Professional Documents
Culture Documents
) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Carbon Dioxide Post-Combustion Capture: Solvent Technologies Overview, Status and Future Directions
Mohammad R. M. Abu-Zahra1,* , Zeina Abbas1, Prachi Singh2, Paul Feron3
1
Masdar Institute of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 54224, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, Orchard Business Centre, Stoke Orchard, Cheltenham GL52 7RZ, UK 3 CSIRO Energy Technology, P. O. Box 330, Newcastle, NSW 2300, Australia *Corresponding author: mabuzahra@masdar.ac.ae, +9712 810 9181
2
1. Introduction
One of the most promising approaches to tackle the high emission rate of carbon dioxide is the use of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology. This technology aims at capturing carbon dioxide from power stations and other industrial facilities, compressing, and then transporting it to underground storage locations. Three technological routes for carbon capture from power plants exist: pre-combustion, post-combustion and oxycombustion. Pre-combustion is the removal of the carbon element from fuel gas prior to combustion [1]. This process takes place in Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plants and operates at high pressures for high concentrations of CO2. IGCC plants still face several obstacles to commercialization. For instance, only two IGCC demonstration plants are in operation in the power sector in the United States. The second option is oxy-fuel combustion, which involves the use of high purity oxygen (instead of air) for fuel combustion and produces a CO2/H2O stream from which water is easily condensed [2]. However, the air (or nitrogen-oxygen) separation step is considered a bottle-neck for this process due to its energy intensiveness and high capital and operational costs. Finally, postcombustion capture involves a highly energy intensive nitrogen-carbon dioxide separation step [3]. As an end-of-pipe technology, this process is easier to implement compared to the other capture routes. In this chapter, the focus will be placed on post-combustion capture technology due to its high maturity, ability to be retrofitted to existing power plants and operational flexibility in switching between capture and no-capture modes [4].
2. Post-Combustion Capture
Post-combustion capture (PCC) is the separation of low concentration CO2 (typically 3-15 %) from flue gas and the production of a relatively pure CO2 stream, which is then compressed to a pressure of approximately 110 bar and transported via pipelines to be stored in geological formations or used for other applications, such as Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR). Although PCC incurs high costs making commercialization difficult, it is viewed as the best available technology for CO2 capture, specifically for coal-fired power plants, mainly due to its maturity level, high CO2 selectivity and retrofit-ability to the power plants [5]. Several separation technologies can be employed within the PCC category, including: adsorption, cryogenics, membranes and absorption [6]. Comparative assessment studies [[8]-[10]] have shown that the absorption process, specifically based on chemical solvents, is currently the preferred option for post-combustion CO2 capture. Chemical absorption offers high capture efficiency, high selectivity at low partial pressures, and the lowest energy use and costs when compared with the other separation techniques. For this reason, details on the chemical absorption for postcombustion capture technology only are shown in this chapter. Due to the acidity of CO2 and the basicity of chemical solvents, a reversible acidbase neutralization reaction takes place upon their interaction in a packed absorber column at a temperature ranging between 40 and 65C, forming a CO2 rich solvent while the rest of the flue gas is vented. The rich solvent solution is then pumped to the stripper to regenerate the solvent and separate the CO2 by increasing the temperature to approximately 90-120 C using low pressure reboiler steam. Water vapor in the CO2 product is then condensed, resulting in a highly concentrated (>99%) CO2 product stream. This stream is liquefied or compressed for transportation to be utilized commercially or stored underground. The regenerated solvent is cooled to absorption temperature (at 4065 C) and is recycled back into the absorption column [11]. Chemical absorption based PCC, using monoethanolamine (MEA) solvent, was first commercially employed in the 1970s for use in EOR operations and commercial applications, such as carbonation of brine and production of dry ice, urea and beverages [[12]-[13]]. However, the largest capacity of CO2 recovered in these applications was approximately ten times less than that of a typical 500 MW coal-fired power plant [14]. Although development of solvents was made more than 80 years ago for CO2 separation in natural gas processing applications, several studies have shown that amine-based absorption systems are the most suitable option for CO2
FORMATEX 2013
923
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
separation from flue gas emitted from power plants [15]. However, the commercialization of this technology faces major obstacles: intensive solvent regeneration energy, huge absorption towers and high solvent losses and degradation. These obstacles call for the need of developing more economical and efficient solvent systems. Typically, a good solvent candidate should have high CO2 loading with fast kinetics to reduce plant sizes. It should also require low heat of regeneration for the process to be energy efficient. Moreover, it should have high selectivity and high solubility for CO2, so as to avoid reactions with the other impurities in the flue gas stream. Furthermore, it must have low byproduct formation and low decomposition rates to maintain solvent performance and to limit the amount of solvent makeup and waste materials produced. Significant research efforts are being directed at developing improved solvents to be able to commercialize chemical absorption technology for carbon capture from flue gas [[16]-[19]].
924
FORMATEX 2013
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
molecular weight, reasonable thermal stability and thermal degradation rate [5]. In a commercial process, up to 30 wt% MEA has been employed successfully to remove 80% - 95% of the carbon dioxide from the feed gas [3]. Although the MEA-based chemical absorption process is considered to be a well-established technology for CO2 capture, the solvent has its own drawbacks [34]. MEA has a high enthalpy of reaction with CO2. Substantial energy is required to break the bonds, leading to high energy requirement in the stripper, making the process uneconomical [5]. Moreover, MEA has relatively low CO2 loading capacity which results in large MEA recirculation rates and ultimately, large equipment sizes and high capital cost. Other problems associated with MEA are solvent losses and degradation [[35], [36]]. MEA has a relatively high vapor pressure, causing high solvent carryover during the absorption and regeneration step [23]. MEA degradation is usually caused by the reaction between MEA and flue gas constituents, such as oxygen, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides, or by the effect of the thermal degradation, resulting in the formation of heat stable salts. Moreover lighter degradation components are formed such as N-nitrosamines which are considered to be harmful for human health and the environment [123]. These MEA losses reduce the CO2 absorption capacity and induce higher solvent makeup rates. Furthermore, MEA is highly corrosive in nature and it also might react with materials used in reactor vessels, piping, and other process compartments. This means that high concentrations of MEA cannot be used unless a corrosion inhibitor is added [37]. Appropriate materials of construction and mild operating conditions are also required to reduce corrosive effects of MEA [38]. In spite of all the problems associated with MEA, it is considered to be the baseline solvent for CO2 capture from flue gases. Process improvements are currently being made for the MEA system to be a competitive option for CO2 capture. The second most widely used alkanolamine in the gas processing industry is DEA. It has a lower regeneration energy requirement than MEA, but a much lower absorption rate and capacity [39]. Similar to MEA, DEA is also prone to losses and degradation, but to a relatively lower extent.
Table 1 Physical and thermodynamic properties of amine solvents.
Solvent
Rich Loading (mol CO2/mol amine) 0.50 (PCO2= 5 kPa) [45] 0.48 (PCO2= 1.5 kPa) [45] 0.56 (30 wt% at 40C) [46] 0.45-0.55 [47] 0.30-0.35 (for 15-20 wt% MEA) [48] 0.46 (30 wt% MEA) [49] 0.35-0.40 (for 25-30 wt% DEA) [48] 0.45-0.55 (for 35-55 wt% MDEA) [48] 0.84 (30 wt% AMP) [49] 0.41 (8 m PZ) [56] 0.42 (PCO2= 8.4 kPa) [45] 0.40 (PCO2= 5 kPa) [45] 0.31-0.39 [47][48]
Reaction enthalpy (kJ/mol CO2) 70.5 (30 wt% MEA) [46] 82 (7 m MEA with PCO2= 1.5 kPa) [47] 84 [48] 83 (5M MEA at 25C) [50] 66.7 (30 wt% MEA at 40C) [51] 66.5 [48] 59 [48] 44.6 (20 wt% MDEA at 40C) [51] 58.2 (20 wt% AMP at 40C) [51] 70 [[47], [57]]
MEA
0.077 (at 25C) [53] 0.0013 (at 20C) [43] 0.1347 (at 20C) [43] 0.1066 (at 20C) [43]
380 (at 30C) [44] 101 (at 20C) [44] 2.26 (26.73 wt% at 30C) [54] 11.5 (8 m PZ) and 21.1 (10 m PZ) [55]
The tertiary amine MDEA, on the other hand, has found increased usage in carbon capture, due to its relatively low regeneration energy requirement for CO2 liberation, low tendency to form degradation products, and low corrosion rates [23]. MDEA is being used for natural gas processing on large industrial scale. Furthermore, it is less basic than MEA and DEA and can be used in significantly higher concentrations. However, MDEA is well known for its relatively slow kinetics compared with those of MEA or DEA [24]. As for sterically hindered amines, AMP is the most common for CO2 absorption. AMP is two orders of magnitude slower in oxidative degradation and more resistant to thermal degradation than MEA [40]. The CO2 loading of AMP can reach a ratio of one to one. Piperazine, on the other hand, is considered a promising solvent as compared to MDEA or AMP. This is due to its high acid gas loading capacity (two moles of CO2 per one mole of PZ), high reaction rate with CO2 (greater than that of MEA, DEA, MDEA and AMP), and high resistance to thermal and oxidative degradation [41]. The apparent second order rate constant of PZ has been found to be an order of magnitude higher than that of MEA [42]. The main physical and thermodynamic characteristics of the five common solvents (MEA, DEA, MDEA, AMP and PZ) are shown in Table 1.
FORMATEX 2013
925
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
926
FORMATEX 2013
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
These solvents are claimed to have higher CO2 working capacities than MEA, ranging from 20-80%, and can be used at higher amine concentration. The key features claimed for the PSR solvents are lower regeneration temperature, lower solvent circulation rate, lower solvent degradation rate and lower corrosion rate. Relative energy requirements are reportedly 55-85% of conventional amines. The ability to regenerate PSR solvents at temperatures 5-10C (9-18F) lower than that of MEA not only reduces amine degradation, but potentially facilitates process integration by permitting the use of lower pressure steam [74]. The PSR process is being tested on a 4 ton/day CO2 capture facility at the Sask Power 875 MW lignite fired Boundary Dam Power Station under the auspices of the ITC, a consortium of 13 industrial and governmental organizations including two Canadian Universities. Although post combustion carbon capture has been demonstrated commercially in large scale, the CO2 containing feed stream to the capture process is mainly emitted from industrial processes. There is a need for commercial scale plants that treat flue gas from power plants. However, achieving this goal faces obstacles such as high cost and high solvent losses. For this reason, research efforts have been going on in order to develop suitable amine solvents (both single solvent systems and blended amines) which can make the commercialization of post combustion carbon capture feasible.
FORMATEX 2013
927
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
hence, a reduction in capital and operating costs. Investigation of the CO2 absorption and desorption characteristics of different amine blends have been approached by several researchers. For example, Veawab et al. [[74], [86], [87]] studied the absorption characteristics of MEA, DEA, MDEA and their blends and found that the absorption performance and stripping energy requirements are greatest in MEA, followed by DEA and then MDEA, while those of the blended alkanolamines lay between their parent alkanolamines. Additionally, Idem and Veawab [88] reported substantial reduction in energy requirements and modest reduction in circulation rates for MEA/MDEA blends in their studies at two CO2 capture pilot plants, one based on natural gas and the other on coal-fired. An aqueous 4:1 molar ratio MEA/MDEA showed a significant reduction in heat duty compared to an equivalent concentration of aqueous MEA. These results were also confirmed by Huttenhuis et al. [89]. The use of PZ activated aqueous MDEA solutions was first patented by BASF as it proved to be successful when applied to the bulk removal of CO2 in ammonia plants [90]. BASF has also been developing a wide range of advanced amine-based solvents for efficiently recovering CO2 emitted from flue gas [91]. Closmann et al. [92] studied the MDEA/PZ blend in a molality ratio of 7.7 : 1.2. Outcomes of the study showed that the heat of CO2 absorption of the blended solvent is about 75 kJ/mol while that of 7 m MEA is around 84 kJ/mol. MDEA/PZ blend also showed better performance than MEA and MDEA alone for resistance to thermal and oxidative degradation at typical absorption/stripping conditions. The resistance to oxidative degradation was found to be highest in the blend, followed by MDEA and then PZ. Furthermore, Bishnoi and Rochelle [42] reported that 6 M PZ/4 M MDEA blend absorbed CO2 faster than MEA or DEA blends with MDEA at similar concentrations. Park et al. [93] studied the absorption rates of CO2 into aqueous mixtures of MDEA and hexamethylenediamine (HMDA). As the concentration of HMDA increased from 0.7 wt% to 14.4 wt%, the absorption rate constant was increased from 25% to 292% compared with 20.5 wt% MDEA. Han et al. [94] also confirmed a similar effect of HMDA in MEA blends but results showed higher absorption rate and capacity using HMDA/AMP blends. Singh et al. [122] tested HMDEA/AMP blend in a pilot plant for 10 vol% CO2 and found that regeneration energy requirement is lower (3.41 MJ/kgCO2) than that of MEA (4.33 MJ/kg CO2). Furthermore, Mangalapally and Hasse [[95], [96]] have presented high performance new solvents named as CESAR1 and CESAR2. CESAR1 is a mixture of AMP and PZ whereas CESAR2 is a primary amine with two amine groups (1,2- Ethanediamine (EDA)). Their pilot plant results showed that the new solvents require lower flow rates and regeneration energy as compared to standard MEA. For example, CESAR1 requires 20% less regeneration energy and 45% less solvent flow rate than MEA. Currently there is also research and development in the area of amine based solvents in combination with enzymes, which acts as a catalyst to transform carbon dioxide to bicarbonate such as Carbonic Anhydrase. Carbonic Anhydrase is an enzyme found in the blood of humans and other mammals. This enzyme facilitates the transfer of CO2 during respiration. Genetic modification of this enzyme makes it possible to use it in combination with aqueous alkanolamine solutions within an industrial environment, like flue gas treatment [121].
6. Pilot Activities
As a primary step to achieving commercialization for amine based post combustion carbon capture, pilot plants using chemical absorption have been commissioned at several power plants worldwide. Currently, there are numerous pilot scale post-combustion capture plants running worldwide and deploying various forms of amines. Both Research and Development (R&D) institutions and industrial companies have contributed to the establishment of these pilot plants. Major R&D groups include CSIRO, the University of Texas, the University of Regina, NTNU and University of Melbourne. Industrial companies which supply the amine technologies include: Fluor (Econamine FG PlusTM technology), MHI (KM-CDR process), Aker Clean Carbon, BASF (aMDEA technology), Cansolv (Cansolv absorbent DC), Alstom (Chilled Ammonia process), Siemens (PostCap amino acid salt technology), Babcock&Wilcox (Regenerable Solvent Absorption Technology), HTC Purenergy, Toshiba, Powerspan (ECO2) and Hitachi [63]. The capacity of operating pilot plants ranges between 0.5 to 50 tons/day. The most commonly used solvents in these pilot plants are MEA, KS-1, chilled ammonia, and Cansolv solvents. A list of the pilot activities taking place worldwide is shown in Table 2.
928
FORMATEX 2013
Capacity 3 t/day 1 t/day 4 t/day 24 t/day 50 t/day 1 t/day 2 t/day KS-1 10 t/day 1800 t/yr 15,000 t/yr 10 t/h 10 t/h 1.2 t/day 100 t/day N.A. N.A. 1,000 t/yr 3,000 t/yr 3,000 t/yr 600 t/yr 1,000 t/yr 2.25 ton/hr 0.3 t/hr 0.05 t/hr 10 t/day 4.5 t/day MEA Amine solvent Amino Acid Salt formulations Amino Acid Salt Proprietary advance-amine technology Chilled ammonia Chilled ammonia Chilled ammonia MEA KM-CDR process with KS-1 solvent KS-1TM KS-1TM and other solvents BASF PuraTreatTM and other new solvents 2009-ongoing 2004-ongoing 1991-ongoing 1991-ongoing 2006-ongoing 2009-ongoing 2008-ongoing 2009-ongoing 2012-ongoing 2012-ongoing 2011-ongoing 2009-ongoing 2013-ongoing 2010-ongoing 2008-ongoing 2009-ongoing 2008-ongoing 2010-ongoing -ongoing -ongoing 2009-ongoing 2010 2006-2012 2000- ongoing [97] [97] [97]
Project C2P3 University of Texas Separations Research Program (SRP) ITC (University of Regina) ITC/consortium Saskpower power station Boundary Dam (Saskatchewan)
Technology/Solvent used MEA and 2 variants of PZ- promoted K2CO3 MEA and MEA/MDEA Fluors Econamine FGSM Technology 30 wt% MEA, CASTOR-1 and CASTOR-2, CESAR1 and CESAR2
CO2CRC/International Power (Hazelwood coal-fired power plant, Australia) MHI-KEPCO (MHI Hiroshima R&D Centre) MHI/KEPCO Nanko Pilot Plant
[[97], [98]] [[98], [99]] [63] [[97], [98]] [100] [63] [63] [63] [101] [102] [103] [103] [[104],[105]] [[105],[106]] [[105],[106]] [105] [[105],[106]] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112]
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
FORMATEX 2013
MHI/KEPCO/J-Power Matsushima Thermal Power Station of Electric Power Development Co. (Nagasaki) Alstom and DOW Chemical Alstom/EPRI/ We Energies (Wisconsin) Alstom/AEP/US DOE Mountaineer plant (New Haven) Alstom/Statoil (Mongstadt) Imperial College London Doosan Power Systems, SSE and Vattenfall CCPilot100+ (Ferrybridge power station, Yorkshire, UK) Siemens and E.ON (Staudinger power station, Germany) Tampa Electric/Siemens Big Bend Station project (Florida) Tarong Energy/CSIRO/Stanwell corporation Tarong power station (QLD) CSIRO/China Huaneng Group Gaobeidian power station (Beijing) CSIRO/Delta electricity Munmorah power station (New South Wales) CSIRO transportable pilot plant (China) CSIRO Loy Yang power station (Victoria) IFP Energies nouvelles/ENEL Brindisi power plant (Italy) (HiCapt+TM process) EnBW CHP Plant Heilbronn SINTEF/NTNU pilot plant (Norway) Sigma Power Ariake Co. Ltd/Toshiba Mikawa power plant (Japan) Amine based solvents Aqueous ammonia Alternative solvents Amine based solvents, including MEA Different solvents, including MEA (20 wt% to 40 wt%) Amine solvent New CO2 capture solvents Amine based Toshiba solvent MEA and proprietary solvents, including H3 (Hitachis proprietary solvent) MEA and H3-1 solvents
929
930
1 t/h 250 kg/h 0.5 t/h 1 t/h 50 t/h 3 t/h 4 t/h 25 kg/h 4 t/h 1 t/h 1 Mt/yr 180 kg/h 25 t/d 250 kg/h Alstom amine technology Amine solvents Amine solvents Amine solvents Various solvents UCARSOLTM FGC 3000 (DOW solvent) using Alstoms Advanced Amine Process technology 20 wt% MEA using ABB Lumus technology ECO2 2012-ongoing 1998-currently not operational 2012-ongoing CANSOLV solvents MEA solvent using Econamine FG+ CANSOLV solvents CANSOLV solvents KS-1 Chilled ammonia 2012-ongoing 2010-ongoing 2009-ongoing Variable 2010-ongoing 2009-ongoing CANSOLV solvents 2010-ongoing [63]
H3-1 solvent Amine solvents developed by Hitachi Amino Acid Salt solutions Amine solvents N.A. 2008- ongoing 2009- ongoing
[113] [[63], [113]] [63] [63] [114] [63] [63] [63] [63] [[63], [115] [63] [63] [116] [66] [117] [63] [63]
Babcock-Hitachi Kure Research Laboratory (Japan) Hitachi/Electrabel/GDF Suez/E.ON mobile pilot plant TNO/E.ON Maasvlakte pilot plant RWE/BASF/Linde RWE Coal Innovation Centre (Niederaussem) RWE/Cansolv Technologies/BOC/IM Skaugen/The Shaw group Inc./Tullow Oil Plc. (South Wales) RWE Aberthaw pilot plant Fluor/E.ON power station (Wilhelmshaven, Germany) E.ON/Cansolv Technologies (Heyden) Cansolv transportable pilot plant E.ON/MHI E.ON/Alstom power (Sweden) Powerspan/Basin Electric Antelopes Valley power station (North Dakota)
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
FORMATEX 2013
PG Elektrownia Belchatow (Poland) Aker Clean Carbon Scottish power (Longannet) China Huaneng Group Beijing Cogeneration plant
2004-currently not operational 2017 2009-ongoing 2008-ongoing 2009-ongoing 2011-ongoing 2008-2010 2010
South Energy/MHI/SCS/SECARB/EPR Plant Barry power station (Alabama) First Energy/Powerspan/Ohio Coal development office (Ohio) Doosan/Emissions Reduction Test Facility (ERTF)
Chilled ammonia and KS-1 solvents (MHI technology) N.A. MEA solvent & RS-2 solvent
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
7. Conclusions
Amine scrubbing is a proven technology and is ready to be tested and used on large coal-fired power plants. As a tailend technology, it offers flexibility through implementation in scale-up, on/off operation during peak demand, and can be retrofit to existing utility plants. Other advanced technologies will not provide solutions as energy-efficient or as timely to decrease CO2 emissions. Amongst the different amine solvents used for CO2 separation, 30 wt% MEA has served as the standard for the evaluation of processes for post-combustion capture. However, this solvent needs to be improved due to its drawbacks and other more economically efficient amines need to be developed. Pilot plants have already been built at several power stations to demonstrate the amine based post-combustion chemical absorption process. However, large scale commercialization of this process is yet to be performed. There is a need for full integration of the carbon capture process to power plants. In the direction for large scale CO2 post-combustion capture plants; novel solvents focusing on amine blends together with improved capture process configurations are required. In addition, the capture process integration with the power plant, plant flexibility, process control and the ability to incorporate future process/solvent improvements are essential to have successfully operational capture plant in commercial scale.
References
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] Cormos, C.C., Evaluation of Power Generation Schemes Based on Hydrogen-Fuelled Combined Cycle with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2011. 36: p. 3726-3738. Hadjipaschalis, I., G. Kourtis, and A. Poullikkas, Assessment of Oxyfuel Power Generation Technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2009. 13(9): p. 2637-2644. Metz, B., Davidson, O., de Coninck, H., Loos, M., Meyer, L., IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. 2005: Cambridge University Press. Abu Zahra, M.R.M., Carbon Dioxide Post-Combustion Capture: Overview Challenges and Future Directions, in 8th Engineering Excellence Forum. 2012: Higher Colleges of Technology- Abu Dhabi. GHG, I., CO2 capture as a factor in power station investment decisions. IEA GHG (IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme) Report, 2006(2006/8). Thiruvenkatachari, R., Su, S., An, H., Yu, X.X.,, Post Combustion CO2 Capture by Carbon Fibre Monolithic Adsorbents. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2009. 35(5): p. 438-455. White, C.M., , Separation and capture of CO2 from large stationary sources and sequestration in geological formations coalbeds and deep saline aquifers. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 2003. 53(6). Hendriks, C., Carbon dioxide removal from coal-fired power plants. 1994: Kluwer. Riemer, P. and W. Ormerod, International perspectives and the results of carbon dioxide capture, disposal, and utilization studies. Energy Conversion and Management, 1995. 36: p. 813-818. IEAGHG, Leading options for the capture of CO2 emissions at power stations. 2000, IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme. Stewart, C. and M.A. Hessami, A study of methods of carbon dioxide capture and sequestrationthe sustainability of a photosynthetic bioreactor approach. Energy Conversion and Management, 2005. 46(3): p. 403-420. Kaplan, L., Cost-saving process recovers CO2 from power-plant flue gas. Chemical Engineering (NY);(United States), 1982. 89(24). Pauley, C.R., P.L. Simiskey, and S. Haigh, N-Ren Recovers CO2 from Flue Gas Economically. Oil & Gas, 1984. 82(20): p. 8792. Herzog, H., An introduction to CO2 separation and capture technologies. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Energy Laboratory Working Paper, 1999. Shao, R. and A. Stangeland, Health and Environmental Impacts, in Amines Used in CO2 Capture. 2009, The Bellona Foundation. Zheng, X., Diao, Y.F., He, B.S., Chen, C.H., Xu, X.C., Feng, W., Carbon Dioxide Recovery from Flue Gases by Ammonia Scrubbing. Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. 2002. 1: p. 193-197. Cullinane, J.T. and G.T. Rochelle, Carbon dioxide absorption with aqueous potassium carbonate promoted by piperazine. Chemical Engineering Science, 2004. 59(17): p. 3619-3630. Chakravarti, S., A. Gupta, and B. Hunek. Advanced technology for the capture of carbon dioxide from flue gases. 2001. Mimura, T., et al. Recent developments in flue gas CO2 recovery technology. 2002. Power Plant CCS, Chemical Absorption, in Amine Solvents. 2010. Ramachandran, N., et al., Kinetics of the Absorption of CO2 into Mixed Aqueous Loaded Solutions of Monoethanolamine and Methyldiethanolamine. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2006. 45: p. 2608-2616. D'Alessandro, D.M., B. Smit, and J.R. Long, Carbon Dioxide Capture: Prospects for New Materials. Ange. Chem. Int. Ed., 2010. 49: p. 6058-6082. Polasek, J. and J. Bullin, Selecting amines for sweetening units. ENERGY PROGRESS., 1984. 4(3): p. 146-149. Alvis, R.S., N.A. Hatcher, and R.H. Weiland, CO2 Removal from Syngas Using Piperazine-Activated MDEA and Potassium Dimethyl Glycinate, in Nitrogen+Syngas 2012. 2012: Athens. Chen, X. and G. Rochelle, Aqueous piperazine derivatives for CO2 capture: Accurate screening by a wetted wall column. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2011. 89(9): p. 1693-1710.
FORMATEX 2013
931
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
[26] Moon, S., et al., Heat of reaction for CO2 absorption using aqueous K2CO3 solution with homopiperazine, in Trondheim CCS Conference-6. 2011: Trondheim. [27] Plaza, J.M. and G. Rochelle, Modeling Pilot Plant Results for CO2 Capture by Aqueous Piperazine. Energy Procedia, 2011(4): p. 1593-1600. [28] Rameshni, M., Carbon Capture Overview. 2010, WorleyParsons. [29] Chakma, A., Separation of Acid Gases from Power Plant Flue Gas Streams by Formulated Amines. Vansant, EF, Elsevier Science Publishers, 1994: p. 727-737. [30] Sartori, G. and D.W. Savage, Sterically hindered amines for carbon dioxide removal from gases. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 1983. 22(2): p. 239-249. [31] Rochelle, G., et al., Research needs for CO2 capture from flue gas by aqueous absorption/stripping. Austin, The University of Texas, 2001. [32] Gupta, M., I. Coyle, and K. Thambimuthu, CO2 Capture Technologies and Opportunities in Canada, in 1st Canadian CC&S Technology Roadmap Workshop. 2003: Alberta. [33] Xu, S., et al., Kinetics of the Reaction of Carbon Dioxide with 2-Amino-2-Methyl-1-Propanol Solutions. Chemical Engineering Science, 1996. 51(6): p. 841-850. [34] Aaron, D. and C. Tsouris, Separation of CO2 from flue gas: a review. Separation Science and Technology, 2005. 40(1-3): p. 321-348. [35] Stewart, E. and R. Lanning, Reduce amine plant solvent losses; Part 1. Hydrocarbon Processing;(United States), 1994. 73(5). [36] Strazisar, B.R., R.R. Anderson, and C.M. White, Degradation pathways for monoethanolamine in a CO2 capture facility. Energy & fuels, 2003. 17(4): p. 1034-1039. [37] Mamun, S., et al., Selection of new absorbents for carbon dioxide capture. Energy Conversion and Management, 2007. 48(1): p. 251-258. [38] Barchas, R. and R. Davis, The Kerr-McGee/ABB Lummus Crest technology for the recovery of CO2 from stack gases. Energy Conversion and Management, 1992. 33(5-8): p. 333-340. [39] NREL, Survey and Down-Selection of Acid Gas Removal Systems for the Thermochemical Conversion of Biomass to Ethanol with a Detailed Analysis of an MDEA System, in Task 2: Detailed MDEA Process Analysis. 2009: California. [40] Gupta, M., I. Coyle, and K. Thambimuthu, Strawman Document for CO2 Capture and Storage (CC&S) Technology Roadmap, in CO2 Capture Technologies and Opportunities in Canada. 2003, CANMET Energy Technology Centre: Alberta. [41] Freeman, S.A., J. Davis, and G. Rochelle, Degradation of Aqueous Piperazine in Carbon Dioxide Capture. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2010. 4(5): p. 756-761. [42] Bishnoi, S. and G.T. Rochelle, Absorption of carbon dioxide into aqueous piperazine: reaction kinetics, mass transfer and solubility. Chemical Engineering Science, 2000. 55(22): p. 5531-5543. [43] Yu, C., C. Huang, and C. Tan, A Review of CO2 Capture by Absorption and Adsorption. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 2012. 12: p. 745-769. [44] Kohl, A. and R. Nielson, Gas Purification. 5th ed. 1997, Texas: Gulf Publishing Company. [45] Wagener, D.V. and G. Rochelle, Stripper configurations for CO2 capture by aqueous monoethanolamine and piperazine. Energy Procedia, 2011. 4: p. 1323-1330. [46] Murai, S., et al., Novel Hindered Amine Absorbent for CO2 Capture, in GHGT-11. 2013, Elsevier: Japan. [47] Sherman, B., et al., Carbon Capture with 4 m Piperazine/4 m 2-Methylpiperazine, in GHGT-11, E. Procedia, Editor. 2013, Elsevier: Japan. [48] Chemstations, CHEMCAD, in Power Plant Carbon Capture with CHEMCAD. 2009: Houston. [49] Choi, W.-J., et al., Removal characteristics of CO2 using aqueous MEA/AMP solutions in the absorption and regeneration process. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2009. 21: p. 907-913. [50] Siminiceanu, I., R.E. Tataru-Farmus, and C. Bouallou, Kinetics of Carbon Dioxide Absorption into Aqueous Solution of a Polyamine. Chemical bulletin, 2008. 53(67). [51] Kim, S.-T., et al., Analysis of the heat of reaction and regeneration in alkanolamine-CO2 system. Korean J. Chem. Eng., 2011. 28(12): p. 2275-2281. [52] Yeh, J.T., H.W. Pennline, and K.P. Resnik, Study of CO2 absorption and desorption in a packed column. Energy & fuels, 2001. 15(2): p. 274-278. [53] EPA, Diethanolamine, in Hazard Summary. 2000, United States Environmental Protection Agency. [54] Murshid, G., et al., Thermo Physical Analysis of 2-Amino-2-methyl-1-propanol Solvent for Carbon Dioxide Removal. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2011. 25. [55] Freeman, S.A., et al., Carbon dioxide capture with concentrated, aqueous piperazine. International Journal of Greenhouse gas Control, 2010. 4(2): p. 119-124. [56] Rochelle, G., et al., Aqueous piperazine as the new standard for CO2 capture technology. CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, 2011. 171: p. 725-733. [57] Yu, C. and C. Tan, Mixed Alkanolamines with Low Regeneration Energy for CO2 Capture in a Rotating Packed Bed, in GHGT-11. 2013, Energy Procedia: Japan. [58] Duke, M.C., et al., Assessment of postcombustion carbon capture technologies for power generation. Frontiers of Chemical Engineering in China, 2010. 4(2): p. 184-195. [59] Herzog, H.J., THE ECONOMICS OF CO2 CAPTURE1. 1999. [60] Sander, M.T. and C.L. Mariz, The Fluor Daniel econamine FG process: Past experience and present day focus. Energy Conversion and Management, 1992. 33(5-8): p. 341-348. [61] Chapel, D.G., C.L. Mariz, and J. Ernest, Recovery of CO2 from flue gases: commercial trends. Aliso Viejo, 1999. [62] Freeman, B. and R. Rhudy, Assessment of post-combustion carbon capture technology developments. 2007, Report. [63] Feron, P., et al., Research Opportunities in Post Combustion CO2 Capture. 2009, CSIRO, CO2CRC.
932
FORMATEX 2013
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
[64] Mimura, T., et al., Development and application of flue gas carbon dioxide recovery technology. Proceedings of the Fifth Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Cairns, Australia, 2000. [65] Kishimoto, S., et al., Current status of MHIs CO2 recovery technology and optimization of CO2 recovery plant with a PC fired power plant. Energy Procedia, 2009. 1(1): p. 1091-1098. [66] Herzog, H., J. Meldon, and A. Hatton, Advanced post-combustion CO2 capture. Clean Air Task Force, 2009. [67] Lecomte, F., P. Broutin, and E. Lebas, CO2 Capture: Technologies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions, ed. Technip. 2010, Paris: IFP. [68] MHI. Latest Advancements in Post Combustion CO2 Capture Technology for Coal Fired Power Plant. in Ninth Annual Conference on Carbon Capture & Sequestration. 2010. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, LTD. [69] altenergymag, CO2 Technology Centre Mongstad launches International Carbon Capture and Storage Test Centre Network, in altenergymag.com. 2013. [70] Norway.cn, Carbon Capture and Storage: Technology Centre Mongstad opened, in Norway.cn. 2012. [71] Cansolv, Cansolv Technologies Inc. 2008. [72] Hakka, L.E. and M.A. Ouimet, Method for recovery of CO2 from gas streams. 2006, Google Patents. [73] MIT, Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in Boundary Dam Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project. 2013. [74] Veawab, A., et al. Solvent formulation for CO2 separation from flue gas streams. 2001. [75] Dugas, R. and G. Rochelle, Absorption and desorption rates of carbon dioxide with monoethanolamine and piperazine. Energy Procedia, 2009. 1(1): p. 1163-1169. [76] Rochelle, G., Pilot Plant Testing of Advanced Concepts for CO2 Capture by Amines, in The CO2 Capture Pilot Plant Project (C2P3). 2011, The University of Texas: Austin. [77] Aroonwilas, A. and A. Veawab, Characterization and comparison of the CO2 absorption performance into single and blended alkanolamines in a packed column. Industrial & engineering chemistry research, 2004. 43(9): p. 2228-2237. [78] Chowdhury, F.A., et al., Synthesis and selection of hindered new amine absorbents for CO2 capture. Energy Procedia, 2011. 4: p. 201-208. [79] Chowdhury, F.A., et al., Development of novel tertiary amine absorbents for CO< sub> 2</sub> capture. Energy Procedia, 2009. 1(1): p. 1241-1248. [80] Singh, P., J.P.M. Niederer, and G.F. Versteeg, Structure and activity relationships for amine based CO< sub> 2</sub> absorbentsI. International Journal of Greenhouse gas Control, 2007. 1(1): p. 5-10. [81] Dibenedetto, A., M. Aresta, and R. Girardi, New Amines for Carbon Dioxide Separation from Gas-Mixtures. Fuel Chemistry Division Preprints, 2003. 48(1): p. 167-168. [82] Jang, K.R., et al. Solubility of Carbon Dioxide in Aqueous Solutions of 2- Amino-2-ethyl-1,3-propanediol. in 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. 2005. Vancouver, Canada. [83] Carrette, P.L., et al., New Solvent for CO2 Capture with Low Energy of Regeneration. 2007, Innovation Energy Environment. [84] Chowdhury, F.A., Synthesis and Selection of New Amine Absorbents for CO2 Capture, in 1st Post Combustion Capture Conference. 2011, IEAGHG: Abu Dhabi. [85] Melien, T.C.C.P., Final Cost Estimation and Economics: Common Economic Model Team Summary Report, in Carbon Dioxide Capture for Storage in Deep Geologic Formations-Results from the CO2 Capture Project. 2005, Elsevier. p. 47-87. [86] Veawab, A., A. Aroonwilas, and P. Tontiwachwuthikul, CO2 ABSORPTION PERFORMANCE OF AQUEOUS ALKANOLAMINES IN PACKED COLUMNS. 2002. [87] Veawab, A., et al. Performance and cost analysis for CO2 capture from flue gas streams: absorption and regeneration aspects. 2003: Pergamon. [88] Idem, R., D. Gelowitz, and P. Tontiwachwuthikul, Evaluation of the performance of various amine based solvents in an optimized multipurpose technology development pilot plant. Energy Procedia, 2009. 1(1): p. 1543-1548. [89] Huttenhuis, P.J.G., E.P. Van Elk, and G.F. Versteeg. Performance of Aqueous MDEA Blends for CO2 Removal from Flue Gases. in 10th Meeting of the International Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Network. 2007. Lyon, France: IEAGHG. [90] Lensen, R., The Promoter Effect of Piperazine on the Removal of Carbon Dioxide. 2004. [91] Jovanovic, S., et al., Slipstream Pilot-Scale Demonstration of a Novel Amine-Based Post-Combustion Technology for Carbon Dioxide Capture from Coal-Fired Power Plant Flue Gas, in Topical Report: Techno-Economic Analysis of 550 MWe subcritical PC power plant with CO2 capture 2012, Linde LLC: New Jersey. [92] Closmann, F., T. Nguyen, and G.T. Rochelle, MDEA/Piperazine as a solvent for CO2 capture. Energy Procedia, 2009. 1(1): p. 1351-1357. [93] Park, S., et al., ABSORPTION RATES OF CO2 INTO AQUEOUS MIXTURES OF MDEA (METHYLDIETHANOLAMINE) AND HMDA (HEXAMETHYLENEDIAMINE). 2005. [94] Han, K., et al. A Study about Absorption Rate and Capacity of CO2 in Aqueous Mixture of AMP and HMDA. in 8th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. 2006. Trondheim, Norway: Elsevier Ltd. [95] Mangalapally, H.P., et al., Pilot plant experimental studies of post combustion CO2 capture by reactive absorption with MEA and new solvents. Energy Procedia, 2009. 1(1): p. 963-970. [96] Mangalapally, H.P. and H. Hasse, Pilot plant experiments for post combustion carbon dioxide capture by reactive absorption with novel solvents. Energy Procedia, 2011. 4: p. 1-8. [97] Wang, M., et al., Post-Combustion CO2 Capture with Chemical Absorption: A State-of-the-art Review. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2011. [98] MHI, KM CDR Process, in R and D, Pilot Plant and Engineering Head Quarters. 2012, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. [99] Imai, N. and R. Mitchell, MHI's Experience in Post Combustion CO2 Capture: An Effective Means to Counter Anthropogenic Global Warming, S.R.E. Forum, Editor. 2008, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.: Oslo, Norway. [100] Journal, C.C., Alstom and Dow open CO2 Capture Pilot Plant. 2009.
FORMATEX 2013
933
Materials and processes for energy: communicating current research and technological developments (A. Mndez-Vilas, Ed.) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
[101] London, I.C., Students Take Control of Four Storey Carbon Capture Pilot Plant in the Heart of a University Campus. 2012: London. [102] Carrington, D., Largest Carbon Capture Plant in UK opens in Yorkshire, in theguardian. 2011. [103] Siemens, Siemens' Carbon Capture Technology. 2011, Siemens Energy Sector. [104] Stanwell, Post-Combustion Capture Pilot Plant. 2012: Stanwell. [105] CSIRO, Post combustion capture, in Pilot-scale achievements. 2013, CSIRO. [106] Wardhaugh, L., CSIRO Post-Combustion Capture Research Latest developments and the next steps in NSW. 2010, CSIRO. [107] Bouillon, P.A., et al. First results of the 2.25 t/h post-combustion CO2 capture pilot plant of ENEL at the Brindisi coal power plant with MEA from 20 to 40 %wt and HiCapt+TM process. in PCCC-1. 2010. [108] Wauschkuhn, A. and S. Unterberger. Post Combustion Capture R&D as part of a utility's strategy for CCS. in 1st IEA GHG Post Combustion Conference. 2011. Abu Dhabi: EnBW. [109] SINTEF, CO2 Capture Laboratory, in Industrial scale: Develop "Capture Chemicals" of tomorrow. 2013, SINTEF. [110] Suzuki, K., Toshiba's Activity in Clean Coal and Carbon Capture Technology for Thermal Power Plants. 2012, TOSHIBA. [111] Wu, S., et al., Technology Options for Clean Coal Power Generation with CO2 Capture, in XXI World Energy Congress. 2010, WorldEnergy: Montreal. [112] Kikkawa, H., et al., Hitachis Carbon Dioxide Scrubbing Technology with New Absorbent for Coal-fired Power Plants. 2010, HITACHI. [113] Eswaran, S., et al., Recent Development of Hitachi's Advanced Amine-based Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Technology, P.-G. 2011, Editor. 2011, Hitachi. [114] Matts, D., Aberthaw Carbon Capture Pilot Scale Demonstration. 2012, NPower. [115] MIT, Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in E.ON Karlshamn Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project. 2013. [116] Alstom, EdF, in Le Havre Field Demonstration Plant. 2012. [117] MIT, Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in Belchatow Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project. 2013. [118] MIT, Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in Plant Barry Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project. 2013. [119] MIT, Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in Berger Project Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project. 2013. [120] Elgarni, M. and A. Aboudheir, Design of Commercial Post Combustion CO2 Capture Plant using Pilot Plant Scale-up Approach, in 1st Post Combustion Capture Conference. 2011: Abu Dhabi. [121] Davy, R., 2009. Development of catalysts for fast, energy efficient post combustion capture of CO2 into water; an alternative to monoethanolamine (MEA) solvents.Energy Procedia 2009. 1: p. 885892. [122] Singh, P., et al., Energy Efficient Solvents for CO2 Absorption from Flue Gas: Vapor Liquid Equilibrium and Pilot Plant Study, in the 11th international conference on greenhouse gas control technologies (GHGT-11). 2012: Kyoto. [123] IEAGHG, Gaseous emissions from amine based PCC processes and their deep removal, Report 2012/07.
934
FORMATEX 2013