6/13/11

Comparative Evaluation of Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Technologies

Methodology to Evaluate The Performance of CO2 Separation Technologies - Solvents & Sorbents
-Pradeep Indrakanti

6/13/11

Acknowledgments
RECS, DOE-HQ and NETL LTI Christopher Munson, Vince Brisini, John Huston, Scott (Shiaoguo) Chen, Rick Noceti JM Energy Consulting
John Marano

Disclaimer
Reference in this presentation to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of author expressed in this presentation are his own, do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
6/13/11 2

6/13/11

Outline
Introduction to cost/performance analyses
Challenges Costs Examples of rigorous comparative analyses

Methodology to compare the performance of solvents, sorbents (not across categories)

Aqueous solvents Sorbents
6/13/11 3

Post-Combustion CO2 Capture

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

6/13/11

Source: DOE/NETL Advanced carbon dioxide capture R&D program: Technology update: May 2011

6/13/11

Technical Challenges
INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

6/13/11

Adapted from DOE/NETL Advanced carbon dioxide capture R&D program: Technology update: May 2011

Costs
INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Levelized Cost of Electricty (LCOE)

Capital Operations & Maintenance (O&M)
Fixed, Variable

Fuel
f(energy efficiency or energy penalty of the overall plant)

Transportation, Storage and Monitoring (TS&M)

Goal
DOE cost goal: 35% LCOE increase over a (PC) plant without CCS @ 90% capture (same net power)
6/13/11 6

6/13/11

Advantages & Challenges

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Solvents Fast kinetics Good heat integration Experience High energy (steam) load

Sorbents Fast kinetics, large capacities Lower heat requirement (solvents) Heat requirement

Membranes No steam load No chemicals Flue gas compression % recovery vs. recovery rate tradeoff Multiple stages, recycle streams
7

Non-reactive Heat transfer, pressure drop carrier fluid issues heating Sorbent attrition
6/13/11

Source: DOE/NETL Advanced carbon dioxide capture R&D program: Technology update: May 2011

Where is this type of analysis relevant?

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Lab-, bench-scale studies on new solvents, sorbents, membranes

Preliminary Assessment (solvent/process screening or evaluation) PC plant simulation + Simple CO2 capture models

Estimates may vary as much as 35%

Pilot plant/ Slipstream studies

PC plant simulation + CFD CO2 capture models (co-simulation)

6/13/11 8

6/13/11

Example of a bottom-up cost analysis

(Data from NETL/DOE post-combustion capture pathway study, preliminary results, DOE/NETL Advanced carbon dioxide capture R&D program: Technology update: May 2011)
INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

First year COE, $/MWh (mills/kWh)

120 100 80 60 40 20 0
d C -1 -1 ion ion ine nce SCP I KS I KS ress ress nam nha , MH PC, MH Eco omp omp e, e C in ec ec luor SCP nam wav USC ockwav C, F ock Eco SCP , sh uor r, sh l e e C, F bran sorb SCP d ad mem nce ed a anc Adv Adv
14.2 5 8 31.7 59.6 5.6 19.6 8.7 13 5.2 18.8 8.3 12.3 5.2 18.4 8.6 12.2 5 16.7 7.6 11.2 4.8 15.1 7.1 10.6 4.8 15.4 8.4 9.8

40% 35% 30% 25% 20%

SCPC: Supercritical pulverized coal power plant

56.1

55

50.4

46.9

42.9

Capital
6/13/11

Fixed O&M COE goal

Variable O&M %HHV

Fuel

TS&M

Takeaway Capital cost Fuel cost Fixed O&M

9

Comparison of Various PC CCS Analyses

IEAGHG Cost and Performance of CO2 Capture from Power Generation, IEA Working Paper, Finkenrath INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

6/13/11

Note correlation between increased LCOE and efficiency decrease

10

Efficiency, HHV

6/13/11

Credits: The Far Side Gallery 4 by Gary Larsen

6/13/11 11

A Simplified Case for Aqueous Solvents

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Flue gas, 90% CO2 removed Lean solution Absorption column Lean-rich heat exchanger

CO2 to compression CO2 + H2O Rich solution Stripper column Sensible heat Heat of CO2 desorption, Latent heat of water evaporation

Flue gas from direct-contact cooler

Reboiler
6/13/11

Steam

12

6/13/11

Econamine FG Plus flow diagram

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

6/13/11

Source: Bituminous coal baseline, DOE/NETL-2010/1397

13

Solvents: Energy Requirement

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Qrxn : Heat required to drive CO2 out of solution

(break solvent-CO2 bonds, heat of mixing, heat of solution) Hrxn

Qsensible : Heating the solvent without phase change

Mass of solution/kg CO2*specific heat of solution*change in temperature Qthregen
Cp*TLean-Rich HX/Cw , where Cw is the solution working capacity Cw = *xsolvent*MCO2/Msolution

Qwater_evap : Amount of water evaporated/kg CO2 * Latent heat of vaporization

pH2O/(Pstripper ovhd- pH2O)*Hvap(H2O)
[ Assumed pH2O vapor pressure ]

Electrical equivalent of thermal energy (Weqregen)

Electrical Energy = Electrical energy equivalent of steam used for CO2 Capture + Compression Work
6/13/11
eq Wregen = 0.75.(1-

Tcond

th Tsteam ).Qregen + R.T.ln(Pseq /Pdes )/(MCO2 * 0.75)

14

6/13/11

Recap: Parameters Required

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Solvent/solution properties
Heat of reaction Hrxn, Specific heat capacity Cp, Solution working capacity Cw
(difference of rich and lean loadings, molecular weight of solution, mole fraction of solvent)

Other
TLean-Rich HX, Stripper overhead pressure, temperature, Steam temperature, condenser water temperature

Caveat: Parameters are not independent of each other

Ex: Lower solvent working capacity (or higher lean loading) lower heat exchanger

T
Capex, opex increased L/G ratio
15

6/13/11

Solvents: Base Case

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

30 wt% aq. MEA (7m) Rich solvent loading, mole CO2/mole MEA Lean solvent loading, mole CO2/mole MEA Net solvent loading, () mol CO2/mol MEA Solvent Cp, kJ/(kg-K)* Mole fraction of solvent in solution (Xsolvent)* Molecular weight of solution (Msolution), kg/kg-mole*
*: Used to calculate solvent working capacity

0.484 0.242 0.242 3.7 0.11 22.83 0.05 (0.242*0.11*44/22.83)

10 82 40 95 120 1.8 41
16

Solvent working capacity, kg CO2/kg solvent Cw = *xsolvent*MCO2/Msolution

T (lean-rich HX), C Hrxn, kJ/g-mol CO2 Tabsorber, C Tstripper overhead, C Tstripper bottom, C Pstripper overhead, atm Hvap, H2O, kJ/g-mol H2O

6/13/11

MEA Energy Penalty

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Qthregen : 3237 kJ/kg CO2 Energy penalty: 24% NETL bituminous coal baseline comparison: 3556 kJ/kg CO2
Qrxn : 1864 Qsensible : 707 Qstripping : 666 < 30% because 130 C steam (~3 bar)
210 C: ~31% energy penalty.

Breakdown (kJ/kg CO2) Electrical equivalent of work

0.248 kWh/kg CO2 Reboiler steam at 130 C (266 F)

6/13/11

17

INTRODUCTION

EXAMPLES

SOLVENTS 30 wt% MEA

SORBENTS

Q&A

30% MEA, MEA Case MEA Case MEA Case Hi T(HX) 1 2 3 0.242 0.257 0.121 0.12

(rich-lean gas molar loading), mole CO2/ mole solvent Cp solvent, kJ/kg/K Xsolvent, mole solvent/mole solution Molecular weight of solution, kg/kg-mole Solvent Working Capacity, Cw, kg CO2/kg solvent T, lean-rich HX, K Hrxn, kJ/mol CO2 CO2 absorption T, C Tstripper, top, C Tstripper, bottom (reboiler), C Overhead pressure, atm pH2O, overhead, atm kg H2O/kg CO2 Hvap (H2O), kJ/kg H2O Qrxn, kJ/kg CO2 Qsensible, kJ/kg CO2 Qwaterevap, kJ/kg CO2 Total heat consumption/stripping heat, Qreboiler kJ/kg CO2 Electricity equivalent of heat, WE, kJ/kg CO2 Compression Work, WC @75%, kJ/kg CO2 Total stripping+comp work, kWhe/kg CO2 Auxiliary loads Total energy penalty
6/13/11

0.242 3.7 0.11 22.83 0.052 10 82 40 95 120 1.8 0.75 41 1864 707 666 3237 543 349 0.2477 3% 23.9%

-Same as base case0.052 20 0.056 0.026 0.0268 5

10 5 -Same as base case-Same as base case-

1.8

1.6 1.6 -Same as base case41 1864 666 823 3353 562 358 0.2557 3% 24.6% 41 1864 707 823 3394 569 358 0.2576 3% 24.8%

1.6

41 1864 1415 666 3945 662 349 0.2807 3% 26.7%

41 1864 690 823 3377 566 358 0.2568 3% 24.7%

18

6/13/11

Adsorbent CO2 Capture

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Lean sorbent to adsorber

Moving Bed

Flue gas to stack

Rich sorbent to regenerati on (stripping) Steam In

Flue gas to adsorber CO2 adsorber

CW

(compression/ recovery)

CO2 to

Source: NETL In-House Postcombustion Sorbent-Based Carbon Dioxide Capture Research, Pennline et al., Annual IEP Contractors Meeting, March 24, 2009

19

Sorbents: Theoretical Regeneration Energy

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Thermal Regeneration Energy Heating sorbent, desorbing CO2, heating CO2, desorbing & heating water
sorbent

Cpsorb (Tdes - Tads ) Qregen =

Cw +
CO2

HCO2 ,des + CpCO2 .Tdes - Cpsorb .Tads +

wtH2O/wtCO2 { HH2O,des + Cpsteam .Tdes - Cpsorb .Tads }

eq regen

= 0.75.(1-

Tcond

water

Tsteam ).Q

th regen

+ R.T.ln(Pseq /Pdes )/(MCO2 * 0.75)

20

10

6/13/11

Adsorbents: Base Case & Parameter Variations

Base Case
Sorbent CO2 capacity: 1.7 g-mol CO2/kg sorbent (7.5 wt%) Enthalpy of CO2 desorption: 650 BTU/lb CO2 (66.5 kJ/g-mol CO2) CO2 adsorber temperature: 333 K** Desorption temperature: 378 K** Auxiliary Power: 3% of gross power Steam temperature: 388 K Enthalpy of water desorption: 40 kJ/g-mol H2O Mass H2Odesorbed/Mass CO2 : 0.05
6/13/11
**: Factors in Reactor Design for Carbon Dioxide Capture with Solid, Regenerable Sorbents, Hoffman et al. and fieldscale testing (ADA). : Lowest heat of adsorption measured for diamine-silica (SBA-15) : -48 kJ/mol

Parameters Varied Enthalpy of CO2 desorption: 650, 450 BTU/lb CO2 (66.5 to 46.1 kJ/g-mol CO2) Sorbent CO2 capacity: 1.7,3.0 g-mol CO2/kg sorbent (7.5 to 13 wt%)

21

Cumulative Reduction in Energy Penalty

Effects of sorbent capacity and heat of CO2 adsorption HH2O = 40 kJ/g-mole, mass H2O/CO2 = 0.05
INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

24% 22% 20% 18% 16% 14% 12%

Enthalpy of CO2 desorption CO2 Carrying Capacity

MEA @ 3.2 GJth/T CO2, 10 K T

Energy Penalty %

Base: 66.5 kJ/g-mol CO2, 7.5 wt% Cw, 20.16% penalty 59.4 kJ/mol 66.7 kJ/mol CO2, 7.5% Cw, CO2, 13% Cw, -0.55% 59.4 kJ/mol -1.11% CO2, 13% Cw, 46.1 kJ/mol -1.66% CO2, 13% Cw, -2.68%

46.1 kJ/mol CO2, 13% Cw

22

11

6/13/11

Discussion & Conclusions

INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

Comparative Analyses
LCOE = f( Capital Costs, O&M, Fuel Cost..) Fuel Cost = f(Energy Penalty, Type of Boiler..) Energy Penalty = CO2 Separation + Compression + Auxiliary Work

Going forward
Correlation between COE and energy penalty not always positive What parameter combination results in lowest COE?
6/13/11 23

Questions
INTRODUCTION EXAMPLES SOLVENTS SORBENTS Q&A

6/13/11

24

12