Flue Gas Feed
91 F 293F Sat
CW G-102
254 F
POWER E-102 E-101
195.0 F C-106
E-100 5
14.7 psia 256 F
1
16.7 psia 158 F
CW G-101
226.0 F
G-109 Condensate Return
16.6 psia E-106
Power Plant
K-101 139 F
Power Plant
G-100 ILP Steam
115 F
Feed Gas Water
Condensate V-101 Reclaimer Waste
115 F
POWER OFF-PLOT
67,536 LB/Hr
MEA Plant:
Stream Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 E-100
E-102 Cooling Water Supply Header
Stream Description Flue Treated LP CO2 Cooled Rich Lean E103
Gas Flue Product Flue Gas Amine Amine G-107
81.5 F
Power Plant
Feed Gas Feed 65,355 GPM
VAPOR COMPONENTS: MW G-106 CO2 Comp:
D-101 E-301
N2 28.01 92,188 92,187 1 92,188 - -
E-302
CO2 44.01 4,794 719 4,075 4,794 - - E-303
E-304
Argon 39.95 1,120 1,120 0 1,120 - -
Cooling Water Return Header
O2 32.00 15,503 15,503 0 15,503 - -
MEA Vapor 61.09 - 0 - - - - D-102 95. F
Power Plant
H2O Vapor 18.02 12,231 12,727 189 8,483 - -
Total MPH Vapor 125,837 122,256 4,266 122,088 - -
LIQUID COMPONENTS: PZ85MEA_3 :

N2 28.01 - - - -
CO2 44.01 - - - -
Argon 39.95 - - - - NOTES:

1) All information shown on this diagram or data sheet represent estimatons for given operations and are provided for pre-feasibility
O2 32.00 - - - - 0 2/25/2016 Issued for Task 1 Report RC
evaluation purposes based on Nexant's in-house data from similar applications. The information shown represent projected best
MEA 61.09 - - - - achievable performance for generic inhibited MEA processes. While useful for studies, Nexant does not guarantee the accuracy and Rev. Date Revision BY
Water 18.02 - - - - completeness of the information shown. Actual performance and design specifications and guarantees are the responsibilities of the WB MEXICO PCC STUDY PHASE I : POZA RICA - 240 MWe NGCC
selected technology licensors.
Total MPH Liquid - - - - MEA BASED CO2 CAPTURE PLANT
2) All rates shown are for ONE train. ONE trains is provided to capture 85% CO2 from 100% of the total flue gas. PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
Total Stream LBMole/Hr 125,838 122,256 4,266 122,089 151,366 147,289 30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW DESIGN OPER
3) Normal consumptions for given operation are listed in the utlities summary data sheet. Equipment design sizes are shown under
Total Stream LB/Hr 3,554,677 3,384,176 182,805 3,487,141 3,586,079 3,406,684
the major equipment listing data sheet. Job Rev.
Total Stream Wt Fraction Vapor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000 No. DRAWING No. No.
Temperature, deg F 226.0 117.2 100.0 105.0 138.9 255.6
Pressure, PSIA 16.57 14.92 21.35 15.83 15.83 28.34 02484-001 PFD-100-DESIGN 0
Appendix F
G-301 C-301 K-301A E-301 C-302 K-301B E-302 C-303 V-301 K-301C E-303 C-304 G-302 E-304
CONDENSATE 1ST STG CO2 1ST STG CO2 1ST STG 2ND STG CO2 2ND STG CO2 2ND STG 3RD STG CO2 DEHYDRATION 3RD STG CO2 3RD STG SUPER-CRITICAL CO2 PRODUCT CO2 PRODUCT
PUMP COMP KO DRUM COMPRESSOR COMPRESSOR COMP KO DRUM COMPRESSOR COMPRESSOR COMP KO DRUM UNIT COMPRESSOR COMPRESSOR CO2 SEPARATOR PUMP COOLER
CW AFTER AFTER COOLER AFTER COOLER
COOLER
Recy cle (Nromally No Flow)

CW
E-305
Atm Vent
Regeneration Normally
Purge No Flow
348 F 356 psia

E-302 E-303
E-301
CO2 From 338 F
21.3 psia 87.7 psia 371 psia 100 F V-301
STRIPPER DEHYDRATION
OVHD DRUM UNIT
CW CW CW 90 F
21.3 psia 100 F 348 F
1305 psia
100 F 103 301 93 psia
100-B-001 K-301A K-301B K-301C C-304 CO2 PRODUCT

C-301 C-302 TO PIPELINE
C-303
E-304
303
1300 psia 117 F
PIPELINE
90 F
G-302 CW 2215 psia
111 302
100 F
100-B-001
G-301
Condensate to
Absorber Ovhd
Wash Section
Strm No. 103/301 111/302 303

Stream Name Stripper Condensate CO2
Ovhd Vap Product Notes
PZ85MEA_3 :
=========
Component MW lbmol/hr lbmol/hr lbmol/hr
1) All information show n on this diagram or data sheet represent estimatons for given operations and are
N2/Ar 28.15 0.7 0 1 provided for pre-feasibility evaluation purposes based on Nexant's in-house data from similar
applications. The information show n represent projected best achievable performance for generic
O2 32 0.1 0.0 0 inhibited MEA processes. While useful for studies, Nexant does not guarantee the accuracy and 0 2/25/2016 Issued for Task 1 Report RC
CO2 44.011 4075.3 0.1 4075.2 completeness of the information show n. Actual performance and design specifications and guarantees Rev No. Date Revision Engineer Checked Approval
are the responsibilities of the selected technology licensors.
H2O 18.016 189.3 188.9 0 Nexant Inc.
2) All rates show n are for 1 train. Only ONE train is needed to treat 100% of the Poza Rica MGCC flue
MEA 61.08 TRACE TRACE 0 gas. San Francisco, CA
Total lbmol/hr 4265.4 189.0 4076.0 3) Normal consumptions for given operation are listed in the utlities summary data sheet. Equipment
design sizes are show n under the major equipment listing data sheet.
EPRI CO2 CAPTURE STUDY PHASE IV : POZA RICA - 240 MWe NGCC
lb/hr 182790 3408 179378
Actual Flow GPM - 6.8 465 Process Flow Diagram
Vapor Flow MMSCFD 38.8 - - CO2 COMPRESSION For GENERIC 30% MEA / 85 F CW DESIGN OPERATION
Temp F 100 98 100 Job No. Drawing No. Revision No.
01475-001 DS-PFD-300-DESIGN 0

Appendix F

100 C-100 Feed Scrubber/Cooler Vert 5.0 450 304SS 1 Vessel 44.0 75.0 1
- Scrubber SulzerPak 3.5 inch 304 SS Ft3
- Support Plates 304 SS Ft2
- Hold-Down Plates 304 SS Ft2
- Liq Distributors 304 SS Ft2
- Demister Pads 304 SS Ft2
100 C-101 Flue Gas Absorber Vert 5.0 450 304SS+304SS Top 1 Vessel 46.0 143.0 1
- Absor SulzerPak 252.0 SulzerPak 304 SS Ft3
- Washing Pall Rings 3.5 inch 304 SS Ft3
- Chimney Trays 304 SS Ft2
- Bubble Cap Trays 304 SS Ft2
100 C-102 Amine Stripper Vert 25.0 450 304SS+304SS Top 1 Vessel 11.0x16.0 141.0 1
- Strip Pall Rings 3.5 inch 304 SS Ft3
- Washing Pall Rings 3.5 inch 304 SS Ft3
- Chimney Trays 304 SS Ft2
100 C-103 Stripper OVHD Receiver Vert 25.0 450 304SS 1 Vessel 10.0 9.0 1
100 C-106 Condensate Flash Drum Horizont 50.0 450 Carbon Steel 1 Vessel 9.0 12.5 1
100 C-108 Carbon Drum(Part of V-102) Vert 110.0 450 Carbon Steel 1 Vessel 6.5 10.0 2
100 D-101 MEA Storage Tank Cone Roof Atm 450 Carbon Steel 1 Vessel 56.0 64.5 1

100 E-100 Feed Scrub Circ Cooler P&F 60 100 450 450 304SS 1 4 4
100 E-101 Rich/Lean Exchanger P&F 105 121 450 450 304SS 1 2 2
100 E-102 Lean Amine Cooler P&F 105 100 450 450 304SS 1 2 2
100 E-103 Stripper Condenser Weld P&F 28 100 450 450 304SS 1 1 1
100 E-104 Stripper Reboiler Kettle 40 90 450 450 304SS 304SS 1 8 8

100 E-105 Wash Water Cooler P&F 104 100 450 450 304SS 1 0 0
100 E-106 Reclaimer Kettle 40 90 450 450 304SS 304SS 1 1 1
COMPRESORS, BLOWERS & DRIVERS: Material Of Construction Design Capacity Total

============================== Design Conditions ---------------------- ------------------------------------------ Driver Equip
100 K-101 Flue Gas Blower External to C Cent. 2.0 450 SS CS 795,932 14.7 2.0 Motor 1

================ Design Condition ---------------------- ----------------------------------------- Driver Equip
100 G-100 FG Cooling Circ Pump Cent. 60 12 Cr CS 3.2 42.1 Motor 2

100 G-101 Rich Amine Pump Cent. 128 12 Cr CS 9.2 103.7 Motor 2
100 G-102 Lean Amine Pump Cent. 105 12 Cr CS 5.6 84.7 Motor 2
100 G-103 Wash Water Pump Cent. 104 12 Cr CS 53.8 35.5 Motor 2
100 G-104 Stripper Reflux Pump Cent. 109 12 Cr CS 10.5 83.3 Motor 2
100 G-106 Makeup Amine Pump Cent. 78 12 Cr CS 1.7 61.1 Motor 1
100 G-107 Amine Sump Pump V Cent. 56 12 Cr CS 1.7 39.1 Motor 1
100 G-108 Soda Ash Pump(Part V-103) Cent. 51 CI CS 1.7 34.6 Motor 1
100 G-109 Condensate Return Pump Cent. 217 CS CS 21.0 176.1 Motor 2

============================= Tube Design Cond Equip
Plt ---------------- Total Cost
--- -------- -------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------------ ---------------------------- ---------------------------------- -------
100 V-102 Carbon + Pre&Post Filters Pkg 110 450 Kill CS GPM of Lean Amine 5 Micon Cotton Pre&Post Filters 4
100 V-101 Soda Ash Feed System Pkg Pkg Atm 450 CS Gallon System Mixing Vessel + Agitator 1
100 L-101 Flue Gas Ducts Duct Atm 450 CS Ft 19' ID x 50' Ductings, one each for Feed & Absorber OH Vent
NOTES:
PZ85MEA_3 :
WB MEXICO NGCC CO2 CAPTURE STUDY - PHASE I JOB NUMBER 02484-001

POZA RICA - 240 MWe NGCC DRAWING No. REV.
POST COMBUSTION CO2 CAPTURE
0 2/25/2016 Issued for Task 1 Report RC 30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW DESIGN OPER DS-EQUIP-100-Design 0
Appendix F

300 C-301 1st Stage Comp Feed KO Drum Vert 40 650 304SS 1 Vessel 12.0 9.5 1
300 C-302 2nd Stage Comp Feed KO Drum Vert 90 650 304SS 1 Vessel 12.0 9.0 1
300 C-303 Dryer Feed KO Drum Vert 390 650 304SS 1 Vessel 7.5 8 1
300 C-304 SuperCritical CO2 Separator Horizont 1340 650 CS 1 Vessel 9.0 7.5 1

300 E-301 1st Stg Comp CW AfterCooler S&T 93 100 450 450 304SS 304SS 1 1 1
300 E-302 2nd Stg Comp CW AfterCooler S&T 392 100 450 450 304SS 304SS 1 1 1
300 E-303 3rd Stg Comp CW AfterCooler S&T 1355 100 450 450 CS 304SS 1 1 1
300 E-304 SC CO2 Product CW Cooler S&T 2310 100 450 450 CS 304SS 1 1 1
300 E-305 Recycle Cooler S&T 41 100 423 163 304SS 304SS 1 1 1
COMPRESSORS, BLOWERS & DRIVERS: Material Of Construction Design Capacity Total

============================== Design Conditions ---------------------- ------------------------------------- Driver Equip
300 K-301 CO2 Compressor (w/ Motor and VFD) Cent 1355 450 CS CS 30138 21.3 1283.7 Motor 1

================ Design Condition ---------------------- ------------------------------------- Driver Equip
300 G-301 Condensate Pump Cent. 44 0 CS CS 11 6.9 17.5 Motor 2

300 G-302 Super-Critical CO2 Pum (w/ Motor and VFD) Cent. 2323 0 CS CS 585 1285.6 925.0 Motor 1

============================= Design Cond Equip
Plt ---------------- Total Cost
--- -------- -------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------------ ---------------------------- ---------------------------------- -------
300 V-301 CO2 Dryer Pkg 371 450 CS 1297 ACFM of CO2 40 ppm CO2 product moisture content. 1
NOTES:
(1) Numbers shown are for ONE Train @ 8000 Oper Hrs/Yr. 1 identical trains required for Poza Rica NGCC.
PZ85MEA_3 :
WB MEXICO NGCC CO2 CAPTURE STUDY - PHASE I JOB NUMBER 01475-001

POZA RICA - 240 MWe NGCC DRAWING No. REV.
POST COMBUSTION CO2 CAPTURE
0 2/25/2016 Issued for Task 1 Report RC CO2 COMP FOR 30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW DESIGN OPER DS-EQUIP-300-Design 0
Appendix F
Estimated Size, Capacity, Capacity (%)

Unit Quantity Description Type Rating Material 100% * 1 UNIT Comments
1 LOUVERS IN EXISTING STACK 21 ft 1 x 100%
1 DUCT LOUVERS 19 ft 1 x 100%
1 EMERGENCY VENT LOUVERS 19 ft 1 x 100%
Pressure: 60.0 PSIA; PIPE IS 8" INLET AND 30"
1 STEAM CONDITIONING VALVE (DESUPERHEATER) Temperature: 302.7 F 1 x 100% OUTLET
~22 MW, 3600 RPM, TEWAC,

INLET CONDITIONS: 1131
STEAM TURBINE/GENERATOR SET. COMPLETE WITH TURNING GEAR, BACKPRESSURE TYPE WITH ALL ACCESSORIES PSIA/976 F, OUTLET
1 LUBE OIL SYSTEM, SEAL OIL SYSTEM, EHC SYSTEM, ETC FOR A COMPLETE INSTALLATION CONDITIONS: 65 PSIA/410 F 1 x 100% LOCATED NEAR PCC PLANT
VERTICAL, INCLUDING REVERSE ROTATION 66,000 GPM AT 150 FT DUPLEX SS PUMPS TO BE LOCATED IN
2 CIRCULATING WATER PUMP LATCHING DEVICES (EACH) INTERNALS 2 X 100% COOLING TOWER FOREBAY
MAKEUP TO NEW PCC

TOWER IS FROM A
COMBINATION OF FLUE GAS
COOLER/SCRUBBER, NEW
MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLING TOWER (6 CELL COOLING TOWER, DEMIN SYSTEM REJECT AND
1 EACH FAN WILL HAVE A 200 HP FAN MOTOR) COOLING TOWER WITH FOULING RESISTANT FILL 1 X 100% RIVER WATER MAKEUP
SS IMPELLER
3 COOLING TOWER MAKEUP WATER PUMPS VERTICAL 810 GPM AT 115 FT AND SLEEVE 3 X 50%
1 COOLING WATER PIPING BURIED, UNDERGROUND PIPING 2500 FT CONCRETE 1 X 100%
2 RIVER WATER PUMPS VERTICAL 410 GPM AT 230 FT 2 X 100%
2 FILTERED WATER PUMPS VERTICAL 400 GPM AT 115 FT 2 X 100%
2 DEMIN WATER PUMPS TO MEA ABSORBER VERTICAL 131 GPM AT 235 FT 2 X 100%
THE INFLUENT TO THE DEMIN
SYSTEM FOR THE PCC WILL
BE TREATED CANAL DE
LLAMADA WATER FROM THE
1 DEMIN RO UNIT 200 GPM 1 X 100% PREFILTRATION SYSTEM

Appendix G
APPENDIXG ALSTOMSCOMMENTS
Response to PreFeasibility Study for Establishing a Carbon Capture Pilot Plant in Mexico (World Bank
Contract7175527)
TechnologyprovidersresponseAlstomAdvancedAmineProcess
TheAdvancedAmineProcesstechnology(AAP)thatwasdevelopedtogetherbyAlstomandDowwasused
for the evaluation in this prefeasibility study. As agreed with Nexant, and as specified in the report, the
reference location for the CAPEX provided by Alstom was based in Western Europe. The process flow
schemethatwasutilizedinthisstudywasAlstomsAdvancedFlowSchemethatwasdevelopedmainlyfor
coal applications. This process configuration was successfully tested at the CO2 Capture Demonstration
Facility at lectricit de Frances (EDF) Le Havre Power Plant. This is a proprietary design developed to
provideminimalenergyconsumptionleadingwithreducedoperatingcostsspecificallyforcoalapplications.
However, the process flow scheme is included with features that can be simplified for Gas applications,
adapting for the lower flue gas CO2 concentration. The simplification steps involve reduction in solvent
flowrate, modification of absorber flow arrangement, elimination of heat exchangers, and modification of
theadvancedregenerationconceptsaswell.
The process was updated with these simplification steps and the CAPEX was re estimated. Several of the
advancedflowschemefeaturesareremovedwithoutlosingthebenefitontheenergyperformance.These
modificationsintheprocessflowschemeresultedinaCAPEXsavingsofapproximately$80MMUSD,based
ontheWesternEuropereferencelocation.ThesemodificationsbringtheCAPEXestimatereportedinTable
64,forthePCCPlant+CO2compressionto$180MM,fortheUSGulfCoastreferencelocation.
Additionally, the auxiliary consumption in comparison with MEA as reported in Table 62 is expected to
reduce by more than 30%, from 4.0 MWe to 2.7 MWe. This would correspond to a reduction of the PCC
AuxiliaryPowerConsumptionRelativeto30%MEAfrom155%to105%inTable62.Also,withtheupdated
CAPEX,theestimatedcostofelectricityisnowreducedto$3536/MWh.
Appendix H
APPENDIXH EQUIPMENTDATASHEETS
Appendix H
C100FeedScrubber
LOC.or FLUID FLOW DENSITY TEMPERATURE, F PRESSURE, PSIA TIME LL DATA FOR: 1 LG LC
PROCESS INFORMATION
Instument and Internal details are shown on sheets 2 & 3 NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal Max/Min Normal Max. 3 LCH
1 Vapor 35,547 0.064 226.0 16.57 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
2 Vapor 34,836 0.076 105.0 16.18 LAN 24"
Residence
3 Condensate 85,256 61.68 120.0 16.18 4minutes NLL 4 1 32"
4 Quench Liquid 84,545 62.00 98.6 16.18 LAL 48"
5 Liquid 84,545 62.00 98.6 16.20 LLL *
J-1 2 6 Water 84,545 62.00 98.6 16.20 LCL
3
VAPOR PRESSURE @ MAXIMUM AMBIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA

Demister Pad PROCESS 1 Std Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
TYPE OF MATERIALCORROSION ALLOW. REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY
COM PONENT
1.0' 4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC range.

SHELL & HEADS 304SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
2.5' WELD-IN 304SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
4
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
2.0' PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = 30 PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
MIN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP PSIG (MARGIN + OPER) CODE
SYSTEM PSV SET AT PSIG LOCATED
15.0' MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 276 oF PSIG LOADINGS
EXTERNAL PRESSURE DESIGN: FOR:
VESSEL SUPPORT DATA: SKIRT LEGS LUGS SERVICE (Cyclic, Lethal, etc)
SADDLES (C-527)
5 HEIGHT MIN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: THICK.

13.2' NOZZLE SERVICE NUM B ER EST. RA TING & INTERNA L NOZZLE SERVICE No . EST. RA TING & INTERNA L
59'
INSTRUMENTS
No . REQUIRED SIZE FA CING TYP E No . REQ'D SIZE FA CING TYP E
J-6
J-5
15.0' J-4 Gas Sample Probe
J-3 TW
J-2 LG
J-1 PSV
NOZZLES
3.0' 9
1 5.0' ID 8
2.3' 7
PROCESS
HLL 6 Bed 1 Liquid Return 1 6"
5 Bed 1 Liquid Draw 1 6"
4 Quench Liquid 1 6"
4.5' 3 Scrubber Condensate 1 6"
LLL 2 Scrubbed Flue Gas 1 24"
1 Flue Gas Feed Inlet 1 22" M-1 Manw ay
0.5'
Vortex 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL

Breaker
(Note1) REV DATE ISSUED FOR PROC. INSTR. UNIT PROJECT
3 JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
Service Feed Scrubber/Cooler

A02484 C-100 (sheet 1/3) 0
Unit 30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW at 85% CO2 Recovery
Appendix H
Notes: LOC.or FLUID FLOW DENSITY TEMPERATURE, F PRESSURE, PSIA TIME LL DATA FOR: 1 LG LC
PROCESS INFORMATION
2. PI, TI and sample probes are located in vapor and liquid outlet piping for stream measurements. NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal Max/Min Normal Max. 3 LCH
3. Use type 431 demister pad w ith 4" thickness and 304SS material. Support beams are required for over 6 ft span. 1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
4. See Vessel Standards VS-B504 for chimney tray details. 2 Vapor 34,836 0.076 105.0 16.2 LAN 24"
Residence
5. Koch/Glitsch model 943 spray nozzle distributor 3 5minutes NLL 4 1 32"
8. Packed bed hold dow n plate (typical height 2 to 5", 6" allow ed) 4 Quench Liquid 84,545 62.00 98.6 16.2 LAL 48"
9. Packed bed support plate (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 5 Liquid 84,545 62.00 98.6 16.2 LLL *
6 3 LCL
(Chim ney Tray)
J-1 VAPOR PRESSURE @ MAXIMUM AMBIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA
2 J3 J5 J4 PROCESS 1 Std Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
(Note 2) TYPE OF MATERIALCORROSION ALLOW. REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY
COM PONENT
4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC range.

5.0' ID SHELL & HEADS 304SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
1.0' Demister Pad WELD-IN 304SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
(Note 3)
2.5'
(Note 5) M1
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
4 PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = 30 PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
1.0' MIN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP PSIG (MARGIN + OPER) CODE
(Note 8) oF
MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 155 PSIG LOADINGS
0.5' Wash Section EXTERNAL PRESSURE DESIGN: FOR:
Bed 1
SADDLES (C-527)
30.7 '
HEIGHT MIN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: THICK.
INSTRUMENTS
J-6 Liq Sample Probe 1
J-5 PI 1 Note 2
J-4 Gas Sample Probe 1
J-3 TW 2 Note 2
J-2 LG
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV 1
9
(Note 9)
1.0' 8
7
M1
PROCESS
1.0' 6
5 Bed 1 Liquid Draw 1 6"
5" 4 Quench Liquid 1 6"
7.4' (note 4) HLL 6" 3
1.6' 2 Scrubbed Flue Gas 1 24"
6' 1 M-1 Manw ay 2 24"
LLL
6"
12
5 J3 J6
19.5132 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report
9" (Note 2) REV DATE ISSUED FOR PROC. INSTR. UNIT PROJECT
12" JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
Service Feed Scrubber/Cooler - Top Section

A02484 C-100 (sheet 2/3) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
1. See Vessel Standards VS-548 for vortex breaker details. NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal Max/Min Normal Max. 3 LCH
2. PI, TI and sample probes are located in vapor and liquid outlet piping for stream measurements. 1 Vapor 35,547 0.064 226.0 16.6 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
5. Koch/Glitsch model 943 spray nozzle distributor 2 LAN 24"
Residence
8. Packed bed hold dow n plate (typical height 2 to 5", 6" allow ed) 3 Condensate 85,256 61.68 120.0 16.2 4minutes NLL 4 1 32"
9. Packed bed support plate (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 4 LAL 48"
5 LLL *
Bottom of Wash
Section Chimney Tray 6 Water 84,545 62.00 98.6 16.2 3 LCL
7
PROCESS 1 Std Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
M1
1.0' J3
REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY
COM PONENT TYPE OF M ATERIAL CORROSION ALLOW.
6 4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC range.

J5
1.0' SHELL & HEADS 304SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
WELD-IN 304SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
J4 INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
(Note 8)

Wash Bed 2
MECHANICAL
Liquid Distributor MIN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP PSIG (MARGIN + OPER) CODE
(Note 5)
DESIGN
15.0' MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 276 o
F PSIG LOADINGS
SADDLES (C-527)
28.3' HEIGHT MIN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: THICK.
NOZZLE SERVICE NUM B ER EST. RA TING & INTERNA L NOZZLE SERVICE No . EST. RA TING & INTERNA L
INSTRUMENTS
J-6 Liq Sample Probe
J-5 PI 2
M1
(Note 9) 1.0' J-4 Gas Sample Probe 1
J-3 TW 2 Note 2
2.0' J3 J-2 LG 2
1.8' J-1 PSV
NOZZLES
1
0.5' HLL 9
8
7
PROCESS
J2
5.0' ID 6 Bed 1 Liquid Return 1 6"
5
4
4.5' 3 Scrubber Condensate 1 6" Note 1
2
1 Flue Gas Feed Inlet 1 22" M-1 Manw ay 1 24"
LLL
0.5' J2
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report

Vortex REV DATE ISSUED FOR PROC. INSTR. UNIT PROJECT
Breaker
(Note1) JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
3
Service Feed Scrubber/Cooler -Bottom Section
A02484 C-100 (sheet 3/3) 0
Appendix H
C101FlueGasAbsorber
PROCESS INFORMATION
Nozzle flow data, instument and internal details are shown on sheets 2 to 7 NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal Max/Min Normal Max. 3 LCH
1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
2 LAN 24"
Residence
3 5minutes NLL 4 1 32"
J-1 2 4 LAL 48"
5 LLL *
6 3 LCL
Demister Pad 7
1.0' CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
METALLURGY
5.2' 5 4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC range.

SHELL & HEADS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
10.0' WELD-IN Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
INTERNALS REMOVABLE Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
9.9' 8
6
PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
12 MIN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP PSIG (MARGIN + OPER) CODE
10.0' SYSTEM PSV SET AT PSIG LOCATED
DESIGN
MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE F PSIG LOADINGS
15.8' 7 EXTERNAL PRESSURE DESIGN: FOR:
4
13 SADDLES (C-527)
150'
24.0'
10
11
INSTRUMENTS
24.0' J-6
J-5
9 J-4 Gas Sample Probe
8.7' J-3 TW
14 J-2 LG
24.0'
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV
9 Abs Bed 2 Liquid Draw 1 4"
2.0' 8 Wash Bed 1 Liq Draw 1 2"
1 7 Wash Bed 2 Liq Draw 1 8"
PROCESS
1.7' 6 Pump Around Liquid 1 8" 14 Liquid from Abs Bed 2 1 4"
HLL
5 Makeup Water Inlet 1 2" 13 Liquid from Wash Bed 2 1 2"
4 Lean Amine 1 4" 12 Liquid from Wash Bed 1 1 8"
5.0' ID 3 Rich Amine 1 4" 11 Liquid from Abs Bed 1 1 4"
3.0' 2 Treated Vapor Outlet 1 11" 10 Abs Bed 1 Liquid Draw 1 4"
1 Flue Gas Feed Inlet 1 24" M-1 Manw ay
LLL
0.5'
REV DATE ISSUED FOR PROC. INSTR. UNIT PROJECT
Vortex
Breaker JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
3 Service Flue Gas Absorber

A02484 C-101 (Sheet 1/7) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
3. Use type 431 demister pad w ith 4" thickness and 316SS material. 11. Level displacer length of 24" is used. 1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
4. See Vessel Standards VS-B504 for chimney tray details. 2 Vapor 32,889 0.070 100.3 14.9 LAN 24"
Residence
6. Packed bed hold dow n plate - 3 658minutes NLL 4 1 32"
(typical height 2 to 5", 6" allow ed) J1 2 J3 J4 J5 4 (note 11) LAL 48"
7. Koch-Glitsch model 941 Spray Nozzle (Note 2) 5 Water 200 61.97 100.0 15.3 LLL *
Distributor or equivalent. 6 3 LCL
10. Packed bed support plate - 8 Water 200 61.97 100.0 15.3
(typical height 11", 12" allow ed) Demister Pad VAPOR PRESSURE @ MAXIMUM AMBIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA
(Note 3)
1.0' 5.0' ID CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
METALLURGY

2.5' 5 M1 SHELL & HEADS 316SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
(Note 7)
1.0' INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
(Note 6)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
Wash Section
PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = 50 PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
0.5' Bed 1 MIN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP PSIG (MARGIN + OPER) CODE
o
MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 150 F PSIG LOADINGS
10.0' VESSEL SUPPORT DATA: SKIRT LEGS LUGS SERVICE (Cyclic, Lethal, etc)
20.8' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-5 PI 1
J-3 TW 2 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
J-1 PSV 1
NOZZLES
9
M1
(Note 10) 01.0' 8 Wash Bed 1 Liq Draw 1 2"
7
PROCESS
1.0' 6
5 Makeup Water Inlet 1 2"
5" 4
J2 (note 4) HLL 6" 3
1.5' 2 Treated Vapor Outlet 1 11"
24" 1 M-1 Manw ay 2 24"
3.4' LLL (Note 11)
J2
6"
8 J3 J6
Service Flue Gas Absorber - Wash Section 1

A02484 C-101 (Sheet 2/7) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
2. For liquid draw s, piping TI can be used in place of TW. NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal Max/Min Normal Max. 3 LCH
4. See Vessel Standards VS-B504 for chimney tray details. 1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
6. Packed bed hold dow n plate (typical height 2 to 5", 6" allow ed) 2 LAN 24"
Residence
7. Koch-Glitsch model 941 Spray Nozzle Distributor or equivalent. 3 5minutes NLL 4 1 32"
8.The feed nozzle is removable and is bolted to a nozzle insert at the column. 4 LAL 48"
Provide nozzle insert w ith a 0.25" min. nozzle/nozzle insert clearance at the column. 12 Water 200 61.97 100.0 15.3 LLL *
10. Packed bed support plate (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 6 Water 95,989 61.98 100.0 15.1 3 LCL
Bottom of Wash 7 Water 98,891 61.89 106.8 15.3
5.0' ID Section 1 Chimney Tray VAPOR PRESSURE @ MAXIMUM AMBIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA
J3 CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
1.0' 10" REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY

(Note 8) J5
12 WELD-IN 316SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
J4
2.8' 1.0' 8" INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
6
1.0' M1 PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = 50 PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
(Note 6)
DESIGN
Wash Section
0.5' Bed 2 Liquid MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 157 o
F PSIG LOADINGS
Distributor EXTERNAL PRESSURE DESIGN: FOR:
(Note 7)
10.0' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
26.2' J-6 Liq Sample Probe 1
J-5 PI 1

J-3 TW 2 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
1.0'
NOZZLES
(Note 10) J-1 PSV
9
1.0' 8
M1
7 Wash Bed 2 Liq Draw 1 8"
PROCESS
6 Pump Around Liquid 1 8"
5" 5
1.5' 3
8.8' 7.5' 2 12 Liquid from Wash Bed 1 1 8"
LLL 1 M-1 Manw ay 2 24"
J2
6"
7 J3
1.0' 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report
(Note 2)
16" REV DATE ISSUED FOR PROC. INSTR. UNIT PROJECT
JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
Service Flue Gas Absorber - Wash Section 2

A02484 C-101 (Sheet 3/7) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
OPERATING DATA
Residence
4 Lean Amine 42,942 64.84 100.0 15.3 LAL 48"
10. Packed bed support plate (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 5 LLL *
10 Liquid Draw 46,695 64.60 100.0 15.3 3 LCL
13 Make Up Water 3,753 61.98 100.00 15.3
Bottom of Wash VAPOR PRESSURE @ MAXIMUM AMBIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA
Section 2 Chimney Tray
J3 CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
1.0' 10" REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY

J5
13
J4
1' 2" INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
2.5' 4 M1
1' PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = 50 PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
(Note 6)
DESIGN
0.5' Absorber Bed 1 Liquid MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 150 o
F PSIG LOADINGS
(Note 7)
24.0' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-5 PI 1

J-3 TW 3 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
1.0'
NOZZLES
(Note 10) J-1 PSV
9
1.0' 5.0' ID 8
M1
1" 7
PROCESS
6
5" 5
J2 (note 4) HLL 6" 4 Lean Amine 1 4"
4.7' 1.5' 3 13 Liquid from Wash Bed 2 1 2"
3.4' 2 10 Abs Bed 1 Liquid Draw 1 4"
J2
6"
10 J3 J6
6" 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report

(Note 2)
Service Flue Gas Absorber - Absorption Bed 1

A02484 C-101 (Sheet 4/7) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
OPERATING DATA
Residence
9. Allow 10" spacing betw een the bottom of the liquid distributor and the top of the packed bed. 4 LAL 48"
10. Packed bed support plate (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 5 LLL *
9 Liquid 46,695 64.60 100.0 15.3 3 LCL
11 Liquid 46,695 64.60 100.0 15.3
Bottom of Abs Section CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
1
METALLURGY

J5
1.0' M1 SHELL & HEADS 316SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
J3
2.3' INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
11
J4
MECHANICAL
(Note 6)
DESIGN
0.5' Absorber Bed 2 Liquid MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 150 oF PSIG LOADINGS
(Note 7)
24.0' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-5 PI 1
J-3 TW 3 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
M1
1.0'
NOZZLES
(Note 10) J-1 PSV
9 Abs Bed 2 Liquid Draw 1 4"
1.0' 5.0' ID 8
7
PROCESS
6
5" 5
3.4' 1.5' 3
2.0' 2 11 Liquid from Abs Bed 1 1 4"
J2
6"
9 J3 J6
6' 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report

(Note 2)

A02484 C-101 (Sheet 5/7) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
6. Packed bed hold dow n plate (typical height 2 to 5", 6" allow ed) 1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
7. Koch-Glitsch model 941 Spray Nozzle Distributor or equivalent. 2 LAN 24"
Residence
3 NLL 4 1 32"
10. Packed bed support plate (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 4 LAL 48"
5 LLL *
6 3 LCL
14 Liquid 46,695 64.60 100.0 15.3
Bottom of Abs Section 2 PROCESS 1 Std Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
Chimney Tray
METALLURGY
5.0' ID J5
1.0' M1 SHELL & HEADS 316SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
J4
14 INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
1.0'
J3
1' PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = 50 PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
(Note 6)
DESIGN
Wash Section
0.5' Bed 3 Liquid MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 150 oF PSIG LOADINGS
(Note 7)
24.0' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-6
J-5 PI 1

J-3 TW 1 Note 2
J-2 LG
1.0'
NOZZLES
(Note 10) J-1 PSV
9
8
7
PROCESS
6
5
4
3
2 14 Liquid from Abs Bed 2 1 4"
1 M-1 Manw ay 2 24"


A02484 C-101 (Sheet 6/7) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
2. PI, TI and sample probes are located in vapor and liquid outlet piping for stream measurements. 1 Vapor 34,836 0.076 105.0 16.1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
2 LAN 24"
Residence
3 Rich Amne 44,736 67.05 130.1 16.1 5minutes NLL 4 1 32"
4 LAL 48"
5 LLL *
6 3 LCL
Bottom of Abs Bed 3 7
METALLURGY

1
M1 SHELL & HEADS 316SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
0.5' WELD-IN 316SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
HLL INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
J2 PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = 50 PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
DESIGN
o
3.0' 5.0' ID VESSEL SUPPORT DATA: SKIRT LEGS LUGS SERVICE (Cyclic, Lethal, etc)
SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-6
J-5
LLL
J-3 TW 1 Note 2
0.5' J-2 LG 2
J2
J-1 PSV
NOZZLES
9
8
7
PROCESS
Vortex 6
Breaker
(Note 1) 5
3 4
3 Rich Amine 1 4" Note 1
2
1 Flue Gas Feed Inlet 1 24" M-1 Manw ay 1 24"

Service Flue Gas Absorber - Bottom Section

A02484 C-101 (Sheet 7/7) 0
Appendix H
C102AmineStripper
PROCESS INFORMATION
Nozzle flow data, instument and internal details are shown on sheets 2 to 6 NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal Max/Min Normal Max. 3 LCH
1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
2 LAN 24"
Residence
3 1minutes NLL 4 1 32"
J-1 2 4 LAL 48"
5 LLL *
6 3 LCL
7
METALLURGY
4 4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC range.

SHELL & HEADS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
10.0' WELD-IN Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
INTERNALS REMOVABLE Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
7.6' 7
PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
1
MECHANICAL
5 MIN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP PSIG (MARGIN + OPER) CODE
21.0' SYSTEM PSV SET AT PSIG LOCATED
DESIGN
MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE F PSIG LOADINGS
7.9' EXTERNAL PRESSURE DESIGN: FOR:
9
4
SADDLES (C-527)
10
112'
21.0'
7.9' 11 NOZZLE SERVICE NUM B ER EST. RA TING & INTERNA L NOZZLE SERVICE No . EST. RA TING & INTERNA L
12 No . REQUIRED SIZE FA CING TYP E No . REQ'D SIZE FA CING TYP E
INSTRUMENTS
21.0' J-6
J-5
J-4 Gas Sample Probe
6.7' 13 J-3 TW
J-2 LG
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV
6
8 9 Regen Bed 1 Liq Draw 1 4"
HLL
1.0' 8 Reclaimer Vapor 1 6"
7 Wash Section Draw 1 2"
PROCESS
6 Reboiler Vapor 2 6"
5 Wash Liquid Return 1 2" 13 Bed 3 Liquid Draw 1 4"
4 Reflux 1 2" 12 Bed 2 Liquid Return 1 4"
2.0' ID 3 Lean Amine Out 1 4" 11 Bed 2 Liquid Draw 1 4"
4.0' 2 Regenerator Ovhd 1 4" 10 Bed 1 Liquid Return 1 4"
1 Rich Amine 1 4" M-1 Manw ay
LLL
0.5'
Vortex
Breaker JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
3 Service Amine Stripper

A02484 C-102 (sheet 1/6) 0
Appendix H
Notes: Detail A-A LOC.or FLUID FLOW DENSITY TEMPERATURE, F PRESSURE, PSIA TIME LL DATA FOR: 1 LG LC
PROCESS INFORMATION
3.The feed nozzle is removable and is bolted to a nozzle insert at the column. 1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
Provide nozzle insert w ith a 0.25" min. nozzle/nozzle insert clearance at the column. 2 Vapor 2,901 0.107 217.7 27.4 LAN 24"
Residence
4. See Vessel Standards VS-B504 for chimney tray details. 3 11minutes NLL 4 1 32"
2 J3 J4 J5
6. Packed bed hold dow n plate - 4 Reflux Liquid 1,107 62.07 100.0 21.4 LAL 48"
(typical height 2 to 5", 6" allow ed) J1 5 LLL *
(Note 2)
7. Flanged head can be used for the installation 6 3 LCL
& removal of packings and internals. 7 Wash Liquid 1,107 62.07 100.0 21.4
10. Packed bed support plate - VAPOR PRESSURE @ MAXIMUM AMBIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA
(typical height 11", 12" allow ed) (Note 7) PROCESS 1 Std Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
11. Minimum level displacer 2.0' ID CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
length of 14" is used. 1' REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY

4 WELD-IN 316SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
M1
2" 6" INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
(Note 3)
(Note 6)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE 268 oF PSIG LOADINGS
17.6' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-5 PI 1
J-3 TW 2 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
NOZZLES
M1 J-1 PSV 1
9
(Note 10) 1.0' 8
7 Wash Section Draw 1 2"
PROCESS
J5 J4
1.0' 6
5
2" 4 Reflux 1 2" Note 3
9" 2 Regenerator Ovhd 1 4"
15" 1 M-1 Manw ay 1 24" Note 3
2.4' (Note 11)
LLL
J2
6"
7 J3 J6
J3 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report
.3' (Note 2) REV DATE ISSUED FOR PROC. INSTR. UNIT PROJECT
J4 4" J5 JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
Service Amine Stripper - Wash Section

A02484 C-102 (sheet 2/6) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
3.The feed nozzle is removable and is bolted to a nozzle insert at the column. 1 Rich Amine 44,736 65.12 226.3 27.4 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
Provide nozzle insert w ith a 0.25" min. nozzle/nozzle insert clearance at the column. 2 LAN 24"
Residence
4. See Vessel Standards VS-B504 for chimney tray details. 3 0.3minutes NLL 4 1 32"
6. Packed bed hold dow n plate - (typical height 2 to 5", 6" allow ed) 4 LAL 48"
10. Packed bed support plate - (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 5 Wash Liquid 1,107 62.07 100 21.4 LLL *
11. Minimum level displacer length of 14" is used. 6 3 LCL
5 9 Wash Liquid 45,844 65.04 223.3 21.4
(Note 7) PROCESS 1 Std Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
2.0' ID CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
10" 10" M1 REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY

5 1 316SS Min. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
SHELL & HEADS
(Note 3) 2" 1 WELD-IN 316SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.

10" 4" 6" (Note 3)
Detail A-A INTERNALS REMOVABLE SS Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
A A
(Note 6)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
28.9' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-5 PI 1
J-3 TW 2 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV 1
M1 9 Regen Bed 1 Liq Draw 1 4"
(Note 10) 1.0' 8
7
PROCESS
1.0' 6
5 Wash Liquid Return 1 2"
2" 4
9" 2 Note 3
14" 1 Rich Amine 1 4" M-1 Manw ay 2 30" Note 3
2.4' (Note 11)
LLL
J2
6"
9 J3 J6
Service Amine Stripper - Stripping Bed 1

A02484 C-102 (sheet 3/6) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
OPERATING DATA
Residence
10. Packed bed support plate - (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 5 LLL *
11. Minimum level displacer length of 14" is used. 10 Rich Amine 45,844 65.04 223.3 21.4 3 LCL
11 Rich Amine 45,844 65.04 223.3 21.4
J3 2.0' ID CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
10" REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY
2.5' J4 M1 4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC range.

J5 10 WELD-IN 316SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
4" 6" (Note 3)
(Note 6)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
28.9' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-5 PI 1
J-3 TW 2 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV 1
M1 9
(Note 10) 1.0' 8
7
PROCESS
1.0' 6
5
2" 4
J2 (note 4) HLL 6" 3 11 Bed 2 Liquid Draw 1 4"
9" 2 Note 3 10 Bed 1 Liquid Return 1 4"
14" 1 M-1 Manw ay 2 24"
2.4' (Note 11)
LLL
J2
6"
11 J3 J6

A02484 C-102 (sheet 4/6) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
OPERATING DATA
Residence
10. Packed bed support plate - (typical height 11", 12" allow ed) 5 LLL *
11. Minimum level displacer length of 14" is used. 12 Rich Amine 45,844 65.04 223.3 21.4 3 LCL
13 Rich Amine 45,844 65.04 223.3 21.4
J3 2.0' ID CONTAMINANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
10" M1 REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY
2.5' J4 4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC range.

J5 12 WELD-IN 316SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
4" 6" (Note 3)
(Note 6)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
28.7' SADDLES (C-527)
INSTRUMENTS
J-5 PI 1
J-3 TW 2 Note 2
J-2 LG 2
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV
M1 9
(Note 10) 1.0' 8
7
PROCESS
1.0' 6
5
2" 4
J2 (note 4) HLL 6" 3 13 Bed 3 Liquid Draw 1 4"
9" 2 Note 3 12 Bed 2 Liquid Return 1 4"
14" 1 M-1 Manw ay 2 24"
2.2' (Note 11)
LLL
J2
6"
13 J3 J6

A02484 C-102 (sheet 5/6) 0
Appendix H
PROCESS INFORMATION
2. PI, TI and sample probes are located in vapor and liquid outlet piping for stream measurements. 1 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
5. Tw o nozzles required. Locate the tw o nozzles 90 degrees apart. 2 LAN 24"
Residence
12. A total of 5 minutes of surge volume is provided for the lean amine cirulation pump. 3 Lean Amine 42,942 61.49 252.7 27.6 1minutes NLL 4 1 32"
The column bottom provides 1.08 minute of liquid surge with the balance provided at the kettle reboiler 4 (Note 12) LAL 48"
5 LLL *
6 Reboiler Vapor 3,657 0.071 252.7 27.6 3 LCL
7
TYPE OF MATERIALCORROSION ALLOW. REMARKS 3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY
COM PONENT

Bottom of Bed2 Section WELD-IN 316SS Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
Chimney Tray
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
8
6 SYSTEM PSV SET AT PSIG LOCATED
o
0.5' (Note 5) HLL (Note 12) J2 EXTERNAL PRESSURE DESIGN: FOR:
SADDLES (C-527)
2.0' ID NOZZLE SERVICE NUM B ER EST. RA TING & INTERNA L NOZZLE SERVICE No . EST. RA TING & INTERNA L
4.0' No . REQUIRED SIZE FA CING TYP E No . REQ'D SIZE FA CING TYP E
INSTRUMENTS
7.5' J-6
J-5
J-4 Gas Sample Probe
J-3 TI Note 2
J-2 LG 2
NOZZLES
M1 J-1 PSV
9
8 Reclaimer Vapor 1 6"
7
PROCESS
LLL 6 Reboiler Vapor 2 6" Note 5
5
J2
0.5' 4
3 Lean Amine Out 1 4" Note 1
2
1 M-1 Manw ay 1 24"
Vortex
Breaker
3 (Note 1)

Service Amine Stripper - Bottom Section

A02484 C-102 (sheet 6/6) 0
Appendix H
C103StripperRefluxDrum
1
Notes: LOC.or FLUID FLOW DENSITY TEM PERATURE, F PRESSURE, PSIA TIM E LL DATA FOR: LG LC
1. See Vessel Standards VS-548 for vortex breaker details. NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal M ax/ M in Normal M ax. 3 LCH
PROCESS INFORMATION
2. See Vessel Standards VS-520 for internal feed nozzle details. 1 Vapor 1,828 0.152 100.0 21.4 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
3. Use type 431 demister pad with 4" thickness and 304SS material. Support beams are required for over 6 ft span. Liquid 1,107 62.06 100.0 21.4 LAN 24"
Residence
4
2 Vapor 1,828 0.152 100.0 21.4 5minutes NLL 1 32"
3 Liquid 1,107 62.064 100.0 21.4 LAL 48"
*
LLL
3
LCL
1 J-2

PROCESS 1 St d Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
View A-A CONTAMINANTS: Wet CO2 Vapor * Special Condit ions Over 48"
METALLURGY
COM PONENT TYPE OF M ATERIAL CORROSION ALLOW. REM ARKS 3 Surge, etc.
4 LG will be nearest std. size t o cover LC range.
J-1 2 SHELL & HEADS 316SS M in. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
WELD-IN 316SS Tot al indicat e LG dimension in space provided.
INTERNALS REM OVABLE 316SS Tot al POST WELD TREATM ENT FOR: (Ot her t han CODE)
Top Tangent Line PRESSURE M ARGIN:M IN. SPEC + = PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
M IN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP 65 PSIG (M ARGIN + OPER) CODE
DESIGN
M IN. DESIGN TEM PERATURE PSIG LOADINGS
Demister Pad
(Note 3) EXTERNAL PRESSURE DESIGN: FOR:
2.0' ID SADDLES (C-527)

7.5' Tan To Tan
A
1 A HEIGHT M IN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: None THICK.
NOZZLE SERVICE NUM BER EST. RATING &INTERNAL NOZZLE SERVICE No. EST. RATING & INTERNAL
0.4' No. REQUIRED SIZE FACING TYPE No. REQ'D SIZE FACING TYPE
INSTRUMENTS
(Note 2) HLL J-6
J-2
J-5
J-4
J-3
J-2 LG 2
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV 1
2.0' 9
8
7
PROCESS
M-1
6
LLL 5
4
1.0' 3 Liquid Out 1 2" Note 1
J-2
2 Vapor Out 1 3" Note 3
1 Feed 1 4" Note 2 M-1 Manw ay 1 24"
Btm Tangent Line
Vortex
Breaker 0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report
3 (Note 1)
Service Stripper Reflux Drum

01776-004
C-103 0
Unit

Appendix H
C106CondensateFlashDrum
LOC.or FLUID FLOW DENSITY TEM PERATURE, F PRESSURE, PSIA TIM E LL DATA FOR: LG LC 1
PROCESS INFORMATION
NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal M ax/ M in Normal M ax. LCH
3
Notes: 1 Vapor - 0.134 293 60
OPERATING DATA
HLL 14"
Liquid 3,709 59.56 293 60 LAN 24"
Residence
4
1. See Vessel Standards VS-B505 for horizontal drum nozzle minimum distance details. 2 Vapor - 0.134 293 60 5hrs NLL 1 32"
2. Normally no vapor flow. Provided minimum 2" nozzle for venting requirement. 3 Liquid 3,709 59.56 293 60 LAL 48"
3. See Vessel Standards VS-548 for vortex breaker details. 4 Liquid 3,709 59.56 293 60 LLL *
3
LCL
VAPOR PRESSURE @ M AXIM UM AM BIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA
PROCESS 1 St d Displacer Ranges (circle choice)
CONTAM INANTS: * Special Conditions Over 48"
COM PONENT TYPE OF M ATERIAL CORROSION ALLOW. REM ARKS 3 Surge, et c.
METALLURGY
4 LG will be nearest std. size t o cover LC range.
SHELL & HEADS Carbon Steel M in. If no LC is used, or longer LG is required,
WELD-IN Carbon Steel Tot al indicat e LG dimension in space provided.
INTERNALS REM OVABLE Carbon Steel Tot al POST WELD TREATM ENT FOR: (Other t han CODE)
+ = SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
PRESSURE M ARGIN:M IN. SPEC PSIG
MECHANICAL
M IN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP 15.0 PSIG (M ARGIN + OPER) CODE
15.0' Tan to Tan SYSTEM PSV SET AT PSIG LOCATED
VESSEL SUPPORT DATA: SKIRT LEGS LUGS SERVICE (Cyclic, Let hal, et c)
1 4 M-1 2
J-1 SADDLES (C-527)
HEIGHT M IN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: (Note 2) THICK.
NOZZLE SERVICE NUM BER EST. RATING & INTERNAL NOZZLE SERVICE No. EST. RATING & INTERNAL
No. REQUIRED SIZE FACING TYPE No. REQ'D SIZE FACING TYPE
INSTRUMENTS
Min
Min 1.1' (Note 1) J-6
J-2 (Note 1) HLL
J-5
J-4
J-3
3.9' J-2 LG 2
6.0' ID
NOZZLES
LLL J-1 PSV 1
9
8
J-2
1.0' 7
PROCESS
6
Vortex 5
Breaker Min
(Note 3) (Note 2) 4 Reclaimer Steam Cond 1 2"
3 3 Condensate 1 3"
2 Flashed Steam 1 2" Note 1,2
` 1 Reboiler Steam Cond 1 2" M-1 Manw ay 1 24"

Service Condensate Flash Drum
A02484 C-106 0
Appendix H
D101AmineStorageTank
1
Notes: LOC.or FLUID FLOW DENSITY TEM P ERA TURE, FP RESSURE, P SIA TIM E LL DATA FOR: LG LC
1. Volume from LLL to HLL is 308 ft3 or 2,302 gallons NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal Max/Min Normal Max. 3 LCH
PROCESS INFORMATION
1 Amine 47,848 64.838 90.0 44.0 HLL 14"
OPERATING DATA
3 Amine 47,848 64.838 90.0 44.0 LAN 24"
Residence
4
NLL 1 32"
LAL 48"
LLL *
3
LCL

CONTAMINANTS: Wet CO2 Vapor * Special Conditions Over 48"
3 Surge, etc.
METALLURGY
COM PONENT TYPE OF M ATERIAL CORROSION ALLOW. REM ARKS
4 LG w ill be nearest std. size to cover LC rang

SHELL & HEADS M in. If no LC is used, or longer LG isrequired,
WELD-IN Total indicate LG dimension in space provided.
INTERNALS REM OVABLE Total POST WELD TREATMENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
2
J-1 J-2 PRESSURE MARGIN:MIN. SPEC + = PSIG SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
MIN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP PSIG (MARGIN + OPERCODE
DESIGN
MIN. DESIGN TEMPERATURE PSIG LOADINGS
1' min VESSEL SUPPORT DATA: SKIRT LEGS LUGS SERVICE (Cyclic, Lethal, etc)
HHLL SADDLES (C-527)
1
2' HEIGHT MIN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: None THICK.
NOZZLE SERVICE NUM B ER EST. RA TING &NTERNA LNOZZLE SERVICE No. EST. RATING & INTERNAL
HLL No. REQUIRED SIZE FA CING TYP E No. REQ'D SIZE FACING TYPE
INSTRUMENTS
J-6
J-5
J-4
8' J-3
12.0' J-2 LG 1
PSV 1
NOZZLES
J-1
9
8
7
PROCESS
6
5
4
3 Amine Out 1 4"
2 Vent 1 6"
M-1
1 Amine Feed 1 4" M-1 Manw ay 1 24"
LLL 3
1'
7.0' ID

Service Amine Storage Tank

01776-004
D-101 0

Appendix H
E104AmineStripperReboiler(Kettle)
PROCESS INFORMATION
Notes: NOZZLE Lb/Hr Lb/Cu.Ft. Normal M ax/M in Normal M ax. LCH
3
1. See Vessel Standards VS-548 for vortex breaker details. 1 Liquid 46,600 61.88 251.9 27.6
OPERATING DATA
HLL 14"
2. Channel diameter shall be based on minimum shell to tube bundle clearance requirement per TEMA standard. 2 Vapor 3,657 0.071 252.7 27.6 LAN 24"
Residence
4
3. See Vessel Standards VS-B505 for horizontal drum nozzle locations details. 3 Liquid 42,942 61.49 252.7 27.6 5minutes NLL 1 32"
4. No. of kettles required = 1 4 Steam 3,709 0.1394 292.7 60.0 LAL 48"
5. Channel Length is based on vapor nozzle diameter + 1 ft clearance on each side. 5 Condensate 3,709 58.63 262.1 51.3 LLL *
3
6: Elevation of reboiler HLL must match the elevation of the HLL in the stripper bottom surge section. LCL
7. Reboiler LLL is controlled at the stripper.


METALLURGY
4 LG will be nearest st d. size t o cover LC range.
SHELL & HEADS 316SS M in. If no LC is used, or longer LG is required,
WELD-IN 316SS Tot al indicate LG dimension in space provided.
18.3' Overall Length INTERNALS REM OVABLE 316SS (tubes) Tot al POST WELD TREATM ENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
2.3' 16.0' Length M IN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP 15.0 PSIG (M ARGIN + OPER) CODE

(Note 5)
J-1 M-1 2 Min SADDLES (C-527)

(Note 3) HEIGHT M IN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: (Note 2) THICK.
J-2 J-6
INSTRUMENTS
1.7' J-5
Liquid
4.0' ID
4 Overflow
Baffle (Notes 6 & 7)
HLL J-4
Tube Bundle
J-3
J-2 LG 2
Channel ID (Note 2)
NOZZLES
2.0' Diam.
2.3'
J-1 PSV 1
9
J-2 8
7
PROCESS
6 Amine Waste 1 12"
Vortex 5 Condensate Out 1 2"
Breaker Min
5 1 6 (Note 1) (Note 3) 4 Steam In 1 4"
3
3 Lean Amine Out 1 4" Note 1,2
2 Reboiler Vapor 1 6" Note 2
1 Reboiler Feed 1 4" M-1 Manw ay 1
8.0' Tube Bundle Length 1.0' 7.0'

Service Stripper Reboiler (Note 4)
A02484 E-104 0
Appendix H
E106AmineReclaimer
PROCESS INFORMATION
3
1. Provide 6" clearancet between the bottom of tube bundle and kettle shell for cleaning of viscous degradation products. 1 Liquid 9,320 61.88 251.9 27.6
OPERATING DATA
HLL 14"
2. Channel diameter shall be based on tube bundle diameter plus 6" channel clearance on top and bottom of tube bundle. 2 Vapor 731 0.071 252.7 27.6 LAN 24"
Residence
4
3. Minimum distance required between head seam and nozzle. 3 Liquid 8,588 61.49 252.7 27.6 11minutes NLL 1 32"
4. No. of reclaimer required = 1 4 Steam 742 0.1394 292.7 60.0 LAL 48"
5. Channel Length is based on vapor nozzle diameter + 1 ft clearance on each side. 5 Condensate 742 58.63 262.1 51.3 LLL *
3
6. Reclaimer capacity is based on 20 % of Amine Stripper Reboiler duty LCL
7. Nozzle for steam sparger to provide supplemental heating as required.


METALLURGY
4 LG will be nearest std. size to cover LC range.
12.2' Overall Length INTERNALS REM OVABLE 316SS (tubes) Total POST WELD TREATM ENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
2.2' 10.0' Length M IN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP 15.0 PSIG (M ARGIN + OPER) CODE
(Note 5) SYSTEM PSV SET AT PSIG LOCATED
J-1 M-1 2 Min SADDLES (C-527)

6 7
(Note 3) HEIGHT M IN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: (Note 2) THICK.
0.5' J-2 J-6

4
HLL
INSTRUMENTS
J-5
3.0' ID
J-4
Tube Bundle
2.0' J-3
J-2 LG 2
Channel ID (Note 1)
1.67' Diam.
NOZZLES
J-1 PSV 1
LLL
9
0.5' J-2 8
7 Steam Sparger 1 2" Note 7
PROCESS
6 Soda Ash Addition 1 2"
Min
5 Condensate Out 1 2"
5 1 3 (Note 3) 4 Steam In 1 2"
3 Liquid Out 1 4"
2 Reclaimer Vapor 1 2"
1 Reclaimer Feed 1 3" M-1 Manw ay 1
4.0' Tube Bundle Length 0.8' 5.2'

Service Reclaimer (Notes 4 & 6)
A02484 E-106 0
Appendix H
C108CarbonDrum
PROCESS INFORMATION
3
1. Activated Charcoal, total volume = 166 ft3 1 Lean Amine 2,147 64.833 100.0 106.4
OPERATING DATA
HLL 14"
2. Coarse size supporting media, 3/16" diameter top layer, 1" diam. bottom layer 3 Liquid 2,147 64.833 100.0 76.4 LAN 24"
Residence
4
3. Two Drums Required. NLL 1 32"
4. Cartridge or candle type filters are required at the inlet and the outlet of the carbon filters to filter out any particles in the feed and LAL 48"
any carbon fines at the outlet. LLL *

3
5. Bottom manway can be used for unloading carbon and supporting media. LCL
6. Flanged top for loading filters and carbon

2.0' ID (Note 3) VAPOR PRESSURE @ M AXIM UM AM BIENT 109 F 1.24 PSIA

METALLURGY
2 J-1 4 LG will be nearest std. size to cover LC range.
INTERNALS REM OVABLE 316SS Total POST WELD TREATM ENT FOR: (Other than CODE)
(Note 6)
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
MECHANICAL
3.5' (Note 4) M IN. DESIGN PRESSURE AT TOP 15.0 PSIG (M ARGIN + OPER) CODE
VESSEL SUPPORT DATA: SKIRT LEGS LUGS SERVICE (Cyclic, Let hal, etc)
1 SADDLES (C-527)
0.5' HEIGHT M IN. ABOVE GRADE FIREPROOFING INSULATION: (Note 2) THICK.
INSTRUMENTS
10.0' Tan to Tan
J-6
J-5
J-4
J-3
5.0' J-2
NOZZLES
Activated J-1 PSV 1
Charcoal 9
(Note1) 8
7
PROCESS
6
(Note5) 5
M1
4 Drain 1 2"
3 Filtered Lean Amine 1 2"
Liquid Collecor 2 Vent 1 2"
1 Lean Amine 1 2" M-1 Manw ay 1 24" Note 5
Support 3 1.0'
Media
(Note2)

4 JOB NUM BER VESSEL DESIGN DATA SHEET VESSEL No. REV.
Service Activated Carbon Filter Drum (Notes 3 & 4)
A02484 C-108 0
Appendix H
VesselStandards
VesselStandardVS506FeedDistributor VesselStandardVS548VortexBreaker
Appendix H
VesselStandardVS504ChimneyTray
Blowers
BLOWER NUMBER K-101
Flue Gas
SERVICE Blow er
GAS HANDLED Flue Gas
NORMAL FLOW SCFM 7,959
NORMAL FLOW LB / HR 35,547
DESIGN FLOW SCFM 8,755
MOLECULAR WIEGHT 28.25
Cp / Cv Value @ 1.40
F / PSIA 195 14.3
SUCTION CONDITIONS:
ORIGIN PSIA 14.70
TEMPERATURE F 195.00
LINE LOSS PSI (2) (0.40)
OTHER LOSSES PSI (1,2)
CONTINGENCY PSI
SUCTION PRESSURE PSIA 14.30
COMPR. FACTOR @ SUCTION 1.000
FLOW AT SUCTION ACFM 11,339
DISCHARGE CONDITIONS:
DELIVERY PSIA 16.57
LINE LOSS PSI (2) -
EXCHANGER LOSS PSI (2) -
HEATER LOSS PSI (2) -
CONTROL VALVE PSI (2) -
OTHER LOSSES PSI (1,2) -
CONTINGENCY PSI -
TOTAL LOSSES PSI (2) -
DISCHARGE PRESSURE PSIA 16.57
DISCHARGE TEMPERATURE F (2) 229.02
COMPR. FACTOR @ DISCH. 1.000
COMPRESSION RATIO 1.16
EFFICIENCY (% Polytropic) (2). 83.00
B. H. P. (2). 133
BLOWER TYPE Centrifugal
DRIVER TYPE Electrical
METALLURGY
BLADES CS
CASING CS
GAS COMPOSITION: VOL. %

N2 73.26
CO2 3.81
Ar 0.89
O2 12.32
H2O 9.72
H2S (ppmV) 11.0
Total 100.00
NOTES:
(1) INCLUDES ALLOWANCE FOR SUCTION OR DISCHARGE SNUBBER
(2) VALUE TABULATED IS ESTIMATED AND MUST BE VERIFIED BY FINAL MECHANICAL DESIGN.

No . DATE REVISIONS PROC. PROJ. CLIENT
JOB No. A02484
PROCESS DESIGN DATA - BLOWERS DRAWING No. REV
K-101 0

Appendix H
Pumps
PUMP NUMBER G100 A/B G101 A/B G102 A/B G103 A/B G104 A/B G105 A/B G106
Feed Scrubber Feed Scrub 1st

Rich Am ine Lean Am ine Wash Water Stripper Reflux Am ine Fill
2nd Stage Stg Wash
Pum p Pum p Circ. Pum p Pum p Pum p
SERVICE Wash Pum p Pum p
MATERIAL HANDLED Condensate Rich Amine Lean Amine Wash Water Reflux Wash Water Amine
OPERATING CONDITIONS:
NORMAL FLOW GPM 95 83 84 199 2 75 84
DESIGN FLOW GPM 105 92 92 229 3 83 92
TEMPERATURE F 120 130 149 107 100 120 100
SPECIFIC GRAVITY 0.99 1.08 1.03 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.04
VISCOSITY cp 0.56 1.64 1.10 0.64 0.68 0.56 2.11
VAPOR PRESSURE Psia 16.18 16.11 3.70 1.18 0.96 16.18 0.93
PUMP SUCTION: Fd Scrubber Btm Absorber Stripper Bottom Abs Wash Draw Stripper Reflux Fd Scrubber Btm Tank
ORIGIN Psia 16.18 16.11 27.65 15.32 21.35 16.18 14.70
DIFF. ELEVATION Psi (1) 21.42 7.92 7.56 63.68 4.31 7.28 2.25
LINE LOSS Psi (1) (0.10) (0.50) (15.50) (0.50) (0.50) (0.50) (0.50)
SUCT. PRESSURE Psia 37.49 23.53 19.70 78.49 25.16 22.96 16.45
Top of Scrub
PUMP DISCHARGE: Fd Scrubber Top Stripper Absorber Top Abs Wash Rtn Stripper Top Btm Bed Abs Top
DELIVERY Psia 16.18 27.40 15.32 15.12 27.35 16.18 15.12
DIFF. ELEVATION Psi (1) 32.98 60.38 56.09 72.84 62.00 17.99 56.81
EXCHANGER LOSS Psi (1) 10 21.00 5.00 10.00 - - -
DISCH. LINE LOSS Psi (1) 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 5.00 -
FURNACE LOSS Psi (1) - - - - - - -
CONTROL VALVE Psi (1) 6.33 10.05 - 6.33 5.56 5.00 5.00
OTHER LOSSES Psi (1) 2.00 2.00 32.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
CONTINGENCY Psi 5.00 5.14 - 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
DISCH. PRESS. Psia 74.49 127.96 111.40 113.29 104.91 51.17 83.92
TOTAL PUMP DIFF. Psi 37.00 104.43 91.70 34.80 79.75 28.21 67.47
TOTAL PUMP DIFF. Ft 86.38 224.28 206.28 80.98 185.02 65.86 149.85
AVAILABLE N.P.S.H. Ft - - - - - - -
PUMP TYPE Centrifugal Centrifugal Centrifugal Centrifugal Reciprocating Centrifugal Centrifugal
HYDRAULIC H.P. 2.27 5.57 4.92 4.65 0.12 1.36 3.62
EST. % EFFICIENCY (1). 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 60.00 65.00 60.00
EST. B.H.P. (1). 3.5 8.6 7.6 7.2 0.2 2.1 6.0
EST. DRIVER H.P. (1). 4 10 8 8 0.2 2.3 7
NO. of 100% PUMPS REQUIRED 2 2 2 2 2 2 1
METALLURGY
IMPELLER 304SS 316SS 316SS 316SS 316SS 304SS 316SS
CASING CS CS CS CS CS CS CS
NOTES:

PROCESS DESIGN DATA - Pumps JOB No. A02484

DRAWING No. REV
G-100,101,102,103, 104,105,106 0

Appendix H
G110 A&B
PUMP NUMBER G107 G108 G109 A&B G111 A&B G112 A&B
(Note 2)
Am ine Sum p Soda Ash Feed Condensate Abs Interclr Abs OH VOC PCC CW
Pum p Pum p Return Pum p Circ Pum p Wash Pum p Booster Pum p
SERVICE
MATERIAL HANDLED Amine Soda Ash Condensate Amine Water CW
OPERATING CONDITIONS:
NORMAL FLOW GPM 81 20 7 83 99 794
DESIGN FLOW GPM 81 20 9 92 119 953
TEMPERATURE F 100 60 100 130 100 82
SPECIFIC GRAVITY 1.04 1.00 0.99 1.08 0.99 1.00
VISCOSITY CS 2.11 1.00 0.23 1.64 0.68 0.76
VAPOR PRESSURE Psia 0.93 14.70 0.95 16.11 14.93 14.70
PUMP SUCTION: Amine Sump Fd Scrubber Btm Fd Scrubber Btm Absorber Absorber Wash CW Supply Hdr
ORIGIN Psia 14.70 14.70 60.00 16.11 14.93 14.70
DIFF. ELEVATION Psi (1) 2.25 2.17 3.01 27.94 62.40 -
LINE LOSS Psi (1) (0.50) (0.50) (15.50) (0.50) (0.50) (0.50)
SUCT. PRESSURE Psia 16.45 16.37 47.51 43.55 76.83 14.20

Top of Cooling
PUMP DISCHARGE: Amine Tank Fd Scrubber Top Fd Scrubber Top Absorber Absorber Wash Tow er
DELIVERY Psia 14.70 27.65 40.00 16.11 14.93 14.70
DIFF. ELEVATION Psi (1) 5.40 8.66 12.92 25.61 71.01 17.33
EXCHANGER LOSS Psi (1) - - - 15 - 10
DISCH. LINE LOSS Psi (1) - 2.00 - 2.00 3.00 10.00
FURNACE LOSS Psi (1) - - - - - -
CONTROL VALVE Psi (1) 5.00 5.00 12.33 8.00 5.00 12.33
OTHER LOSSES Psi (1) 2.00 2.00 32.00 2.00 2.00 12.00
CONTINGENCY Psi 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
DISCH. PRESS. Psia 32.10 50.31 102.25 73.72 100.94 81.36

TOTAL PUMP DIFF. Psi 15.65 33.94 54.74 30.17 24.11 67.16
TOTAL PUMP DIFF. Ft 34.76 78.37 127.13 64.80 56.02 155.06
AVAILABLE N.P.S.H. Ft - - - - - -
Vertical
PUMP TYPE Centrifugal Centrifugal Reciprocating Centrifugal Centrifugal Centrifugal
HYDRAULIC H.P. 0.74 0.40 0.27 1.61 1.67 37.32
EST. % EFFICIENCY (1). 60.00 60.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00
EST. B.H.P. (1). 1.2 0.7 0.4 2.5 2.6 57.4
EST. DRIVER H.P. (1). 1.4 0.7 0.5 3 3 64
NO. of 100% PUMPS REQUIRED 1 1 2 2 2 2
METALLURGY
IMPELLER 316SS CI CS 316SS 316SS CS
CASING CS CS CS CS CS CS
NOTES:
(2) NORMALLY NOT USED. REQUIRED FOR ABSORBER INTERCOOLER OPERTION.

PROCESS DESIGN DATA - Pumps JOB No. A02484

DRAWING No. REV
G-107,108,109,110,111,112 0

Appendix H
Exchangers
E100 E101 E102
EXCHANGER NUMBER
Fd Scrubber 2nd Stg
Lean/Rich Exchanger Lean Am ine Cooler
SERVICE Wash Cooler
FLUID IN SHELL Condensate Lean Amine Lean Amine
IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 84,545 84,545 42,942 42,942 42,942 42,942
LIQUID LB/HR 84,545 84,545 42,942 42,942 42,942 42,942
VAPOR LB/HR
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.03 1.03 1.04
VISCOSITY - LIQUID @T cP 0.56 0.69 0.39 1.10 1.10 2.11
MOL. WT. - TOTAL GAS
TEMPERATURE F 120.0 98.6 252.7 149.1 149.4 100.0
PRESSURE PSIG 6.5 1.5 13.0 5.0 96.7 91.7
P ALLOW / CALC PSI 5 / 8 / 5 /
DESIGN TEMP (1) F 375 375 375

DESIGN PRESS (1) PSIG 75 112 112
FOULING FACTOR - REQ.
FLUID IN TUBES CW Rich Amine CW
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 75,005 75,005 44,736 44,736 78,163 78,163
LIQUID LB/HR 75,005 75,005 44,736 44,736 78,163 78,163
VAPOR LB/HR
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T 1.00 1.00 1.07 1.04 1.00 1.00
TEMPERATURE F 81.5 95.0 130.5 234.2 81.5 95.0
PRESSURE PSIG 106.1 85.1
DESIGN TEMP (1) F 375 375 375

DUTY MMBTU/HR 1.01 4.07 1.06
TYPE EXCHANGER P&F P&F P&F
EST. MTD F 20.78 18.58 33.30
EST. TRANS. RATE-SERVICE 222 222 222
EST. AREA SQ.FT. 220 1,065 143

NO. of UNITS REQUIRED 1 1 1
EST. AREA per UNIT SQ.FT. 220 1,065 143
METALLURGY
SHELL or Plates 304SS 316SS 316SS
TUBE
COND/VAP. CURVE REF. DWG.
NOTES:

JOB No. A02484

PROCESS DESIGN DATA - Exchangers DRAWING No. REV
E-100,101,102 0

Appendix H
E103 E105 E108

EXCHANGER NUMBER
Abs OH Wash Water Steam Condensate
Regen OH Condenser
SERVICE Cooler Cooler
FLUID IN SHELL Stripper OH Vapor + Cond Wash Water Steam Condensate
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 2,901 2,901 98,891 94,692 3,709 3,709
LIQUID LB/HR 1,073 98,891 94,692 3,709 3,709
VAPOR LB/HR 2,901 1,828
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T - 1.00 0.99 1.03 0.92 1.00
VISCOSITY - LIQUID @T cP - 0.68 0.39 1.10 0.19 0.68
MOL. WT. - TOTAL GAS 28.40 42.85
TEMPERATURE F 217.7 100.0 106.8 100.0 292.7 100.0
PRESSURE PSIG 11.7 6.7 0.6 0.4 30.6 25.6
P ALLOW / CALC PSI 5 / 0.2 / 5 /
DESIGN TEMP (1) F 375 375 375

FLUID IN TUBES CW CW CW
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 90,084 90,084 40,630 40,630 53,333 53,333
LIQUID LB/HR 90,084 90,084 40,630 40,630 53,333 53,333
VAPOR LB/HR
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
TEMPERATURE F 81.5 95.0 81.5 95.0 81.5 95.0
PRESSURE PSIG
DESIGN TEMP (1) F 375 375 375

DUTY MMBTU/HR 1.22 0.55 0.72
TYPE EXCHANGER Weld P&F P&F P&F
EST. MTD F 55.07 14.88 75.64
EST. TRANS. RATE-SERVICE 400 222 222
EST. AREA SQ.FT. 55 166 43
NO. of UNITS REQUIRED 1 1 1
EST. AREA per UNIT SQ.FT. 55 166 43
METALLURGY
SHELL or Plates 316SS 316SS 304SS
TUBE
NOTES:

JOB No. A02484

E-103,105, E108 0

Appendix H
E109 E110
EXCHANGER NUMBER
Fd Scrub 1st Stg Wash Abs Intercool Cicr
SERVICE Cooler Cooler
FLUID IN SHELL Fd Scrub Wash Water Wash Water
IN OUT IN OUT
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 37,200 37,200 41,595 41,595
LIQUID LB/HR 37,200 37,200 41,595 41,595
VAPOR LB/HR
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.03
VISCOSITY - LIQUID @T cP 0.56 0.68 0.39 1.10
TEMPERATURE F 120.0 98.6 110.2 100.0
PRESSURE PSIG 6.5 1.5 15.6 0.6
P ALLOW / CALC PSI 5 / 15 /
DESIGN TEMP (1) F 375 375

DESIGN PRESS (1) PSIG 75 74
FLUID IN TUBES CW CW
IN OUT IN OUT
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 58,932 58,932 74,074 74,074
LIQUID LB/HR 58,932 58,932 74,074 74,074
VAPOR LB/HR
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
TEMPERATURE F 81.5 95.0 81.5 95.0
PRESSURE PSIG
P ALLOW / CALC PSI 5 / 5 /

DUTY MMBTU/HR 0.80 1.00
TYPE EXCHANGER P&F P&F
EST. MTD F 20.78 16.80
EST. TRANS. RATE-SERVICE 222 222
EST. AREA SQ.FT. 172 268
NO. of UNITS REQUIRED 1 1
EST. AREA per UNIT SQ.FT. 172 268
METALLURGY
SHELL or Plates 304SS 316SS
TUBE
NOTES:
0 4/25/2016 Issued For Task 3 Report AKL

JOB No. A02484

E-109, E110 0

Appendix H
E104 E106
KETTLE EXCHANGER NUMBER
Am ine Stripper Am ine Reclaim er
SERVICE Reboiler (note 3) (note 2 & 3)
FLUID IN SHELL Amine Amine
IN OUT IN OUT
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 46,600 46,600 9,320 9,320
LIQUID LB/HR 46,600 42,942 9,320 8,588
VAPOR LB/HR 3,657 731
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.95
TEMPERATURE F 251.9 252.7 252.7 300.0
PRESSURE PSIG 13.9 13.0 13.9 13.0
P ALLOW / CALC PSI 0.9 / 0.9 /

FLUID IN TUBES Steam Steam
IN OUT IN OUT
TOTAL FLUID LB/HR 3,709 3,709 742 742
LIQUID LB/HR 3,709 742
VAPOR LB/HR
NON-CONDEN. LB/HR 3,709 742
STEAM LB/HR
SP. GR. - LIQUID @ T 0.94 0.94
VISCOSITY - LIQUID @T cP 0.21 0.21
TEMPERATURE F 1,183.1 262.1 1,183.1 262.1
PRESSURE PSIG 45 36.6 45 36.6
P ALLOW / CALC PSI 8.4 / 8.4 /

DUTY MMBTU/HR 3.42 0.68
TYPE EXCHANGER Kettle Kettle
EST. MTD F 40.37 92.23
EST. TRANS. RATE-SERVICE 190 65
EST. AREA SQ.FT. 445 114
NO. of UNITS REQUIRED 1 1
EST. AREA per UNIT SQ.FT. 445 445
METALLURGY
SHELL 316SS 316SS
TUBE 316SS 316SS
NOTES:
(2) DESIGNED FOR 5% OF THE STRIPPER REBOILER DUTY
(3) KETTLE LAYOUTS ARE SHOWN IN THE ATTACHED VESSEL DRAWINGS

JOB No. A02484

E-104,106 0

The Power of Experience
NexantInc
101SecondStreet
Suite1000
SanFrancisco,CA94105
T)415.369.1000
F)415.369.9700
www.nexant.com

CCPP Final Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CCPP Final Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Report No: AUS8579 - 2

United Mexican States

Document of the World Bank

Existing NGCC, No Change Other NGCC Plant Modifications:

NetPowerPlantExport,MW 241.9 195.8 199.5 202.6 198.4 201.4 200.9 202.5

NetPlantHeatRate,MJ/kWh(Btu/kWh) 6.94(6584) 8.57(8134) 8.42(7984) 8.28(7860) 8.46(8025) 8.33(7907) 8.35(7926) 8.29(7862)

IncrementalWaterImport,lpm(gpm) 0(0) 1537(406) 3058(808) 1718(454) 1618(427) 1328(351) 2561(676) 1580(417)

Net Poza Rica Power Export, kW 241,857 241,467

Costs, $1,000 Total

TOTAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST 2,545.4 100.0

Thissectionlistssomeofthekeydesignbasisinformationused inthestudy. Thefulldesignbasis

Natural CO2 Compression&

SiemensSteam SiemensSteam Treated

Existing Cooling Tower #1

Existing Cooling Tower #2

Existing Cooling Tower #3

Existing NGCC, No Change Other NGCC Plant Modifications:

2. Developed overall balances on power generation/consumption, cooling water loads, and

13. Determined therelativeeconomicsof thePCC technologiesbasedonleastimpacttothe

Pre PCC Retrofit NGCC Simplified

1. Existing river water pumps and

Feed Water Existing CT Blowdown

A02484 PFD-Water Bal-101 0

NetPozaRicaPowerExport,kW 241,857 195,768

1. Existing river water pumps and 755 GPM

New PCC Makeup Wash Water

A02484 PFD-Water Bal-102 0

G-103 A & B MEA Storage Tank

K-101 FLUE GAS DUCT C-100

MEA REGENERATION CO2 COMPRESSION

E-104A K-301 K-301

E-104D E-301 A / E-302 A

E-101 B E-301 B / E-302 B

Stripper E-303 A / E-304 A

E-101 E E-303 B / E-304 B

TOTALOPERATING&MAINTENANCECOST 51.09 69.59

NetPowerPlantExport,MW 241.9 195.8

NetPlantHeatRate,MJ/kWh(Btu/kWh) 6.94(6584) 8.57(8134)

Asshownin Table62,alladvancedaminebased PCCtechnologylicensorsdesignwere basedon

PCCRegenerationHeatRelativeto 100% 74% 74% 77% 80% 75% 73%

CoolingLoadRelativeto30%MEA 100% 134% 107% 115% 88% 120% 115%

PCCAuxiliaryPowerConsumption 100% 155% 54% 109% N/A 59% 45%

ReportedCAPEXReference USGC Western USGC USGC Canada USGC USGC

CAPEX(USGC)Relativeto 100% 141% 107% 102% 112% 98% 112%

NetPowerPlantExport,MW 241.9 195.8 199.5 202.6 198.4 201.4 200.9 202.5

NetPlantHeatRate,MJ/kWh(Btu/kWh) 6.94(6584) 8.57(8134) 8.42(7984) 8.28(7860) 8.46(8025) 8.33(7907) 8.35(7926) 8.29(7862)

Thedatashowthatatthislevelofaccuracy,it cannot be determined if any one of the top 5 (all

Alstom BASF Fluor(85%Capture) HTCPurenergy MHI ShellCansolv

Alstom BASF Fluor(85%Capture) HTCPurenergy MHI ShellCansolv

Power Cooling Cooling PCCPilot Plant

Existing Cooling Tower #1

Existing Cooling Tower #2

Existing Cooling Tower #3

2. Developed overall balances on power generation/consumption, cooling water loads, and

Net Poza Rica Power Export, kW 241,857

1. Existing river water pumps 1,080 GPM

Exist ACF/RO/ED Purge 20 GPM

A02484 PFD-Water Bal-101 0

h. Provide an online analyzer for monitoring of CO2 and/or O2 concentrations, including

Other NGCC Plant Modifications:

O2 & CO2 CO2 Product Vent

30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW at 85% CO2 Recovery

30 Wt% MEA / 81.5 F CW at 85% CO2 Recovery

Waste Disposal Cost Allowance: