Advanced Amine Solvent Formulations and Process Integration for Near-Term CO2 Capture Success

This Phase I SBIR project investigated the economic and technical feasibility of advanced amine scrubbing systems for post-combustion CO2 capture at coal-fired power plants. Numerous combinations of advanced solvent formulations and process configurations were screened for energy requirements, and three cases were selected for detailed analysis: a monoethanolamine (MEA) base case and two “advanced” cases: an MEA/Piperazine (PZ) case, and a methyldiethanolamine (MDEA) / PZ case. The MEA/PZ and MDEA/PZ cases employed an advanced “double matrix” stripper configuration. The basis for calculations was a model plant with a gross capacity of 500 MWe. Results indicated that CO2 capture increased the base cost of electricity from 5 cents/kWh to 10.7 c/kWh for the MEA base case, 10.1 c/kWh for the MEA / PZ double matrix, and 9.7 c/kWh for the MDEA / PZ double matrix. The corresponding cost per metric tonne CO2 avoided was 67.20 $/tonne CO2, 60.19$/tonne CO2, and 55.05 $/tonne CO2, respectively. Derated capacities, including base plant auxiliary load of 29 MWe, were 339 MWe for the base case, 356 MWe for the MEA/PZ double matrix, and 378 MWe for the MDEA / PZ double matrix. When compared to the base case, systems employing advanced solvent formulations and process configurations were estimated to reduce reboiler steam requirements by 20 to 44%, to reduce derating due to CO2 capture by 13 to 30%, and to reduce the cost of CO2 avoided by 10 to 18%. These results demonstrate the potential for significant improvements in the overall economics of CO2 capture via advanced solvent formulations and process configurations

Advanced Amine Solvent Formulations and Process Integration for Near-Term CO2 Capture Success

This Phase I SBIR project investigated the economic and technical feasibility of advanced amine scrubbing systems for post-combustion CO2 capture at coal-fired power plants. Numerous combinations of advanced solvent formulations and process configurations were screened for energy requirements, and three cases were selected for detailed analysis: a monoethanolamine (MEA) base case and two “advanced” cases: an MEA/Piperazine (PZ) case, and a methyldiethanolamine (MDEA) / PZ case. The MEA/PZ and MDEA/PZ cases employed an advanced “double matrix” stripper configuration. The basis for calculations was a model plant with a gross capacity of 500 MWe. Results indicated that CO2 capture increased the base cost of electricity from 5 cents/kWh to 10.7 c/kWh for the MEA base case, 10.1 c/kWh for the MEA / PZ double matrix, and 9.7 c/kWh for the MDEA / PZ double matrix. The corresponding cost per metric tonne CO2 avoided was 67.20 $/tonne CO2, 60.19$/tonne CO2, and 55.05 $/tonne CO2, respectively. Derated capacities, including base plant auxiliary load of 29 MWe, were 339 MWe for the base case, 356 MWe for the MEA/PZ double matrix, and 378 MWe for the MDEA / PZ double matrix. When compared to the base case, systems employing advanced solvent formulations and process configurations were estimated to reduce reboiler steam requirements by 20 to 44%, to reduce derating due to CO2 capture by 13 to 30%, and to reduce the cost of CO2 avoided by 10 to 18%. These results demonstrate the potential for significant improvements in the overall economics of CO2 capture via advanced solvent formulations and process configurations