You are on page 1of 91

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 Capture Plant Retrofit

Vishnu Digant 9th September 2011 Supervised by: Dr. Nick Florin and Dr. Paul Fennell

A thesis presented to Imperial College London in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Sustainable Energy Futures and for the Diploma of Imperial College.

Faculty of Engineering Imperial College London SW7 2AZ

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Acknowledgements
I would like to first and foremost thank my supervisors Dr. Nick Florin and Dr. Paul Fennell for their constant guidance, support and mentorship over the course of this thesis. Whenever I was bereft of ideas, their valuable insight and ideas helped me get back on the right track. I would like to thank Hamender Jain and Prashant Pathak for their valuable help in the modeling of the project. Their suggestions and feedback helped me understand layout design concepts and explore the project from a wider perspective. I acknowledge Danlu Tong for providing experimental results that have been used in the model. My classmates of SEF also deserve recognition for their valuable insights and support extended to me during the project. My special thanks goes to Santosh Kumar from whom I learnt great deal from our lengthy discussion. Finally, I would like to thank my parents for their unwavering support and encouragement to pursue a graduate degree.

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Abstract

The Climate Change Act (2008) legally binds the UK to reduce its CO2 emissions by 80% compared to 1990 levels by 2050. Currently around 75% of UK electricity needs are met by fossil fuels, which are the major source of CO2 emissions. To meet the targets of 80 % reduction in CO2, CCS is being proposed to decarbonize the fossil based power generation sector. Under section 36 of Electricity Act 1989, all combustion plants with electrical capacity 300 MW are required to demonstrate Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR). CCR is an assessment to demonstrate that no known barriers, to accommodate Carbon Capture Plant (CCP) at a future date exists and the plant will be able to accommodate CCP when it becomes economically viable. The minimum area footprint required for demonstrating CCR has been provided by DECC in their guidance notes. The area provided in the guidance notes for demonstrating CCR for natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) post combustion technology is contentious. Several reports suggest that a reduction of more than 60% in the area provided by DECC for CCR is feasible. However these reports consider different assumptions and layouts, therefore a standardized comparison is difficult. The UK government is interested in area requirements as roughly 4.6 GW of NGCC are currently in the planning stage. An assessment of the minimum area requirements was carried out by Dr. Nick Florin and Dr. Paul Fennell of Imperial College London. However, this assessment was based on review of academic literature and data available in public domain. The report recommended that a 50 % reduction in area appeared to be feasible; however such a recommendation can only be justified on the basis of detailed design. This thesis looks into the details of area requirements of individual equipments of the CCP by undertaking a detailed design analysis. Three different CCP models of 500 MW, 400 MW and 250 MW were created and equipments were sized for capture efficiency of 90 %, 85 %, 75 % and 70 %. Models of absorber and stripper were developed to calculate their area requirement while knock-out pot and cooling tower area requirement were calculated using engineering software. Other equipment dimensions were obtained through either manufacturers catalog or simple correlations. Thereafter the equipments were plotted using CAD software to calculate area requirements of the plant for different capacity and capture efficiency. The area footprint requirement would also be affected in the future by the development in amine technology and with flue gas recirculation. This thesis also looks into the reduction in area footprint that could possibly result from these technological advancements. Finally, an equation to calculate land area footprints as a function of the plant capacity, capture efficiency, reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement and flue gas recirculation rate was developed. It was found that the land area footprint sensitivity with capture efficiency, reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement and flue gas recirculation is not very high. Therefore a massive reduction in area requirement with advancement in amine technology and flue gas recirculation cannot be expected in the future (max. possible reduction of 10-15 % seems feasible). Further, it was also found that reduction in number of absorber trains has a significant impact on reducing the total area footprint. Finally, the thesis recommends that a 66 % reduction in minimum land area requirement as prescribed in the Guidance notes is feasible based on the CCP model.

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit Table of Contents
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. 5 List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... 7 List of symbols and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................ 8 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 11
1.1 Motivation for the project ......................................................................................................................... 11

2. Background of the project: Review of Literature..................................................................................... 15 3. Carbon Capture Plant ............................................................................................................................. 18


3.1 CCP process description: ................................................................................................................................. 18 3.2 Plant Schematic .............................................................................................................................................. 23 3.3 Design basis and Assumption: ......................................................................................................................... 25 3.4 Equipment list for standalone CCP: ................................................................................................................. 26

4. Design of Carbon capture plant equipments: .......................................................................................... 28


4.1 Absorber: ...................................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Stripper .......................................................................................................................................................... 38 4.3 Direct Contact Cooler: .................................................................................................................................... 42 4.4 Centrifugal Fan / Blower: ................................................................................................................................ 43 4.5 Flue gas heater: .............................................................................................................................................. 46 4.6 Heat Exchangers: ............................................................................................................................................ 49 4.6.1 Lean - rich amine heat exchanger: ...................................................................................................................... 49 4.6.2 DCC heat exchanger : .......................................................................................................................................... 50 4.6.3 Lean Amine cooler:.............................................................................................................................................. 51 4.6.4 Wash water cooler: ............................................................................................................................................. 51 4.7 CO2 stripping and compression system ............................................................................................................ 51 4.7.1 CO2 condenser prior to knock-out pot: ............................................................................................................... 51 4.7.2 CO2 knock-out pot: .............................................................................................................................................. 52 4.7.3 Reboiler: ............................................................................................................................................................. 53 4.7.4 Reboiler Condensate tank: .................................................................................................................................. 55 4.7.5 CO2 Compressor: ................................................................................................................................................. 55 4.7.6 CO2 compressor intercooler: ............................................................................................................................... 56 4.7.7 CO2 knock-out pots after compressor stages: ..................................................................................................... 56 4.7.8 CO2 Dehydration package: .................................................................................................................................. 56 4.8 Reclaimer: ...................................................................................................................................................... 57 4.8.1 Reclaimer Condensate Tank: ............................................................................................................................... 58 4.8.2 Reclaimer Waste Tank: ........................................................................................................................................ 59 4.9 Pumps: ........................................................................................................................................................... 59 4.10 Filters: .......................................................................................................................................................... 60 4.11 Soda Ash Injection system: ........................................................................................................................... 61 4.12 MEA Storage tank: ........................................................................................................................................ 61 4.13 Solvent Sump: .............................................................................................................................................. 62 4.14 Demineralization water plant: ...................................................................................................................... 62 4.15 Control Room: .............................................................................................................................................. 62 4.16 Cooling Towers: ............................................................................................................................................ 63
3

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


5. Layout Design of CCP ............................................................................................................................. 66
5.1 CCP layout principles: ..................................................................................................................................... 66 5.2 CCP Plant layout consideration: ...................................................................................................................... 67

6. Results................................................................................................................................................... 69 7. Conclusion and scope for future work .................................................................................................... 76 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................. 79 Appendices................................................................................................................................................ 84
Appendix 1: Design of Absorber ........................................................................................................................... 84 Appendix 2: Design of Stripper ............................................................................................................................. 86 Appendix 3 A: Layout Design of the CCP for 500 MW NGCC at 90 % Capture efficiency ........................................... 88 Appendix 3 B: Layout Design of the CCP for 250 MW NGCC at 90 % Capture efficiency ........................................... 89 Appendix 4 : Clearances / Space allocation for the model layout. .......................................................................... 90

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

List of Figures
Figure 1 :Sectoral distribution of sources of CO2 .......................................................................................... 11 Figure 2: The efficiency of fossil fuel based plants before and after implementation of CCS plants.... 13 Figure 3: Combined cycle plants available from Alstom and ...................................................................... 19 Figure 4: Block flow diagram of model carbon capture plant (CCP) (single train) ................................... 21 Figure 5: Process flow diagram of NGCC CCP model ( based on Fluor EFG+ technology ) ............... 23 Figure 6: Process flow diagram of NGCC CCP model ( based on Fluor EFG+ technology ). ............. 24 Figure 7:Random (Dumped) packings ( HYPAK (top left), IMTP (top right), Cascade mini ring (bottom left) and Flexi-ring (bottom right)) .................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 8: Structured packings ( Flexipack (left), Flexipack HC (top right), Intalox (bottom right).......... 30 Figure 9: Simple model of absorber for material balance ............................................................................ 31 Figure 10: Solubility of CO2 in 30 wt % MEA solution .................................................................................. 32 Figure 11: Generalized Pressure Drop Correlation (GDPC) for packed towers ...................................... 33 Figure 12: Impact of packing material on column diameter calculated for 90 % capture efficiency (from absorber model) ................................................................................................................................................. 35 Figure 13: Absorber column diameter sensitivity with capture efficiency. ................................................ 36 Figure 14: Impact of packing material on stripper column diameter calculated for 90 % capture efficiency (from stripper model)........................................................................................................................ 40 Figure 15: Stripper diameter sensitivity with capture efficiency. ................................................................. 40 Figure 16: Impact of decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement for a 500 MW NGCC stripper. ................................................................................................................................................................ 41 Figure 17: Single flow fan with coupling and motor ...................................................................................... 44 Figure 18: Single inlet fan and double inlet fan ............................................................................................. 45 Figure 19: A tube type flue gas heater installed on a 1000 MW coal based plant FGD ......................... 47 Figure 20: A rotary gas- gas heater ................................................................................................................ 47 Figure 21: Diameter of flue gas heater at different flue gas flow rates ...................................................... 48 Figure 22: Flue gas flow rate vs diameter of the flue gas heater with temperature difference between inlet hot flue gas and outlet hot flue gas ......................................................................................................... 48 Figure 23: A typical Alfa laval heat exchanger .............................................................................................. 51 Figure 24: A typical vertical knock out pot and Vertical knock-out pot engineering calculator ............. 53 Figure 25: Kettle Reboiler (left) and thermo-syphon reboiler (right) .......................................................... 54 Figure 26: A typical TEG dehydration unit ..................................................................................................... 57 Figure 27: CO2 flow through the TEG and the required area footprint. ..................................................... 57 Figure 28: A typical reclaimer used for MEA / DEA ...................................................................................... 58 Figure 29: A chemical dosing skid ................................................................................................................... 61 Figure 30: Area requirement by the 500 MW NGCC plant at 90% capture efficiency ............................ 64 Figure 31 : Break-up of cooling tower heat load ........................................................................................... 65 Figure 32: Area required by a 90 % carbon capture plant at different NGCC capacity. ......................... 69 Figure 33: Area required per MW for CCP at different NGCC plant capacity (90% CC efficiency) ...... 70 Figure 34: Equipment area sensitivity with capture efficiency .................................................................... 71 Figure 35: Equipment area per MW at different capture efficiency. ........................................................... 72
5

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Figure 36: Sensitivity of area footprint with carbon capture efficiency for a 500 MW NGCC plant CCP. ............................................................................................................................................................................... 72 Figure 37: Area requirement by a 500 MW NGCC CCP with 90 % capture efficiency at different recirculation rates. .............................................................................................................................................. 74 Figure 38: Reduction in area foot print of a CCP for 500 MW NGCC at different flue gas recirculation rate........................................................................................................................................................................ 75 Figure 39: Generalized Pressure Drop Correlation (GDPC) for packed towers ...................................... 86

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

List of Tables
(Table 1:) Main design aspects of amine based post-combustion NGCC retrofit / CCR study. ............ 15 (Table 2:) CCP area reuirements for NGCC plants ...................................................................................... 17 (Table 3:) Flue gas composition ...................................................................................................................... 25 (Table 4:) List of equipments for a single absorber train based 500 MW NGCC CCP at 90% capture efficiency. ............................................................................................................................................................. 26 (Table 5 :) Packing factor for random packing elements. ............................................................................ 34 (Table 6:) Absorber column diameter as determined by model and by Fluor Daniel formula for different plant capacity and at different capture efficiency. ......................................................................... 37 (Table 7:) Stripper column diameter as determined by the model and by Fluor Daniel formula for different plant capacity and at different capture efficiency. ......................................................................... 39 (Table 8:) Stripper diameter at different amine regeneration energy requirement for a 500 MW stripper. ................................................................................................................................................................ 41 (Table 9:) Specification of TLT Turbo installed at Yenikoy power plant , Turkey. ................................... 45 (Table 10:) The calculated area footprint and diameter of fan for different flow capacity. ..................... 46 (Table 11:) Comparison of design parameters for ref. gas heater and the heater required for this project. ................................................................................................................................................................. 49 (Table 12:) Alfa - Laval plate heat exchangers specifications .................................................................... 50 (Table 13:) Product specification sheet of RG compressors ....................................................................... 55 (Table 14:) The knock-out pot diameter for 6170 ton / day Tjeldbergodden plant .................................. 56 (Table 15:) Pump size for a 500 MW NGCC plant with 90 % capture efficiency ..................................... 59 (Table 16:) Temperature and specific heats used in CCP model calculation .......................................... 63 (Table 17:) The heat energy (in MW) to be dissipated by the cooling tower at different capture efficiency .............................................................................................................................................................. 65 (Table 18:) Area required by the CCP per MW ............................................................................................. 70 (Table 19:) Area required by CCP plant equipments that are affected by steam flow rate (CCP for 500 MW NGCC with 90 % capture efficiency). ..................................................................................................... 73 (Table 20:) Reduction in land area footprint with amine regeneration energy requirement for a 500 MW NGCC CCP at 90 % capture efficiency. ................................................................................................. 73 Table 21: Value of the constants for model Equation 1 ............................................................................... 77 Table 22 Value of the constants for model Equation 2 ................................................................................ 77

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

List of symbols and Abbreviations


Symbols :
A Area Capacity of compressors Capacity of pumps D Diameter Efficiency of compressors Efficiency of pumps

F Packing Factor G Gas mass rate


G* gas mass velocity Gm1 Inlet gas mass flow rate Gm2 outlet gas mass flow rate specific heat capacity of amine specific heat capacity of water Specific heat of flue gas Specific heat capacity of steam

L Liquid mass rate


Latent heat of condensation at 30 C Lm1 Inlet solvent mass flow rate Lm2 outlet solvent mass flow rate Moisture in the flue gas mass flow rate of amine mass flow rate of cooling water
8

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Flue gas flow rate steam flow rate (kg/sec) mass flow rate of wash water N Rotation per minute (rpm) Q Volumetric flow rate V Volume Liquid kinematic viscosity X Relative flow capacity X1 CO2 molar conc. in inlet solvent X2 CO2 molar conc. in outlet solvent Y Flow capacity factor Y1 CO2 molar conc. in inlet gas Y2 CO2 molar conc. in outlet gas

Abbreviations:
CCGT Combined Cycle Gas Turbine CCP Carbon Capture Plant CCR Carbon Capture Readiness DCC Direct Contact Coolers DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change EFG+ Econoamine FG Plus EU CCS European Union Carbon Capture and Storage FGD Flue Gas Desulphurization FRP Fibreglass Reinforced Plastic GCCSI Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute GDPC Generalized Pressure Drop Correlation GHG Green House Gas HETP Height of Equivalent Theoretical Plate HRSG Heat Recovery Steam Generators IEA International Energy Agency
9

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


IPCC International Panel on Climate Change MEA Mono Ethanol Amine NGCC Natural Gas Combined Cycle SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction SKM Sinclair Knight Merz TEG Tri- Ethylene Glycol URS United Research Services WEO World Energy Outlook

10

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

1. Introduction
An increasing body of evidence confirms that anthropogenic emissions are contributing to global climate change and there is almost no doubt that humans are altering earths natural climate (Anderson et. al., 2003). IPCC Fourth assessment report concludes that the global warming observed in last 50 years is very likely due to increase in anthropogenic green house gas (GHG) emissions(Metz et. al., 2007). The main GHG is carbon dioxide (CO2) accounting for 77 % of the total GHG emissions to the atmosphere (Metz et. al., 2007). Electricity & heat generation is one of the major contributors to GHG emissions and accounted for 12.1 GtCO2, or approximately 41% (Fig 1) of global GHG emissions in 2008 (IEA, 2010). Considering the huge impact of power generation sector on economy and global emissions, the development of environment friendly and cost effective means of power generation is necessary for a sustainable society (Hongtao et. al., 2006).

Figure 1 :Sectoral distribution of sources of CO2. (CCS, 2011) By 2030, world energy outlook (WEO, 2009) reference scenario predicts that the worldwide demand for electricity would reach nearly twice the current demand, driven by increasing income and population growth in developing countries (IEA, 2010). So on one side there is increasing electricity demands while on other side there are increasing climate change concerns because of emissions associated with electricity production. Therefore there is a need for switching to low carbon intensive electricity production to avoid emissions reaching dangerous levels and affecting terrestrial eco-systems and human societies. In such context natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants can be a good option because of their lower emissions and competitive electricity generation prices (Hongtao et. al., 2006). 1.1 Motivation for the project

IPCC in its report has identified carbon capture and storage (CCS) as one of the potential technologies for GHG mitigation, which have great potential for large point source emitters (IPCC, 2005). CCS involves capturing of CO2 from large point source emitters like power generating stations, liquefying the captured CO 2 and transporting it to geological formations or saline aquifers for permanent storage (Herzog et. al., 2004; IPCC, 2005). In European Union CCS regulatory requirement was imposed by EU CCS directive (EC, 2009).
11

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


In response to the EU directive, under section 36 of Electricity Act 1989, the UK government requires that all new applicants with electrical capacity at or over 300 MWe demonstrate carbon capture readiness (CCR) (DECC, 2009). Other EU members are also in process of transposing the EU directive into their national policy (CCP, 2010). In US currently there is no planned regulatory requirement for CCR while in Canada, CCS is not mandated but is expected to be promoted through policies and incentives (CCP, 2010). But as the concerns for climate change will grow, most governments would require power plant developers to demonstrate CCR before granting licenses to build and operate plants. Currently CCR is used by UK government while granting licenses for new power plants, although there is no formal or agreed definition of CCR (Markusson et. al, 2009). In general terms CCR implies that all known barriers for installing carbon capture plant at a later date has been addressed during the planning stage and it is reasonable to expect that the plant will be able to accommodate carbon capture plant when economic drivers are in place (DECC, 2009).

1.1 The CCR requirements:

The applicant needs to demonstrate that:

1. There is sufficient space available on or near the site for accommodating carbon capture plant when required by law, 2. The chosen carbon capture technology for retrofit is feasible, 3. A suitable off shore geological storage site exists for storing the captured CO 2 from the proposed plant, 4. Transportation of CO2 from the plant to storage site is technically feasible and a proper transport corridor has been identified and 5. It would be economically feasible to integrate the carbon capture plant with the main plant (DECC, 2009; GCCSI, 2010). CCR concept has been proposed to prevent the carbon lock in problems, a solution to avoid situation where we would have large amount of electricity coming from fossil fired plants, which will not be able to accommodate carbon capture plant when policy requires CCS implementation (Markusson et. al, 2009).

Efforts to reduce CO2 emissions from power stations have lead to a "dash for gas" which has increased the share of NGCC plants in the UK and across the globe. The use of gas turbines for power generation has been growing worldwide since the last decade and is expected to grow in future because of low capital cost, short construction time, lower CO2 emissions per unit of electricity and competitive price of electricity (Hailong et. al., 2010; Alstom, 2011; GE 2011). In coming few years about 4.6 GW of NGCC plants are expected to be built in UK (DECC, 2011) and it is essential to have these plants capture ready so that they will be able to
12

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


accommodate the carbon capture plant within their lifetime. NGCC plants have highest efficiency among all other fossil fuel based conventional plants, therefore the impact of energy penalty due to carbon capture and storage (CCS) plant on cost of electricity is expected to be least on NGCC plants (Kanniche et. al., 2010).

Figure 2: The efficiency of fossil fuel based plants before and after implementation of CCS plants (Kanniche et. al., 2010). The major CCR demonstration criterion for NGCC is eventually the minimum land requirements set in the DECC guidelines. The guideline sets a minimum area requirement of 37,500 m2 for a 500 MWe NGCC postcombustion CCR plant, 26,250 m2 for a NGCC pre-combustion CCR plant and 9,600 m2 for an NGCC oxy-fuel CCR plant (DECC, 2009). However, the area requirement for a NGCC post-combustion plant is contentious and many reports suggest that the actual area required can be reduced by as much as 50 % (URS, 2009; SKM, 2009). The UK government is interested in the space requirements of NGCC plant bearing in mind the requirement of future CCS plants on the currently planned 4.6 GW of NGCC capacity. An assessment of validity of "appropriate minimum land area footprints for certain type of CO 2 capture plant" as prescribed in DECC CCR guidelines was carried out by Dr Nick Florin and Dr Paul Fennell (Florin N, 2009). This assessment was based on an up-to-date review of literature and data available in public domain; however a detailed design analysis was not carried out. The assessment report recommended that for the NGCC CCP based on post combustion technology 50 % reduction in land area footprint is feasible considering the advances in technology and layout optimization, however such reduction can only be justified based on detailed engineering design (Florin N, 2009). Therefore this research project was undertaken in further continuation to this report. This project would look into the details of area requirements of each individual equipment of the CCP by undertaking a detailed design analysis. This will help remove ambiguity in determining the area requirement by a NGCC CCP. Further with development in amine technology and EGR
13

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


integration with post-combustion technology the area requirement for CCS plant installation may reduce further (Botero et. al., 2009; URS, 2009). Therefore this project would also look into the possible reduction in land area footprints of the NGCC CCP that these technological advancements can bring. The project will conclude with finding answer to the below listed questions-

1. How much land area would be required by the CCP for a NGCC of a given capacity? 2. How sensitive is the land area footprint with carbon capture efficiency? 3. How sensitive is the land area footprint with reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement? 4. How sensitive is the land foot print requirement with flue gas recirculation? 5. How much saving in land area footprints can be achieved by using a single absorber train in place of two absorber train?

The answer to the above questions will not only help to remove the uncertainty in the area requirement proposed by DECC for CCR criterion demonstration but will also help NGCC developers in resolving some of the dilemma related to how effective would be the technological development of amines and EGR in reducing the land area requirement of the CCP. This project also identifies the major equipments that have high share in the overall footprint of the CCP, therefore these equipment should be targeted first for optimizing area utilization, if significant reduction in area footprint of the CCP is to be achieved.

14

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

2. Background of the project: Review of Literature


In order to understand the land area requirements of amine based post-combustion NGCC CCP, five feasibility design reports prepared by five different organizations were reviewed. Due to copyright protections and to maintain their competitive advantage, organizations have not provided many crucial / proprietary data in these reports. The report for Cockenzie, Scotland (4), prepared by URS, is different from all other design reports because a separate GT / fired boiler based CHP will be used to provide steam for amine regeneration and electricity for CCP auxiliaries (URS, 2009). In all other reports, steam from steam turbine of NGCC has been used for amine regeneration and power from the NGCC plant would be provided to CCP auxiliaries. Therefore except Cokenzie power plant, output of all other plant would be reduced when CCP would be implemented. Except SKM (3), none of the reports has made provision for flue gas heater after absorption column to avoid plume visibility. Cockenzie report is also different from all other reports in the sense that it uses vertical integration concept to optimize space utilization. SKM (3) and Cockenzie (4) have also made provisions for adding selective catalytic reduction unit (SCR) in future if need arises. Because of low sulphur content in natural gas, SOX emissions are within acceptable range, therefore provision for SOX treatment has not been considered in any of these reports. Table 1 shows the main design aspects of these reports.

(Table 1:) Main design aspects of amine based post-combustion NGCC retrofit / CCR study. Plant Generic postcombustion NGCC, Netherlands (1) Generic postcombustion NGCC, Netherlands (2) Generic postcombustion NGCC, SKM (3) Cokenzie, Scotland (4) Tjeldbergodden, Norway (5)

Studied by

Fluor for IEA, Jacobs 2004 Consultancy for IEA, 2005 800 MWe 800 MWe

Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM), 2009 1500 MWe

URS, 2009

Statoil, 2005

Capacity (before capture)

1000 MWe + 800 MWe (77 MWe + 148 MWt ) 2x500 MWe (GT+ST) 2 GT + 1 ST

Configuration

2x260 MWe GT + 1x280 MWe ST 1 unit with 2 GT + 2 HRSG + 1 ST

2x400 MWe (GT+ST)

3x500 MWe (GT+ST)

Configuration details

2 units, each unit with 1 GT + 1 HRSG + 1 ST

3 units, each unit with 1 GT + 1 HRSG + 1 ST

2 units, each unit with 1 GT + 1 HRSG + 1 ST

1 unit with 2 GT + 2 HRSG + 1 ST

15

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Capture process Post combustion Econamine FG+ process MEA 3 Postcombustion MEA Post combustion Econamine FG process MEA 3 Postcombustion MEA Post combustion Econamine FG+ process MEA 3

Amine Number of absorber trains

MEA 8

MEA 2 + 1 (one train for CHP) 2 + 1 (one train for CHP) 2 + 1 (one train for CHP) Yes No Not specified

Number of strippers

1 with three re-boilers 3

1 with two reboilers 3

Number of DCC

SCR considered SOX treatment Efficiency before capture (LHV) Efficiency after capture (LHV) Efficiency penalty

No No 55.6 %

No No 55.9 %

Yes No Not specified Not specified Not specified 90 % Not specified Not specified

No No Not specified

47.4 %

44.6 %

Not specified

Not specified

8.2 %

11.3 %

Expected be high 90 %

to Not specified

Capture efficiency Flashing of Amine

85% Yes

85 % Not Specified 110 bar (g)

Not specified Not specified 103 kg/cm2 (a) or 100 bar (g)

Not specified

CO2 discharge pressure

110 bar (g)

70 bar (g)

Area required

Not specified

250 m x 150 23,500 m2 m

185 m x 185 Not specified m (Worst case) 133 m x 113 m (with vertical Integration)

16

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


From the table it is evident that, most reports have assumed a CO 2 discharge pressure of 100-110 bar (g) except Cockenzie where discharge pressure of 70 bar (g) has been assumed. However, this assumption is unlikely to have significant impact on overall land requirement as CO 2 can be pumped to higher pressure using booster pumps, which require significantly less area compared to compressors (The critical pressure of CO2 is 73 atm, so it can be pumped once pressure after compressor is 75 bar (g)). Number of absorber trains and stripper are the major equipments that are likely to have significant impact on overall land footprint. Except IEA, 2005 report, prepared by Jacobs consultancy which assumes four absorber trains and four strippers for a 400 MWe unit before capture, all other reports use either one absorber train for a 400 500 MWe unit or three absorber trains for a combined 800-1000 MWe unit. The number of strippers, in case of reports other than Jacobs vary from one stripper per absorber train to one centralized stripper for all trains with number of reboilers equal to number of gas turbines). Although, it is not clear why four absorber trains for a 400 MWe unit were chosen in the IEA, 2005 report however it appears probably that during the time frame of study, large diameter absorbers were not available (SKM, 2009). The current practice worldwide for design of NGCC capture plant is to design single absorber trains for one 400-500 MWe unit (SKM, 2009).

(Table 2:) CCP area reuirements for NGCC plants


DECC, 2009 IEA, 2005 Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM), 2009 23,500 m2 Cockenzie (URS, 2009) Vertical Integration 15,029 m2 Cockenzie (URS, 2009) Worst case 34,225 m2

Area Requirement Capacity Area/ MW

37,500 m2

37,500 m2

500 MWe 75

800 MWe 47

1500 MWe 16

1225 MWe 13

1225 MWe 28

Table 2 shows the area requirement as assessed in the studies and it is clear that there is a huge variation in area required per MW. IEA prescribed area requirement per MW is high because the study was conducted 6 years ago and there has been lot of technological advancement in post combustion carbon capture technology since then. The minimum area requirement by the DECC for CCR needs to be reduced by 36 % because it is based on the estimated area requirement for a 800 MW NGCC CCP. A further reduction of 50 % in area requirement by the DECC can be expected based on the studies of URS and SKM (URS, 2009; SKM, 2009). A detailed design analysis of CCP area requirement will help address this uncertainty.

17

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

3. Carbon Capture Plant


The carbon capture plant for the NGCC should be located close to the NGCC unit ideally at the downstream of the NGCC after the flue gas stack. This would result in area footprint optimization by reducing the duct works and piping required to carry flue gas and steam to the carbon capture plant (CCP). To estimate the area footprint of CCP, an understanding of CCP layout and different equipment used in the CCP is essential. The area required for the CCP should have sufficient space to facilitate construction, sufficient space for ease of operation and maintenance, as well as sufficient space for installation of essential utility services and provisions for emergencies like fire fighting points, wash shower etc. (Mecklenburgh, 1985). Further provisions for safety of equipment and personnel are to be ensured during the layout consideration. It is also essential to consider whether any further extension of the site is expected in the for-seeable future and make required provisions if an extension is expected. Finally based on cost economics and after evaluation of pros and cons of various choices, the layout for the CCP is frozen.

3.1 CCP process description:


The Carbon capture plant proposed for this NGCC is based on post combustion Fluor Daniel Econoamine Plus (EFG +) method. In this project CCP for three different capacities of gas turbines were chosen to study and understand the impact of carbon capture efficiency on CCP land area footprint and also to understand the impact of plant capacity on CCP area footprint. It was also important to understand how much saving in the area footprint can be achieved by designing a single absorber train in place of two. In all past studies for NGCC capture plant, a three absorber train system with single stripper has been proposed for a 800 - 1000 MW system except for Jacobs consultancy study where 8 absorber trains and 8 associated stripper were proposed for a 800 MW NGCC plant (Fluor, 2004; Jacobs, 2005; SKM, 2009; URS, 2009; Statoil, 2005). Although no justification was provided for the choice, the diameter of the absorber column appears to be the main restriction in the choice for number of trains. At the time of study of this report (Jacobs, 2005) steel columns with more than 15 m diameter were not available. However with modern fabrication technology large column diameters are possible (SKM, 2009) and therefore in this report, a single absorber train for up to 500 MW NGCC has been assumed.

18

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Alstom Combined cycle offerings
60% 58% 56% 54% 52% 50% 48% 46% 44% 168 MW 240 MW 260 MW 370 MW 430 MW

Efficiency

KA-11N2-1

13-E2-1

KA -24-1
Plant net output

KA 26-1

KA 26-1

62% 60% 58% 56% 54% 52% 50% 217 MW SA206 FA 218 MW S106 FA

GE Combined cycle offerings

Efficiency

262.6 MW SA107 FA

280 MW

390 MW

787 MW S209 FA

400 MW SA10 7H

480 MW S109H

SA107 FB SA109 FC Plant Net output

Figure 3: Combined cycle plants available from Alstom and GE (EPRI, 2003) Fig 3 shows the combined cycle plants designed by two of the leading combined cycle manufacturers. It can be seen from the Fig 2 and Fig 3 that most of the NGCC plants are in range of 200-250 MW and 400-500 MW. Therefore in this project three NGCC of 250 MW capacity, 400 MW capacity and 500 MW capacity were selected. A comparison of the area footprint of the 250 MW plant and 500 MW plant was made to understand the % saving in footprint when two absorber train is replaced by a single absorber train. The efficiencies of the proposed plants were selected based on the published design ratings of Alstom and GE. The efficiencies of 250 MW, 400 MW and 500 MW NGCC plant model were selected as 54 %, 57% and 59 % respectively. To calculate the amount of CO2 generated in the model for different NGCC plant capacities, the calorific value of natural gas used was assumed to be 11000 kcal/kg (a conservative figure because the range is 11000 12000 kcal/kg) and the natural gas fuel was assumed to comprise of 100% methane. The above values and the combined cycle efficiency were used to calculate the amount of CO2 produced by each plant on an hourly
19

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


basis. Once the rate of CO2 production for each plant capacity was determined, based on capture efficiency, the CCP for the NGCC was sized according to the amount of CO2 to be captured per day. Fig 4A shows the path of flue gas in the CCP plant while Fig 4B shows the path of CO2 only, starting from absorber, through CCP elements before being finally sent to CO 2 storage site. The flue gas from the exit of HRSG (80 100 C) is sent to flue gas heater and the HRSG stack is bypassed (with diverter dampers). The purpose of the flue gas heater is to heat the flue gas coming from the absorber so as to avoid plume visibility. On one side of the flue gas heater hot flue gas from the exhaust of HRSG flows which heats the moist flue gas coming out of the absorber that flows on the other side of the flue gas heater. After the flue gas heater, the hot flue gas (50 70 C) is cooled in the direct contact cooling (DCC) tower. The DCC tower cools down the flue gas by direct spray of water and the temperature of the flue gas is reduced to 30 35C. It is also important to note that the flue gas from NGCC contains about 10 % of water vapor and therefore when the temperature of the flue gas is reduced to 30 35 C, the flue gas can only hold about 4 5 % of moisture. The extra moisture is condensed in the DCC and this excess water, which is very pure (except some dissolved gases) can be used as an input to the demineralization plant. The circulating water and the flue gas are brought into contact with the use of packing elements in the DCC. Further, any impurities in the flue gas such as soot are also removed during the scrubbing (washing) of flue gas with the circulating water. A slip stream downstream of DCC circulating water pump is provided with filter to continuously remove impurities from the circulating water. The cooled clean flue gas from the overhead of the DCC is pressurized by a blower / centrifugal fan to overcome the pressure drop through the absorber and flue gas heater.

The pressurized flue gas from the fan is routed to the bottom of the absorber where ascending flue gas comes in contact with counter current flowing MEA solution. To facilitate better contact, random packing materials are used in the absorber column. The lean 30 wt % MEA solution enters the top of the absorber column and reacts chemically with the CO2 in the flue gas while descending down the absorber. The CO2 gets absorbed in the MEA solvent and at the bottom of the absorber, the MEA solvent is "rich in CO 2". Rich solvent pumps then transport this CO2 rich amine solution to the stripper through lean-rich amine heat exchanger. Since some of the MEA solvent gets carried along with the flue gas to the top of the absorber, there are 3 - 4 trays for washing the flue gas to minimize the MEA solvent loss and also to meet the environmental regulations. Because of washing, the flue gas at the exit of the absorber is saturated with water. Therefore when outside temperature is low, the flue gas would give visible plumes. To avoid plume visibility, the flue gas from the absorber is passed through a flue gas heater where the treated flue gas from the absorber exchanges heat with the hot flue gas from the exit of the HRSG. The flue gas heater has not been proposed in most of the studies; however for this project flue gas heater has been chosen considering that it may be needed in future based on public opposition to visible plumes from CCP. Flue gas heaters are routinely used in US and UK after the FGD units in coal based plants.

20

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Flue gas from HRSG exit Absorber

Entry to flue gas heater (HRSG stack bypassed) Rebioler

Stripper
Reclaimer

Direct contact cooler (DCC)

Condenser before knock out pot

Centrifugal blower / fan

Knock out pot

Absorber

Compressor

Exit to the atmosphere after paasing through flue gas heater

Exit point on site to CO2 storage site

Fig 4A : Flue gas stream

Fig 4B : CO2 stream

Figure 4: Block flow diagram of model carbon capture plant (CCP) (single train)

21

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


The rich amine solvent enters the top of the stripper column after passing though the lean-rich amine heat exchanger. In the lean-rich amine heat exchanger, the CO2 rich solvent exchanges heat with the hot lean amine solution pumped by the lean solvent pump at the bottom of the stripper. The stripper operates at 120 C and 1.9 bar and the approach of the rich amine solvent to the stripper is 15 20 C. The lean amine after the lean-rich heat exchanger is passed to the absorber top through another lean amine cooler to further reduce the temperature of amine before entering the absorber column. To prevent corrosion products from entering the absorber column, the lean amine is passed through a filter. In the stripper column CO2 is released from the amine by providing desorption energy. Steam generated in the reboiler is used to heat the rich amine entering the stripper to the stripper operating temperature (120 C) as well as to provide desorption energy to the CO2 (Arnold, 1999). The reboiler is heated from the steam extracted from IP-LP crossover pipe of the steam turbine. To maintain the highest CO2 absorption capacity of the lean amine, the amine solution is passed to the reclaimer in a semi-batch process to remove the contaminants like heat stable salts formed due to amine degradation and impurities in flue gas.

The CO2 leaves the stripper at the top and is passed through a condenser, to condense the amine and water solution that escapes from the stripper top. The condensed amine and water reflux is returned back to the stripper through the reflux pumps. The CO2 after the condenser is passed through the knock out pot to further reduce the moisture content in the CO2. After the knock out pot, the CO2 is sent to the multi-stage compressors for compression. The CO2 at an inter-stage pressure of 35 40 bar is sent to glycol dehydration unit (TEG) to reduce the moisture content to below 50 ppm on mass basis. The CO2 is compressed to the required pressure (220 bar) for transportation to storage site.

22

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


3.2 Plant Schematic

Figure 5: Process flow diagram of NGCC CCP model ( based on Fluor EFG+ technology )
23

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Figure 6: Process flow diagram of NGCC CCP model ( based on Fluor EFG+ technology ).

24

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


3.3 Design basis and Assumption:
The CCP model chosen for this project is a single absorber train model based on Fluor Daniel Econoamine plus (EFG +) process. The equipment is designed to have an operating life of 30 years with a minimum 330 days of operation each year. The natural gas used for the fuel is assumed to comprise of 100 % methane with a calorific value of 11000 kcal/kg. The cooling water used for the cooling of CCP equipments is assumed to be supplied by NGCC plant central water reservoir. The flue gas composition used in the model is shown in the Table 3. In the CCP model, the absorber column is constructed with concrete and hence the maximum column diameter is not a restriction. To optimize space utilization, hybrid cooling towers have been used. Hybrid cooling towers use either induced draft fan or forced draft fan and have the advantages of the combination of the wet cooling and the dry cooling (GEA, 2011). Instrument and service air requirements of the CCP are expected to be met from the central NGCC plant. Also, nitrogen required for nitrogen blanketing is expected to be provided by the central NGCC plant. In the model, no space requirement for transformer (to provide electricity to CCP) has been considered because the transformer would be installed in the switchyard itself and not in the CCP. The CCP fire fighting points would be connected to the main NGCC fire water header, hence no space requirements for fire fighting and hydrant pumps have been considered in the model layout. A pipe rack to carry compressed CO2 up to the CCP boundary has been considered in the model. (Table 3:) Flue gas composition Flue gas composition CO2 (Carbon dioxide) O2 (Oxygen) H2O (Water) N2 (Nitrogen) % 3 13.5 10 73.5

25

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


3.4 Equipment list for standalone CCP:
The following is the list of equipments required by the CCP for a single train. The equipments share of the total equipment area for the CCP of 500 MW NGCC at 90 % capture efficiency and their share in total land area footprint are shown in the table 4

(Table 4:) List of equipments for a single absorber train based 500 MW NGCC CCP at 90% capture efficiency.

Equipment

Flue gas Heater DCC Fan Stripper Absorber CO2 condenser Knock out pot Reboiler Reboiler Condensate tank Reclaimer Reclaimer waste vessel Reclaimer condensate tank CO2 compressor CO2 compressor intercooler CO2 knockout pots CO2 knockout pots CO2 knockout pots CO2 knockout pots CO2 dehydration package Filter - DCC wash water filter Filter - wash water Filter - lean solvent Filter - solvent sump Soda ash injection system MEA solvent storage tank Solvent sump

Number of equipments required 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

% of total equipment area footprint 11.024 12.071 2.986 1.950 12.071 0.150 0.593 0.718 0.339 1.525 0.341 0.040 0.604 0.604 0.216 0.157 0.108 0.075 2.761 0.037 0.037 0.746 0.037 0.299 0.339 0.504

% of total CCP area footprint 2.686 2.941 0.727 0.475 2.941 0.0365 0.145 0.175 0.082 0.372 0.083 0.010 0.147 0.147 0.053 0.038 0.026 0.018 0.673 0.009 0.009 0.182 0.009 0.073 0.0827 0.123
26

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


DM Plant Cooling tower Control Room Pumps -DCC Pumps - Rich Solvent Pumps - lean Solvent Pumps - Reflux Pump Pumps - Wash water pump Pumps - Solvent make -up Pumps - Solvent charge Pumps -Reboiler condensate pump Pumps - Solvent sump Heat Exchanger- lean amine cooler Heat Exchanger- lean rich amine Heat Exchanger- DCC cooler Heat Exchanger- wash water cooler 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2.580 43.396 1.866 0.280 0.280 0.280 0.026 0.026 0.007 0.015 0.012 0.007 0.409 0.409 0.409 0.042 0.629 10.573 0.455 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.006 0.006 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010

27

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

4. Design of Carbon capture plant equipments:


4.1 Absorber:
Absorbers are used extensively across the globe for gas purification. They are used in many niche applications such as the food and beverage industry where they primarily remove CO2 from flue gas for use in food and beverages, in power stations for FGD to remove sulphur dioxide (SO2) from flue gas or in gas sweetening plant in the oil and gas industry for removal of hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and CO2 from natural gas. Gas absorption is also known as "scrubbing" and involves removal of vapor phase impurities from the gas stream. It involves transfer of one or more gas phase component to the liquid phase, by dissolving or reacting with a solvent such as MEA (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). Absorption can broadly be classified into three categories based on the interaction between absorbate and absorbent (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997).

1. Physical solution :- The process in which the gas being absorbed is more soluble in the liquid adsorbent compared to other components of the "carrier gas". The absorbed gas does not react chemically with the liquid absorbent and its equilibrium concentration in the liquid phase is strongly dependent on its partial pressure in gas phase. Di-methyl ether of Polyethylene glycol, used for absorbing CO2 and H2S from the synthesis gas in the Selexol process is an example of physical solution (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997).

2. Reversible reaction :- This process involves reaction between the gaseous absorbate and liquid absorbent. The reaction product is loosely bound and has finite vapor pressure that increases with temperature. Reaction between MEA and CO2 is an example of reversible reaction (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). 3. Irreversible reaction :- In this process, the gaseous absorbate reacts with liquid absorbent to form a stable compound that cannot be readily decomposed to liberate the absorbate (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997).

The absorption may be purely physical or may involve a chemical reaction such as that between CO2 and MEA and the solvent is chosen primarily on the content of CO2 in the flue gas. In a carbon capture plant for a NGCC, the flue gas is first cooled in DCC and then pressurized through blower / fan. The pressurized gas from the blower / fan is then transferred to the absorber where CO2 is removed from flue gas, when flue gas while ascending up the absorber makes contact with the counter flowing amine solvent. An important aspect of gas absorption system is the design of the liquid - gas phase contacting system. The main purpose of the contacting system is to provide an extensive liquid surface area for contact with the gas phase to promote efficient mass transfer of the absorbate. A packed tower filled with either structured packing material or a random packing material, a tray column (also known as plate column) containing a number of sieve plates or bubble caps, an empty tower with liquid spraying system or a continuously stirred or sparged vessel may be used to facilitate better contact between liquid and gas phases. However the packed towers are increasingly gaining popularity for a plethora of applications because of development of packings that offer superior
28

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


performance and because of development of more reliable design techniques that help designer accurately predict packing performance (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997).

The most commonly used packing elements are randomly packed because of lower cost, however random packing causes more pressure drop than structured packings, which have higher costs. Structured packings were originally developed for small applications where separation was difficult but they have now been developed for large commercial applications and may be considered for applications where high mass transfer efficiency and low pressure drop are of importance (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). The absorber design for the NGCC plant in most of studies includes randomly packed towers with MEA and water flowing counter-current to promote efficient mass-transfer.

4.1.1 Design of packed bed absorber:


The design of the absorber is strongly influenced by the amount of gas flowing through the absorber and the required gas separation efficiency. The lean MEA - water solution flows through the randomly packed contactor system also known as the dumped packing. The dumped packing provides an increased liquid contact surface area to the flue gas.

Figure 7:Random (Dumped) packings ( HYPAK (top left), IMTP (top right), Cascade mini ring (bottom left) and Flexi-ring (bottom right)) (Koch Glitsch, 2011)

29

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


When the flue gas velocity is high due to either plugging in the packings or poor design of column diameter, the flue gas may carry the amine solvent, causing flooding in the absorber (Falk-Pederson et al., 1999). The flooding causes high-pressure drops and also causes damage to the absorber internals. Therefore for the packed tower absorbers, flooding determines the minimum possible diameter and the usual design is for 50 70 % of the flooding velocity (Perry's, 1984). The pressure drop for commonly used packing at flooding is about 167 cm of water column per m of packing. The packed absorber towers are designed to operate at 80 90 cm of water column per m of packing (corresponding to 70 75% of flooding velocity) and should never exceed 100 cm of water column per m of packing (Perry's, 1984) as a slight increase in flue gas flow may cause flooding and damage the internals.

Figure 8: Structured packings ( Flexipack (left), Flexipack HC (top right), Intalox (bottom right)) (Koch Glitsch, 2011) The amine solvent is consumed in the CCS process because of amine evaporation / loss during absorption and desorption process as well as because of degradation of amines in the process. The high temperatures in the reboiler and the oxidants and other impurities present in the flue gas cause irreversible degradation of amine. Therefore the amine is treated in the reclaimer periodically to remove the contaminants like heat stable salts formed during the capture process. The fresh MEA-water solvent from the storage tank is injected periodically in the amine circuit to make up for the amine losses and also to keep the CO 2 absorption capacity of the lean amine solution as high as possible. Besides flooding and amine degradation, corrosion is the major problem in the absorbers. Corrosion products also cause foaming in the absorber therefore filters are used to separate out corrosion products from the MEA-water solvent.
30

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit 4.1.2 Material balance inside the absorber:
In the design of packed column absorbers the most important task is to evaluate the flow rates and concentration of both liquid and gas stream entering the absorber. The packed column design is a subtle blend of art and science and judicious economical decisions are to be made for an efficient and economical design of an absorber. For dilute streams (with absorbate molar concentration less than 10%), the absorber design can be based on constant mass transfer model. The operating line is constructed in terms of simple mass balance equation for CO2 given by the equation :-

Figure 9: Simple model of absorber for material balance The solubility data for the gaseous absorbate in liquid absorbent as function of partial pressure of absorbate in the carrier gas is required to calculate the minimum solvent flow rate required for the capture. The known parameters in this absorber design system are inlet liquid CO2 loading, inlet flue gas flow rate, inlet molar concentration of CO2 in flue gas and outlet molar concentration of CO2 in flue gas. From the equilibrium data shown in the Figure 10, the solubility of CO2 in 30 wt % MEA at 3 kPa partial pressure of CO2 in flue gas is 0.52 mol of CO2 /mol of MEA.

31

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Figure 10: Solubility of CO2 in 30 wt % MEA solution (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997).

In this absorber design CO2 outlet loading of 0.53 mol of CO2 /mol of MEA is used (experimental data obtained by Tong, 2011). From the material balance equation, the minimum liquid flow rate required to achieve the required amount of CO2 capture from flue gas is calculated. The minimum liquid flow of solvent would require infinite number of trays to achieve required separation therefore the actual solvent flow rate should be higher than the calculated minimum. The actual solvent flow rate is about 1.2 to 1.5 times the calculated minimum based on economic considerations (Perry's, 1984). The actual solvent flow rate used in this absorber model is 1.45 times the minimum solvent flow rate required.

4.1.3 Calculation of column diameter


The preliminary step in the design of packed column filled with random packing is the determination of column diameter. Column diameter is usually calculated on the basis of flooding correlations developed by Sherwood et al (1938), Elgin and Weiss (1939), Lobo et al (1945), Eckert (1970 A, 1975), Kister and Gill (1991), Robbins (1991) and Leva (1992) (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). The generalized pressure drop correlation (GPDC), attributed to Leva is most commonly used for predicting pressure drop across random packed tower. Eckert (1975) version of GDPC, which is basis for the approach given by Strigle (1994) has been used for the development of this absorber model. The Strigle modified Eckerts GDPC is shown in Fig 11. The Y - axis of correlation is called flow capacity factor while the X-axis is called the relative flow capacity (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). The flow capacity factor includes a packing factor (F), which is characteristic of a particular random packing material.

(2)

32

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Since the liquid & gas flow rates and liquid & gas densities are known, the flow capacity factor from the graph can be read out corresponding to the relative flow capacity. Once the packing material has been selected, the corresponding packing factor can be substituted in the flow capacity factor to calculate gas mass velocity (G* ). Since this velocity is in lb/ft2.sec, therefore it should be converted to kg /m2.sec. Thereafter the diameter of the column can be calculated using the equation

where, D = diameter of the column (m) and G* = gas mass velocity kg/m2.sec

Figure 11: Generalized Pressure Drop Correlation (GDPC) for packed towers (Chemsof, 2011).

33

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


4.1.4 Impact of packing factor on column diameter
The packing factor is characteristic of a particular random packing material and is obtained experimentally rather then being calculated from the packing geometry. Table 5 shows the experimental packing factors (F) in 1 / feet units, and is provided by one of the leading random packing elements manufacturers. The packing material and hence the packing factor is usually selected based on cost economics however for corrosive liquids usually ceramic intalox (also called as interlox by some manufacturer) saddles are most preferred. The column diameter is strongly influenced by the selection of packing factor and column diameter increases as the value of packing factor increases. Fig 12 shows the impact of packing factor on the absorber column diameter. Therefore to optimize the space requirement as well as to handle corrosive amine solution 3" intalox ceramic saddles with packing factor F = 22 (1/feet) has been chosen for the absorber model.

(Table 5 :) Packing factor for random packing elements (Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). Packing
Super Intalox saddle Super Intalox saddle Intalox saddle Intalox saddle Rashig rings Rashig rings 1/32 Rashig rings 1/16 Berl Saddles Pall rings Pall rings Telleretes Maspac IMPT Packing Intalox Snowflake Hy-pak Packing Jaeger Tri-packs Jaeger VSP

Material
C P C P C M M C P M P P M P M P M

1/4

3/8

1/2

5/8

3/4

1
60 42

11/4

11/2

2
30 28

31/2

18 22 16 37

725

330

200

145

92 33

52

40 21

1600 700

100 390

580 300 410

380 170 300

255 155 220 170

179 115 144 110 55 56 35 32

125

93 65

65 45 57 45 26 27 24

110

83 65 40 40

32

900

240 95 81

17 18 17 21

51

41 Diameter 3.7, height 1.2, F = 13 43 28 32

24

18

12

12

26

18 16 21

15

12

34

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Impact of Packing factor (F) on column diameter


30 Column diameter (m)

25
20 15 10 5 500 MW 400 MW 250 MW

0
Cermic Intalox 3" Super Intalox Intalox saddle 2" Pall Rings 1'' (52) Berl saddle 1.5" (22) saddle 1.5" (30) (40) (66) Random Packing material (Packing factor)

Figure 12: Impact of packing material on column diameter calculated for 90 % capture efficiency (from absorber model)

4.1.5 Determination of column height: Since the column height does not have much impact on the net area footprint required by the absorber system, a preliminary design method has been used in the model to estimate absorber column height. The HETP (height of equivalent theoretical plate) method works well for the preliminary estimation. For the absorber column approximately 20 theoretical stages are required (AceChemPack, 2011; Aspen, 2011). The HETP value for absorber column has been estimated to be equal to 6 feet or 1.83 m (AceChemPack, 2011). Further the absorber also requires 34 stages for washing of the flue gas to minimize amine loss therefore the height of absorber column is estimated to be around 40 m. The height calculated for a 400 MW absorber system with 19 m diameter was about 37 m in the previous study (Svendsen, 2010).

35

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


4.1.6 Results from the absorber model Column diameter sensitivity with capture efficiency
25 20 Diameter (m) 15 10 5 0 90 % Capture Efficiency 85 % Capture Efficiency 80 % Capture Efficiency 75 % Capture Efficiency

250 MW
400 MW 500 MW

Capture efficiency (%)

Figure 13: Absorber column diameter sensitivity with capture efficiency. Fig 13 shows the absorber column diameter as the function of capture efficiency and indicates that the column diameter is not very sensitive to capture efficiency. The main reason for the difference being that the absorber column is designed based on gas flooding velocity. Although the gas flooding velocity is function of both flue gas flow rate and solvent flow rate, the impact of flue gas flow rate is more than the solvent flow rate. The capture efficiency directly impacts the solvent flow rate through the absorber. Since the capture efficiency does not lead to any reduction in flue gas flow rate, therefore there is not much sensitivity of absorber column diameter with capture efficiency. An important result that can be interpreted from the above Figure is that even reduction in 15 % capture efficiency will lead only to approximately 6% reduction in absorber column diameter. This is much less compared to reduction in absorber column diameter that could be achieved through selection of proper packing material; therefore selecting a packing material with low packing factor is important for reducing the footprint of absorber column. 4.1.7 Alternate method for determination of column diameter The diameter of the absorber column with reference to Fluor Econoamine FG capture process required for the carbon capture plant can also be calculated through the formula published by Fluor Daniel (Fluor,1999). The required area footprint of absorber column is determined by the amount of CO2 to be captured.

where, A= 0.56 at 3% CO2 to 0.62 for 13% CO2 te/d = tonne/day CO2 recovered
36

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


% CO2 = volume % CO2 in flue gas before cooling

Rule of Thumb from the model for determination of absorber column diameter:

Where, Y= Diameter of absorber column in meter X= CO2 captured by the CCP (ton/h)

Table 6 shows that the there is a close agreement between the diameter calculated through the Fluor Daniel formula and the diameter calculated by the model used in this project. Using the alternative Fluor Daniel formula, the diameter of the absorber column required for 90 % capture efficiency for a 500 MW is calculated to be 20.3 m diameter while the model of the absorber used for this project predicts the diameter to be 20.17 m. It is important to note that in the study of 800 MW CCGT plant in Tjeldbergodden, Norway, the Fluor feasibility study includes three absorber trains for a two unit CCGT of 800 MW capacity. The prime reason for this assumption was that the maximum allowable diameter of the absorber column possible at that time was considered to be 15 m (SKM, 2009). However, with advancement in tower fabrication technology, large column diameters are possible. Further this model assumes concrete structure for absorber columns and hence 1 absorber train can sufficiently handle flue gas from up to 500 MW capacity NGCC plant. The concrete structure would be rubber lined to prevent it from the corrosive nature of amine degradation products. This results in a considerably more space efficient design, and has been proposed by potential manufacturers of CCP, including Mitsui Heavy Industries (MHI) (SKM, 2009). (Table 6:) Absorber column diameter as determined by model and by Fluor Daniel formula for different plant capacity and at different capture efficiency.
Absorber diameter from Model (m) Absorber diameter from Fluor Daniel Formula (m) Absorber diameter from Model (m) Absorber diameter from Fluor Daniel Formula (m) Absorber diameter from Model (m) Absorber diameter from Fluor Daniel Formula (m)

Cap.

250 MW

250 MW

400 MW

400 MW

500 MW

500 MW

90 % 85 % 80% 75 %

14.87 14.55 14.26 14.06

15 14.58 14.14 13.69

18.31 17.92 17.56 17.24

18.47 17.92 17.41 16.86

20.13 19.69 19.3 18.94

20.3 19.72 19.14 18.53

37

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


4.2 Stripper
The strippers are used extensively in the petroleum industry. In CCP amine strippers are used to reverse the chemical reaction between CO2 and amine using steam. The steam acts as stripping gas, providing desorption energy required to release the CO2. To facilitate better contact between steam and CO2 rich amine solution random packing elements are used. The characteristic properties of packing elements like packing factor are same for both absorber columns and for stripper columns (Table 5). The stripper in this model operates at 1.9 bar and 120 C. It comprises of a reboiler, the stripping column and a condenser for cooling the steam leaving the stripper. The rich amine is fed from the top of the stripper (3rd or 4th tray from the top), the lean amine is recovered from the bottom of the stripper while the CO2 leaves the top of the stripper along with some uncondensed steam. The uncondensed steam and amine vapor are condensed in the condenser and the reflux is returned back to the stripper while CO2 is sent to a knockout pot to further reduce the water content in the CO2 gas before being forwarded to the compressors. The liquid flow rate, at the bottom tray of the tower is greatest because of the need to supply water to the reboiler for steam generation in addition to lean amine flow rate required by the absorber tower. Since the liquid flow rate through the stripper is known, based on the temperature, pressure and reboiler duty the amount of steam generated by the reboiler can be calculated. The vapor flow rate at both ends of the stripper column must be considered and the highest flow rate must be used for the design of the stripper. At the top of the tower, vapor flow rate is equal to the uncondensed steam flow rate plus the CO2 gas flow rate while at the bottom of the tower the vapor rate is equal to the amount of steam generated (Arnold, 1999). The steam flow rate at the top of stripper can be estimated by subtracting the amount of steam condensed in raising the lean amine temperature from inlet to outlet and in providing the desorption energy from the total amount of steam generated by the reboiler (Arnold, 1999). For this model, the vapor flow rate at the bottom is highest therefore the steam flow rate is used for the design of stripper column. Since the liquid and gas flow rate and density of both amine and steam are known, the Eckert GPDC can be used to determine the flow capacity factor. Thereafter like absorber column the diameter of the stripper column can be calculated. The stripper column diameter is also dependent upon the packing material characteristics and is influenced by the packing factor of the packing material used in the stripper column (Table 5) In this stripper model, the amount of steam generated is calculated based upon the energy required for desorption of CO2 and energy required to heat the incoming amine from inlet to outlet temperature. The CO2 desorption energy from literature varies between 3.4 MJ/kg of CO2 to 4 MJ/kg of CO2 (Erik, 2009; Aspen 2009) and a conservative value of 3.65 MJ/kg of CO2 has been used in this model. Once the steam flow rate at the bottom of the stripper column has been determined, the column diameter is calculated using the same procedure as used for calculating the absorber column diameter. It is important to note that although for this model we have used one single stripper for one absorber train in practice a single stripper can serve different absorber trains. An example of this is that in the Fluor Daniel feasibility study of Mongstad and in Tjeldbergodden, Norway a single stripper column is used to serve three different absorber trains (Fluor, 2005)

4.2.1 Alternative method for determination of stripper column diameter: For comparison the stripper column diameter can alternately be calculated from the formula provided by Fluor (Fluor, 1999). The required area footprint of stripper column is determined by the amount of CO 2 to be captured.
38

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

where, te/d

= tonne/day CO2 recovered

Rule of Thumb from the model for determination of stripper column diameter:

where Y= Diameter of stripper column in meter X= CO2 captured by the CCP (ton/h) (Table 7:) Stripper column diameter as determined by the model and by Fluor Daniel formula for different plant capacity and at different capture efficiency.
Column diameter from Stripper Model (m) 250 MW Column diameter from Fluor Daniel Formula (m) 250 MW Column diameter from Stripper Model (m) 400 MW Column diameter from Fluor Daniel Formula (m) 400 MW Column diameter from Stripper Model (m) 500 MW Column diameter from Fluor Daniel Formula (m) 500 MW

Cap.

90 % 85 % 80% 75 %

6.01 5.84 5.67 5.48

6.03 5.86 5.69 5.51

7.4 7.19 6.97 6.76

7.43 7.22 7 6.78

8.13 7.90 7.66 7.42

8.16 7.93 7.69 7.45

From the table 7, it is evident that the model diameter calculation is consistent with the formula provided by Fluor Daniel. Fig 14 shows the impact of packing factor on the stripper column diameter. The packing factor has a strong influence on the stripper column diameter and approximately there is 30 % increase in column diameter when the value of packing factor is increased by a factor of 3. Therefore, for the stripper column design, appropriate attention should be paid to the selection of packing material. As discussed previously ceramic intalox saddles are best suited for corrosive liquids that have a foaming tendency. For the stripper model, the ceramic intalox saddles with packing factor of 22 feet-1 have been selected to optimize space utilisation. However when space is not the major constraint, ideally the most economical packing material that is suitable for operation in the given liquid environment must be selected.

39

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Impact of Packing factor on stripper column diameter
12 Stripper column diamter (m) 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cermic Intalox 3" Super Intalox Intalox saddle 2" Pall Rings 1'' (52) Berl saddle 1.5" (22) saddle 1.5" (30) (40) (66) Packing material packing factor (1/Feet) 500 MW 400 MW

250 MW

Figure 14: Impact of packing material on stripper column diameter calculated for 90 % capture efficiency (from stripper model)

Stripper diameter sensitivity with capture efficiency


9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 90 % Capture Efficiency 85 % Capture Efficiency 80 % Capture Efficiency 75 % Capture Efficiency Column diameter (m)

250 MW 400 MW 500 MW

Capture efficiency (%)

Figure 15: Stripper diameter sensitivity with capture efficiency. Fig 15 shows the sensitivity of stripper column diameter with capture efficiency and can be seen that with decreasing capture efficiency, the diameter of the stripper column required decreases linearly. Approximately, the stripper diameter decreases by 0.6 % with each 1 % decrease in capture efficiency. Since the steam generated is dependent upon the CO2 desorption energy requirements, the stripper diameter would decrease as the desorption energy requirement decreases in future with advanced solvents.

40

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Fig 16 shows the impact of a decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement on a stripper of a 500 MW NGCC plant. From the Fig 16, it can be concluded that with decrease in regeneration energy requirement by the amine, the stripper column diameter decreases. Also reduced would be the size of the reboiler, reboiler condensate tank, reboiler pump, reclaimer, reclaimer condensate tank and the associated pipe diameter required to carry steam from LP turbine to the reboiler and the reclaimer. Approximately for each 10 % decrease in the amine regeneration energy requirement, the stripper diameter reduces by approximately 4 %.

Impact of amine regeneration energy on stripper column diameter


8 7 Column diameter (m) 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 90 % Capture Efficiency 85 % Capture Efficiency 80 % Capture Efficiency 75 % Capture Efficiency 40 % Reduction 30 % Reduction 20 % Reduction

Capture Efficiency (%)

Figure 16: Impact of decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement for a 500 MW NGCC stripper.

(Table 8:) Stripper diameter at different amine regeneration energy requirement for a 500 MW stripper.
Actual amine regeneration energy requirement Cap. 500 MW 10 % decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement 500 MW 20 % decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement 500 MW 30 % decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement 500 MW 40 % decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement 500 MW

90 % 85 % 80% 75 %

8.13 7.90 7.66 7.42

7.81 7.59 7.36 7.13

7.48 7.27 7.05 6.82

7.13 6.93 6.72 6.51

6.76 6.57 6.38 6.17


41

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


4.3 Direct Contact Cooler:
The hot flue gas from the exit of HRSG is diverted to the DCC with the help of diverter dampers. The hot flue gas must be cooled to 3035 C to minimize amine degradation in the absorber. The DCC also reduces the gas mass flow rate through the absorber by condensing the extra water vapor in the flue gas, beyond its moisture holding capacity at that temperature. The condensed water vapor is removed with the help of circulating water pump and is used as a make up water to the demineralization plant after passing through the degasser (to remove any dissolved CO2). The expected amount of excess water from the DCC is about 125150 m3/hr for a 500 MW NGCC unit. To reduce the temperature of the flue gas in the DCC, circulating water is contacted with flue gas to reduce the temperature of flue gas. Flue gas enters the bottom the DCC and ascends up while circulating water flows counter current. The DCC can either be an empty vessel with spray system or a packed tower or a tray tower (SKM, 2009; SDS, 2011; GCS, 2011). The most commonly used direct contact cooling towers are packed tower type or tray type. 4.3.1 Packed Tower type: A packed tower filled with random or structured packing can be used as the DCC. The packed tower is a cylindrical vessel in which flue gas enters at the bottom and makes contact with the circulating water on the packing material. The packing material facilitates better contact, promoting efficient heat transfer between the flue gas and the circulating liquid. The circulating water used is treated raw water initially supplied from the central water reservoir, however when the DCC becomes operational it is self-sustaining because of condensed water vapor. The circulating water enters the top of the DCC and through spray nozzles is distributed on the top of the packing (GCS, 2011). The water wets the entire packing and flows down and is collected at the bottom of the DCC. The circulating water pumps are used to pump water from the bottom of the DCC to the top spray nozzles. DCC can achieve a minimum approach of 1.7 C between the outgoing flue gas from the DCC and the incoming cold circulating water (GCS, 2011). The approach is not selected to be less than 2 C because it would require large depth of packing. The temperature of flue gas leaving the DCC depends upon the approach and the temperature of incoming circulating water. Therefore it is more economical to supply cooler water (if available) than decreasing the approach temperature. For cooling the flue gas to about 30 35 C, usually the incoming circulating water is supplied at a temperature of about 25 - 26 C. Fibreglass reinforced plastic (FRP) and thermoplastic are usually the most preferred construction material for DCCs, provided with some corrosion protective coating (GCS, 2011). 4.3.2 Tray Towers : Tray tower coolers are also sometimes called "Peabody" scrubbers after the name of the company that designed them, and they consist of a number of perforated stages of trays. The flue gas flows upwards through the perforated trays and makes contact with the circulating water that flows counter current. The turbulent mixing of circulating water and upward ascending flue gas in the perforated tray holes results in flue gas transferring heat to the circulating water (GCS, 2011). Liquid is pumped to the top tray with the help of circulating water pump and is distributed to the top tray with the help of a distributor pipe or overflow weir. The liquid, after flowing across the tray, is brought to the next stage through the downcomers. A liquid weir provides the seal to prevent flue gas from ascending up through the downcomers and bypassing trays. Usually the tray towers are suitable for flue gas flows in narrow range because when flue gas flow is reduced significantly, there is reduced pressure drop and the flue gas is unable to hold liquid head on the top of the trays. This

42

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


results in liquid "weeping" through the trays and it significantly reduces liquid and flue gas mixing, thereby reducing the overall cooling efficiency of the DCC (GCS, 2011). The DCC proposed for this project is packed tower with random packings to minimize cost. In the paper " Recovery of CO2 from flue gases: commercial trends " released by Fluor (Fluor, 1999), the diameter of the column was estimated to be slightly larger than the diameter of the absorber. This diameter was estimated for a DCC cooling the flue gas from 100140 C to about 3035 C Since flue gas heater is being used in this project, therefore the cooling duty of DCC is expected to reduce significantly. Therefore to be extremely conservative, the diameter for the DCC is assumed to be same as the diameter of CO2 absorber (SKM, 2009).

4.4 Centrifugal Fan / Blower:


The centrifugal fan is required in the carbon capture plant to overcome the system resistance of the flue gas path. The highest pressure drop in the system occurs in the absorber and DCC while significant pressure drops occurs in the flue gas heater. The pressure losses in the connecting ducts are very low. Therefore to overcome the pressure drop of the flue gas path, centrifugal fans / blowers are required otherwise the HRSG and the gas turbine would get pressurized causing the failure of the system. Ideally a fan with 3000 - 4000 pa outlet pressure will be able to overcome the system resistance of the flue gas path. Choosing the right fan is very important for the trouble free operation of the CCP because only a single 100 % capacity fan has been selected for the model and there is no standby fan. So if the fan fails the entire CCP has to be shut down and this could prove very costly when the CO2 is priced. Fan selection and sizing depends upon a lot of competing parameters including fan efficiency, external discharge conditions, type of gas to be handled, dust loading, normal demand, variability in the demand, operating schedule (continuous or intermittent)(Evans, 2003). There are many generic type of fans with different flow capacity and discharge pressure and the selection should be made based on type of application and the expected duty. The mechanical energy from the motor drives the impellor of the fan through a coupling. The impellor converts the mechanical energy of the shaft to the kinetic energy of flue gas by increasing flue gas velocity. Finally through diffusers, the kinetic energy is converted to static energy in form of pressurized flue gas. The major fan types include centrifugal fans, axial flow fans and mixed flow fans. 4.4.1 Centrifugal fans: Most commonly used centrifugal fans in industrial applications comprise of backward inclined (BI), forward curved (FC), airfoil (AF) and radial fans. The air enters axially and is discharged radially into volute type casing. Forward curved fans are low speed, and are used in high volumetric flow at low static pressure application (Kruger, 1998). Their advantages include low cost but are unsuitable for high-pressure applications. Backward inclined fans run at approximately twice the speed of FC fans and are suitable for high-pressure requirements. BI fans also have higher efficiency and their inherent strong design increases operational reliability and therefore they find wide application in industry. Radial fans are costly and are more suitable for applications with high pressure and low flow rate requirement. Airfoil fans are most efficient of all centrifugal fan and posses all advantages of BI fans. They are widely used in power stations because of rugged design, higher efficiency and lower maintenance requirements. 4.4.2 Axial fans: Axial fans move air axially and are most suitable for applications where very high flow rate and low static pressure are prime requirement. The shaft's mechanical energy is converted into spiral airflow at fan
43

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


discharge. They are divided into three groups- propellar, tubeaxial and vaneaxial. Axial fans have comparatively lower efficiency than centrifugal fans. Recent developments in axial fans have made it possible to deliver high flow rates of air at a comparable pressure as those delivered by airfoil fans. Therefore these fans are being increasingly used in power stations for FD (forced draft) fans. 4.4.3 Mixed flow fans: Mixed flow fans have an air-path through the impellor that is in between that of a centrifugal fan and an axial fan. They have dual capability to discharge air either radially or axially and they discharge it at a higher pressure than a similar flow fan. It has an operational characteristic that has benefit of both centrifugal and axial flow fans. The fan chosen for the CCP model is centrifugal fan with outlet pressure of 4000 Pa. Various model of centrifugal fans are used in power generation industry as forced draft fans (FD fans). These fans can be used in this CCP model. To calculate the area required for the fan installation, the brochures of various manufacturers were consulted. Most of the manufacturers specify the diameter of the fan, volumetric flow and the pressure increase in the fan specification sheet. However the area requirement for the fan is dependent upon diameter of the fan, shaft length, coupling length and the length of the motor. Fig 17 shows that the area requirement for a fan would be diameter of fan x (Impellor shaft length + coupling length + motor length). A further 10 % margin should be taken on fan diameter length to provide for any clearances that may be required.

Figure 17: Single flow fan with coupling and motor (TLT Turbo, 2011) The arrangement of the fan could be either single inlet or double inlet. Fig 18 shows the single and double inlet arrangements Double inlet fans are suitable when high volumetric flow is required. Therefore for a 500 MW NGCC CCP, double inlet fan has been selected because the flow rate through the fan exceeds the general flow specification provided by the fan manufacturer's data sheet. Howden manufactures centrifugal fans with double inlet flow for capacities upto 1000 m3/sec and pressure rise upto 60 kPa (Howden, 2011).

44

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Figure 18: Single inlet fan and double inlet fan (Howden, 2011) The fan affinity laws can be used to find out the diameter of the fan. The biggest single inlet fan supplied by TLT turbo is installed at Yenikoy power plant , Turkey (TLT Turbo, 2011). The specifications of this fan are given in the Table 9. This fan will be suitable for a 400 MW NGCC CCP with flue gas flow rate of 694 m3/sec. (Table 9:) Specification of TLT Turbo installed at Yenikoy power plant , Turkey (TLT Turbo, 2011). Fan Type Flow Pressure increase Efficiency Diameter Fan affinity law: Centrifugal 756 m3/sec 3370 Pa 88% 4.2 m

where, Q1 and Q2 are flow rates through fan 1 and fan 2, D1 and D2 are diameter of fan 1 and fan 2 and N1 and N2 are speed of fan 1 and fan 2 Assuming N1 = N2 (the RPM of both the fan are constant); the diameter of fan can be calculated for different flue gas flow rates. From observation of various fan layout drawing it is assumed that diameter to length ratio for centrifugal fans used in power station is in between 3 3.5 times. Therefore the area required by the fan can be calculated as 1.12 x D2 x 3.5 for single inlet fans. For double inlet fan, the diameter to length ratio can be assumed to be 6 to be on conservative side.

45

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


(Table 10:) The calculated area footprint and diameter of fan for different flow capacity.
Capacity (MW) 250 400 500 Flow rate (m3/sec) 458 696 839 Daimeter (m) 3.6 (single inlet) 4.1 (single inlet) 3.5 (double inlet) Formula =1.12 x 3.5 x 3.62 =1.12 x 3.5 x 4.12 =1.12 x 6 x 3.52 Area (m2) 55 71 80

4.5 Flue gas heater:


Flue gas heaters are used in power stations as part of Flue gas desulphurization (FGD) unit. They serve the same purpose in FGD as they would be required to serve in the CCP. As part of the flue gas desulphurization unit, they preheat the treated flue gas, saturated with water to a suitable temperature before discharge through the plant chimney. During the heat exchange in the flue gas heater, the temperature of the hot flue gas exiting the flue gas heater is considerably reduced. This brings the flue gas temperature close to the range required for the treatment in the FGD unit. The flue gas heaters used in power stations are generally of two types. One is a tubular heater with treated flue gas flowing through the tube while hot flue gas from the HRSG exit flows outside the tube. Since the flue gas is clean, therefore there are not many issues related to plugging and choking of tubes that reduce heat transfer, increase velocity of flue gas through tubes causing erosion. The other type of flue gas heater is the rotary regenerative heater, also known as a "Ljungstrom" heater. The "Ljungstrom" heater comprises of number of corrugated sheets packed in segmented boxes and rotating slowly in the flue gas stream. Usually the rotating rate varies from 24 rpm. The heater is divided in two paths, on one side the treated flue gas from the absorber flows while on other side, the hot flue gas from the exit of the HRSG flows. The hot flue gas exchanges heat with the corrugated packed sheets of the rotary heater and thus heats the sheets. The heated sheets then rotate gradually into the cold stream flue gas path (treated flue gas coming from the absorber) and transfer heat to the flue gas. Thus the treated flue gas gets heated and the sheets lose heat. The sheets then again rotate back into the hot flue gas stream path. With each rotation of the heater, the heat transfer process between hot flue gas to sheets and from sheets to treated flue gas is repeated. The orientation of rotary heater is horizontal and is supported with bearings on both ends. An external motor with gears for reducing the rpm is used to rotate the Ljungstrom heater.

46

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Figure 19: A tube type flue gas heater installed on a 1000 MW coal based plant FGD (Babcock-Hitachi, 2011) The advantages of tube type heaters include zero flue gas leakage (from treated flue gas stream to hot flue gas stream), zero auxiliary power consumption and very low maintenance cost. The tube type heaters are static assembly and therefore the need for supervision and maintenance of heater is minimal. Further the fabrication and construction of tube type heaters is easy and convenient. The rotary air heaters require regular maintenance in form of adjustment to seals, motor maintenance, bearing maintenance. However the most significant benefit of rotary heater is the compactness of the system and simplified duct layout. Since the rotary heater heating elements / corrugated sheets come in form of modular packages (shop fabricated assemblies), therefore the time required for construction of rotary heaters at site is significantly reduced saving project cost and time. For this project, to simplify duct layout and to optimize space utilization rotary heaters have been chosen to heat the treated flue gas coming from the absorber.

Figure 20: A rotary gas- gas heater (BWE, 2011) Burmeister and Wain Energy A/S (BWE) manufactures gas-gas heaters for FGD plants across globe and has supplied in excess of 60 gas-gas heaters of different capacities. If the flue gas leaks from high- pressure side to low pressure side, it reduces the separation efficiency by diluting the incoming flue gas. There are two types
47

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


of flue gas leakages encountered in rotary gas -gas heaters. One is direct flue gas leakage from the high pressure side to the low pressure side bypassing the radial seals and the other is entrained flue gas leakage that occurs due to trapped flue gas in rotary heater sectors when it rotates from hot flue gas stream to cold flue gas stream (BWE, 2011). Several measures can help reduce flue gas leakages in the rotary heaters and enhancing its efficiency. BWE uses a very efficient radial sealing system, where the seals are elaborated as labyrinth seals between the rotor radial walls and the radial sealing plates (BWE, 2011). The sensor control installed on radial sealing plates automatically adjusts the gap between the rotor and the radial sealing plate keeping the gap to the minimum (BWE, 2011). The other method generally used by manufactures is to provide flue gas sealing, in form of pressurized flue gas, however in this case some of the flue gas from high pressure side (the sealing side) leaks into the low pressure flue gas side.

Diameter of flue gas heater at different flue gas flow rates


20 15 10 5 0 Diameter (m)

12.83

10.5

14.66

12.7

13.97

16.11

283

292

342

355

400

578

Flow rate (m3/sec)

Figure 21: Diameter of flue gas heater at different flue gas flow rates (BWE, 2011).

70 Temperature difference (deg C) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200

Flue gas flow vs diameter

18 16 14 10 8 6 4 2 0 Diameter (m) 12 y = 0.9916x0.4408

Temperature Difference Diameter Power (Diameter) 300 400 500 600 700

Flow (m3/sec)

Figure 22: Flue gas flow rate vs diameter of the flue gas heater with temperature difference between inlet hot flue gas and outlet hot flue gas (BWE, 2011).

48

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Figure 21 and 22 show the diameter of flue gas heater required to heat the flue gas at different flow rates. Fig 22 suggests an exponential relationship between diameter and flow rate, diameter being nearly proportional to square root of flue gas flow rate. Therefore to make conservative estimates, a correlation has been used between the diameter and different flow rates as shown in equation (11)

This correlation is simply based on relationship between diameter of a cylindrical vessel and the volume flow rate through it. The data for 578 m3/sec flow rate has been taken as reference because the design parameters for this heater are quite similar to that required in this project. The obtained diameter values are considered conservative estimates because the flue gas heater required in this project would be operating with gas inlet temperature of 7090 C and a temperature drop of about 30 C.

(Table 11:) Comparison of design parameters for ref. gas heater and the heater required for this project. Parameters Flue gas inlet temp Flue gas outlet temp Temperature diff. Height Reference gas heater 130 C 84 C 46 C 1m Operating parameter 7090 C 40 60 C 30 C 1m

4.6 Heat Exchangers:


As the name suggests, heat exchangers are used for transferring heat from one fluid to another fluid without bringing them in actual contact. In the CCP, four major heat exchangers are used.

4.6.1 Lean - rich amine heat exchanger:


The rich amine from the bottom of the absorber is pumped to the stripper column through lean - rich amine heat exchanger with the help of two rich amine pumps. The purpose of the lean - rich amine heat exchanger is to transfer heat from hot lean amine coming from the stripper column bottom to the rich amine being pumped to the stripper column. This heat transfer results in reduced reboiler steam demand by the stripper thus increasing the efficiency of the process. Plate heat exchangers are most suitable at low-pressure application because they provide much larger surface area to fluids for heat exchange compared to conventional heat exchangers. Alfa Laval manufactures heat exchangers that could be used for the application in the CCP (Alfa Laval, 2011). The size of the heat exchangers is dependent upon the amount of flow through the heat exchangers and the liquid flowing through it. Table 12 shows the major heat exchanger offered by Alfa Laval that is used in industry for exchanging heat between water / water. These heat exchangers can be used for application in exchanging heat between amine and amine. Based on the amine flow rate required through the lean - rich heat exchanger, appropriate model from the table 12 can be selected for the application. It is
49

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


important to understand that most of the manufacturers build heat exchangers that are in standard sizes. However custom-built heat exchangers can be manufactured by the manufacturer on special customer requests. In this project, the equipments selected are from standard sizes available in the market by the manufacturer. Model T50 Alfa laval plate type heat exchanger has been selected for both 500 and 400 MW CCP lean - rich amine heat exchanger while model M30 has been selected for 250 MW lean-rich amine heat exchanger.

(Table 12:) Alfa - Laval plate heat exchangers specifications (Alfa Laval, 2011)
Type M10 M15 M30 MX25 T20 T45 T50 TL35 Area (m2) 1.1 2.2 6.0 4.7 3.0 9.1 10.9 7.3 Height 1.084 1.815 2.882 2.595 2.145 3.53 3.951 3.21 Width 0.47 0.61 1.15 0.92 0.78 1.43 1.55 1.154 Length 2.4 3.7 5.235 5.185 3.93 6.404 7.08 6.36 Flow (kg/sec) 50 80 500 250 225 1000 975 500

4.6.2 DCC heat exchanger :


The hot cooling water from the bottom of the DCC is pumped to the top of the DCC through DCC heat exchanger with the help of DCC circulating water pump. The DCC cooling water rejects heat to the external cooling water in the DCC heat exchanger. The estimated flow rate through DCC heat exchanger is slightly higher than the flow rate through lean - rich amine heat exchanger (SKM, 2009). Therefore the same model of heat exchanger used for lean- rich amine heat exchanger can be used as DCC heat exchanger. Fig 23 shows a typical Alfa Laval plate type heat exchanger.

50

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Figure 23: A typical Alfa laval heat exchanger (Alfa Laval, 2011)

4.6.3 Lean Amine cooler:


The lean amine from the bottom of the stripper is pumped to the top of the absorber column through lean- rich amine heat exchanger and lean amine cooler. The purpose of the lean amine cooler is to further cool the lean amine before its entry into the absorber column. The lean amine rejects heat to the external cooling water being pumped through the lean amine cooler with the help of cooling tower water recirculation pump. The lean amine flow rate through the cooler is essentially same as the flow rate through lean-rich amine heat exchanger therefore the same model heat exchangers can be used for lean amine cooler application. The area footprint of these coolers would be same as the coolers used for DCC heat exchanger and lean-rich amine heat exchanger.

4.6.4 Wash water cooler:


A small amount of amine in the absorber gets carried along with the flue gas flow. Therefore the flue gas is washed at the last few stages (at the top of the absorber column) to minimize the amine loss from the absorber column and meet the environmental norms. The wash water comes in direct contact with the flue gas and as a result gets hot. Therefore a cooler is required to cool the wash water. The wash water rejects heat to the cooling water in the wash water cooler. The cooling water is circulated through wash water cooler with the help of cooling water recirculation pump located in the cooling tower. Since the wash water flow through the wash water cooler is very low (about 30 kg/sec for a 500 MW plant CCP), M10 model can be used.

4.7 CO2 stripping and compression system 4.7.1 CO2 condenser prior to knock-out pot:
The CO2 stream coming out from the stripper contains uncondensed steam and amine vapors. To reduce the moisture content in the CO2 and to prevent amine loss from the stripper, the CO2 stream needs to be cooled. The CO2, amine and uncondensed steam mixture from the top of the stripper is ducted to the condenser, which is a shell -tube type heat exchanger. It is a cylindrical vessel 8 m tall with cooling water flowing through tubes and CO2, amine and steam mixture flowing on shell side. The CO2 stream is cooled in the condenser before the knock-out pot with the help of cooling water being pumped by cooling water recirculation pump located in
51

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


the cooling tower. The condensed water and amine is separated from CO2 stream in the CO2 knock-out pot and returned back to the stripper with the help of reflux pump. To optimize space utilization, the condenser can be put on the top of the stripper, however for this CCP model, the condenser would be located on the ground. The diameter of the condenser is related with the flow of CO2, amine and steam mixture through the condenser and therefore based on the flow rate of CO2, amine and steam mixture the diameter of condenser required for each CCP model can be calculated. The correlation used for calculating the diameter of the condenser for each individual CCP model is given by:

Where, Carbon capture Capacity1 and Carbon capture Capacity2 are the required CO2 capacity that the CCP is designed to capture, Q1 and Q2 are the CO2, uncondensed steam and amine mixture flow rate through the condenser and D1 and D2 are the diameter of the condenser The Fluor study on the 800 MW NGCC with CO2 capture of 6170 ton/day plant requires 2 condensers 8 m long with 2 m diameter while the SKM 1500 MW study with CO2 capture of 11868 ton/day requires 2 condensers 8 m long with 2.6 m diameter (SKM, 2009). From the above data, the diameter of condenser at different CO 2 capture rates can be estimated. Once the diameter required for the condenser for different capture efficiencies of CCP are calculated, the area footprint of the condenser can be evaluated. For this model CCP, only one condenser 8 m long has been selected.

4.7.2 CO2 knock-out pot:


The amine and uncondensed steam are cooled in the condenser and separated from CO2 stream in the condenser knock-out pot. The knock-out pot is a vertical cylindrical vessel where the CO2 and condensed amine and water mixture are separated by gravity. The condensed liquid falls to the bottom, from where it is removed and returned back to the stripper column using reflux pump while the CO2 gas rises to the top of the knock-out pot. The diameter of the knock -out pot depends upon the anticipated flow rate of CO2 and condensed liquid into the pot. The knock-out pot comprises of an inlet section or feed section, demisting section and a degassing section. Usually the length to diameter ratio is 2 4 times, and the liquid storing section has an internal storage capacity of about 5 minutes of liquid flow. The diameter of the vessel can be calculated using the Souders-Brown equation to determine the maximum allowable vapor velocity (CPE, 2005) 13 where: Velocity = maximum allowable vapor velocity, m/sec densityLiquid = liquid density, kg/m3 densitygas = vapor density, kg/m3 k = 0.107 m/s (when the drum includes a de-entraining mesh pad)
52

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Drum diameter in meter (D) = (4 A / 3.1416 )0.5 However for this CCP model an engineering calculator software is used to determine the size of the knock-out pot. The calculator besides the general Souders-Brown equation takes into account, the viscosity of liquid, the viscosity of gas, the minimum particle size required to be separated and accurately calculates the required diameter. Fig 24A shows a typical vertical knock-out pot while Fig 24B shows the calculator used to calculate the diameter of the vertical knock out pot. The L to D ratio has been assumed to be 2 in the calculator while the minimum liquid diameter to be separated has been chosen as 200 micron.

Fig 24 A : A typical vertical knock -out pot (CPE, 2005) Fig 24 B : The vertical knock-out pot engineering calculator ( Enggcyclopedia, 2011) Figure 24: A typical vertical knock out pot and Vertical knock-out pot engineering calculator 4.7.3 Reboiler: The rich amine from the stripper is heated in the reboiler to generate steam for stripping CO2 in the stripper column. The steam extracted from LP-IP crossover pipe is most suitable for supplying steam to the reboiler. In this CCP model one reboiler is used for the stripper, however in general if a single stripper is used for multiple absorber train, then number of reboilers is equal to the number of absorber trains. The re -boilers used for CCP could be either kettle-type horizontal reboiler or vertical thermo-syphon reboilers. The natural circulation
53

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


thermo-syphon reboiler has been chosen for the model CCP to optimize space utilization. The reboiler is a shell-tube type heat exchanger with steam condensing on shell side while amine flows through the tubes. The amine and steam generated in the reboiler rise through the tubes and enter the stripper bottom. The generated steam and amine solution get separated in the CO2 stripper. The steam rises up the stripper column providing desorption energy to the CO2 as well as heating the incoming rich amine solvent to the saturation temperature corresponding to the stripper operating pressure. Most of the steam gets condensed while providing the desorption energy to the CO2 and heating the incoming rich amine while some uncondensed steam along with CO2 and amine vapors leaves the stripper top. This uncondensed amine is condensed in the cooler before the CO2 knock-out pot. Fig 25 shows the kettle-type and thermo-syphon reboiler that can be used in the CCP.

Figure 25: Kettle Reboiler (left) and thermo-syphon reboiler (right) (Loraine, 1999) The diameter of the reboiler depends upon the amount of steam required to be generated, which in turn depends upon the amount of CO2 being captured (provided the required CO2 desorption energy and temperature of incoming rich amine stream are constant). Therefore a simple correlation has been used to derive the diameter required to capture CO2 for different plant capacities.

where, Carbon capture Capacity1 and Carbon capture Capacity2 are the required CO2 capacity that the CCP is designed to capture, Q1 and Q2 are the amine and steam flow rate through the reboiler and D1 and D2 are the diameter of the condenser The diameter of the reboiler for capturing 3956 ton/day of CO 2 is approximately 5 m (SKM, 2005), which is considered to be a very conservative figure. Based on the CO2 capture required for different plant capacities at different capture efficiency, the diameter of individual reboilers can be estimated.

54

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


4.7.4 Reboiler Condensate tank:
The reboiler uses steam from IP-LP extraction to heat amine and generate steam. The steam from IP - LP steam condenses on the shell side after transferring heat to the amine. This condensate is stored in the reboiler condensate tank. In the CCP model the reboiler storage tank is designed for 10 minute storage capacity which is general design principle for power plants process storage tanks (the deaerator is also designed for 10 minute of storage capacity). The amount of condensate is dependent upon the amount of the CO2 required to be captured. The amount of condensate produce can be calculated by the formula mentioned below. The height of the tank is selected to be 5 m high.

4.7.5 CO2 Compressor:


The CO2 from the exit of the knock-out pot is sent to the compressor, where it is compressed to 220 bar pressure. Man Diesel and Turbo manufactures internally geared compressors which are highly efficient multi shaft compressors and have been designed with intention to cater to the upcoming market of CO 2 capture and storage (Man Diesel and Turbo, 2011). Internally geared compressors have highest efficiency and can compress up to 250 bar pressure and handle gas flow rate up to 500000 m3/hr. The internally geared RG compressors can contain up to ten impellor stages, which enables compact design and high-pressure ratio. Table 13 shows the product specification sheet of RG compressors. Based on the CO 2 flow rate through the compressor, appropriate model from the table can be selected to meet the demand. The area footprint of CO2 compressors is product of length and width of compressor.

(Table 13:) Product specification sheet of RG compressors (Man Diesel and Turbo, 2011). Model Length Width Height Weight Flow Power Units mm mm mm ton Am3/h MW RG 25
2,700 3,600 2,000 15 10,000 4

RG 40
3,000 3,600 2,500 30 25,000 15

RG 45
3,400 3,600 3,000 40 30,000 18

RG 50
3,700 3,600 3,300 45 40,000 20

RG 56
4,000 3,600 3,500 50 50,000 20

RG 80
4,500 3600 4000 60 100,000 20

RG 100
5,500 3600 5000 > 60 200,000 35

RG 140
> 3600 7000 > 60 350,000 50

RG 160
> 7000 > 7000 > 130 500,000 60

55

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


4.7.6 CO2 compressor intercooler:
The internally geared RG model compressors are multi stage compressors and have internal coolers in -built inside the compressors. However, the Fluor in the feasibility study of Tjeldbergodden and Mongstad have proposed for additional air coolers (Fluor, 2005). Therefore an area equal to the size of the compressor is left vacant to accommodate air coolers if need arises in future. However, the specification sheet of Man Diesel and Turbo clearly specifies that there is no need for additional coolers (Man Diesel and Turbo, 2011).

4.7.7 CO2 knock-out pots after compressor stages:


The CO2 after each stage of compression followed by cooling passes through knock-out pots to remove any condensate formed during compression. The feasibility study of Tjeldbergodden (Fluor, 2005) provides the dimension of knock - out pots required for a 6170 ton/day CCP. The knock-out pot is a vertical cylindrical vessel and the diameter of the cylinder is proportional to the volume of CO 2 flowing through the cylinder. Therefore based on the CO2 capture capacity of the CCP model the diameter of the knock-out pot for each stage can be calculated using the equation given below:

Where, Carbon capture Cap1 and Carbon capture Cap2 are the required CO2 capacity that the CCP is designed to capture and D1 and D2 are the diameter of the knock-out pots (Table 14:) The knock-out pot diameter for 6170 ton / day Tjeldbergodden plant (Fluor, 2005)
CO2 Compressor KO pot 1 Diameter 3.4 CO2 Compressor KO pot 2 2.9 CO2 Compressor KO pot 3 2.4 CO2 Compressor KO pot 4 2.0

4.7.8 CO2 Dehydration package:


The CO2 from an intermediate stage of the compressor at a pressure of approximately 3540 bar, is extracted from the compressor and sent to glycol dehydrators to reduce the moisture content in the CO 2 below 50 ppm on weight basis. Tri-ethylene glycol is used most commonly used glycol for dehydration and therefore these dehydrators are also known as TEG dehydrators. The TEG is pumped to the top of contacting tower through which CO2 ascends up and makes contact with counter flowing TEG over the structured packing. The TEG adsorbs moisture from the wet CO2 gas and is sent to glycol regenerators where it is heated with steam at 400 F to remove moisture (AMR Process Inc, 2011). There are many established manufacturers of TEG dehydrators and they are available as both standard design and custom-built design.

56

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Figure 26: A typical TEG dehydration unit (QB Johnson, 2011)

ALCO gas and oil production equipment limited and Escher produces TEG dehydrators that can be used for application in the CCP model (ALCO, 2011; Escher, 2011). Fig 27 shows the different TEG projects supplied by ALCO and Escher and have been plotted as a function of CO2 gas flow rate through dehydrators in MMSCFD against area. Therefore based on the CO2 flow rate through the TEG dehydration unit, the required area for the TEG unit can be calculated from the Fig 27. To convert the CO2 gas flow rate from ton/h to MMSCFD the conversion factor listed below can be used. 1 MMSCFD = 1116.3 NM3/h
CO2 Flowrate vs Area y = 3.4346x0.6669 R = 0.9901

100 80 60 40 20 0
0 20 40 60 CO2 Flow rate (MMSCFD) 80 100

Area (m2)

120

Figure 27: CO2 flow through the TEG and the required area footprint (ALCO, 2011; Escher, 2011).

4.8 Reclaimer:
A reclaimer is necessary to maintain the absorption capacity of lean amine to the highest possible extent. Because of oxidizing flue gas atmosphere and other impurities present in flue gas and also because of thermal degradation of amines at high temperature, the absorption capacity of amine is reduced. A reclaimer is used to remove the heat stable salts formed, which are products of degradation. Removal of heat stable salts from the amine restores the absorption capacity of amines to the highest possible limit. The reclaimer is operated periodically in a batch-wise process and is located close to the stripper to reduce the pipe lengths required.
57

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


The stripper is a cylindrical vessel lying horizontally on the ground so the area footprint is the function of diameter of the reclaimer and its length. The volume of the reclaimer required is dependent upon the amine solvent flow rate which in turn is dependent upon CO2 captured per day (carbon capture efficiency).

Figure 28: A typical reclaimer used for MEA / DEA (Huntsman, 2011) The Fluor feasibility study on Tjeldbergodden 800 NGCC plant with 6170 tons/day of CO2 capture estimates the size of the reclaimer vessel to be as 6.6 m diameter and 8.6 m length while SKM for 1500 MW plant with with 11868 tons/day of CO2 capture estimates the size of the reclaimer vessel to be as 8.2 m diameter and 10.7 m length (Fluor, 2005; SKM, 2009). Based on the two data points, the size of the reclaimer can be roughly estimated by general correlation as given below.

where, Carbon capture Capacity1 and Carbon capture Capacity2 are the required CO2 capacity that the CCP is designed to capture and V1 and V2 are the volume of the reclaimer The length of the reclaimer for the model is selected as 7 m for 500 MW & 400 MW while 5m for 250 MW. Using the above correlation, the volume of the reclaimer required for the given capture capacity can be calculated. Once the volume is known, the diameter of the reclaimer can be obtained. It is clear that this is a very rough estimate.

4.8.1 Reclaimer Condensate Tank:


The reclaimer removes contaminants from amine solvent using steam, which produces condensate. The condensate is stored in a reclaimer condensate tank and is designed for 10 minutes retention capacity. The amount of condensate formed is proportional to the amount of CO2 required to be captured and the capacity of
58

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


reclaimer condensate tank required for 11868 ton/day CO2 capture plant is 2.7 m3 (SKM, 2009). Therefore based on the amount of CO2 captured by the CCP model, the capacity of the reclaimer condensate tank can be determined. The reclaimer condensate tank is a cylindrical vessel, located horizontally close to the reclaimer and has a length of 1 m.

The area footprint of reclaimer condensate tank would be diameter of the tank x length of the tank.

4.8.2 Reclaimer Waste Tank:


The wastes removed by the reclaimer are stored in a reclaimer waste tank before being disposed of. To optimize space utilization, the reclaimer waste tank is located beneath the reclaimer and is emptied periodically to remove the waste from it. Based on Fluor estimates 4394 tons of reclaimer waste would be produced each year by a 11868 ton CO2/ day capacity CCP (Fluor, 2005; SKM, 2009). Based on the CO2 required to be captured by the CCP model, the amount of reclaimer waste generated each year can be calculated. Since the reclaimer waste tank is designed to be emptied periodically, the reclaimer waste tank is designed to have a capacity of 3 days of reclaimer waste. The CCP model is designed to operate for 330 days each year therefore the capacity of the reclaimer waste tank is equal to reclaimer waste generated annually /110. The reclaimer waste tank is located beneath the reclaimer and has a length of 5 m.

The area footprint of reclaimer waste tank would be diameter x length; however it would have no impact on the overall layout of the CCP as it would be accommodated in the footprint of the reclaimer vessel.

4.9 Pumps:
The CCP requires number of pumps for pumping DCC water, amine, reflux, wash water and condensate. The area footprint required by the pump can be calculated based on the flow-rate through the pumps. Table 15 shows the required flow rate through pumps for a 500 MW plant at 90% capture efficiency. Based on the flowrate required, the matching pump can be selected from the product catalog of the pump manufacturer. There are many pump manufacturers in low-pressure range that can be used for pumping amine and water. Goulds pumps are used widely for pumping amines (Goulds, 2011) and for amine pumping applications product catalog of Goulds pump have been used. For water pumping application, the catalog of Apex pump and Gould pumps have been used (Apex, 20011; Goulds, 2011) (Table 15:) Pump size for a 500 MW NGCC plant with 90 % capture efficiency (Fluor, 2005; SKM, 2009) Pump Number / Capacity Length (m) Width (m) Manufacturer Flow capacity (m3/h)

Rich solvent pump Lean solvent pump

2 x 100 % 2 x 100 %

2.5 2.5

1.5 1.5

Goulds Goulds

2,860 2,860
59

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


DCC circulating water pump Reflux pump Wash water pump Solvent makeup pump Solvent charge pump Reboiler condensate pump Solvent sump pump 2 x 100 % 2 x 100 % 2 x 100 % 2 x 100 % 2 x 100 % 2 x100 % 2 x 100 % 2.5 1.1 1.1 0.5 1 0.6 0.5 1.5 0.32 0.32 0.2 0.4 0.265 0.4 Goulds Apex Apex Apex Apex Apex Apex 3,200 6570 6570 025 40125 100160 110

The capacity of lean and rich amine pumps for different plant capacity and capture efficiency can be calculated from the absorber model. The capacity of DCC circulating water pump has been provided by Fluor in the feasibility study of Tjeldbergodden and Mongstad (Fluor, 2005) and based on the amount of CO2 required to be captured by the model, the water flow rate through DCC pump can be calculated. Reboiler condensate pump capacity can be calculated with the help of stripper model, which provides the amount of steam required to be generated by the stripper for stripping CO2 from amine. Reflux pump capacity has been calculated assuming 40 % steam leaves the stripper along with CO2 (Aspen, 2009; Arnold 1999). The capacity of wash water pump has been assumed to be same as of reflux pumps. Solvent charge pump and solvent sump pump are very small pumps and their capacity has been estimated based on SKM calculation (SKM, 2009).

4.10 Filters:
The CCP plant requires filters to separate out impurities from amine, DCC circulating water and amine wash water. The biggest of these filters is lean amine filter, which is a side stream filter with one-third of amine flowing through the filter element (Fluor, 2005; SKM, 2009). The DCC circulating water filter is also a side stream filter with 57 percent water being re-circulated back to the DCC bottom tank. The wash water filter and amine solvent sump filter are much smaller in diameter. Heat stable salts, corrosion products and other solid impurities build-up in closed loop amine system causing fouling of heat exchangers, reboilers, stripper and absorber column. They also attract hydrocarbons that cause foaming problems (Eaton, 2011). Clearamine filters provide an efficient means to remove harmful contaminants and maintain the effectiveness of the amine system (Eaton, 2011). Eaton 2 x 2 m2 back-wash filters can filter up to 680 m3 / hr of amine (Eaton, 2011); therefore based on the amine flow rate through the CCP model the area footprint required can be calculated. For the other filters, since the flow rates are very small therefore 1 m 2 area foot print for 500 MW CCP model, 0.8 m2 area foot print for 400 MW CCP model and 0.5 m2 area foot print for 250 MW CCP model has been assumed.

60

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


4.11 Soda Ash Injection system:
Soda - ash injection system is required in the CCP model to neutralize the heat stable salts recovered from the amine in the reclaimer. Soda ash injection system is skid mounted comprising of 2 x 100 % dosing pumps with a vertical cylindrical container to store soda ash. The size of the soda ash injection system required depends upon the tons of CO2 captured per day. For a 500 MW NGCC plant, the required area foot print would be 4 x 2 m2 and has been estimated based on the SKM calculations for 1500 MW NGCC soda ash injection system (SKM, 2009). The area footprint required for other CCP models can be calculated based on the amount of CO2 required to be captured by the CCP model. Prominent, WES Engineering solutions, Grosvenor pumps and Derwent Water Services are some of the manufactures of soda ash (Na2CO3) injection system. Fig 29 shows a typical dosing skid by Grosvenor pumps (Grosvenor, 2011).

Figure 29: A chemical dosing skid (Grosvenor, 2011)

4.12 MEA Storage tank:


The solvent loss in the Fluor Daniel Econoamine FG + process has been calculated by Fluor as 1.6 kg per ton of CO2 for a well maintained NGCC CCP (Fluor, 1999). Therefore based on the carbon captured required by the CCP model, the amount of amine loss per day can be calculated for each model. The size of the MEA storage tank is designed to have capacity equal to 3 days of amine loss. The MEA storage tank is a cylindrical vessel and the height has been assumed to be 2 m. for the CCP model. Therefore the area footprint of MEA storage tank can be calculate by the equations given below -

where, D= Diameter of the cylindrical storage tank.

61

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


The tank would be installed in the bunded area with bunds capable of containing 110 % of the content of the MEA storage tank liquid (Mecklenburgh, 1985; SKM, 2009). The safety hazards and area required for bunds would be defined in more detail in the layout design section.

4.13 Solvent Sump:


Solvent sump is a rubber lined waste collection pit that collects waste solvent and neutralizes them before discharge. For a 500 MW NGCC CCP model the area of the sump is chosen as 4.5 m x 3 m, which is a conservative estimate. The solvent sump would be 1.5 m deep having a volume of 20.3 m3. The solvent sump volume for 400 MW NGCC and 250 MW NGCC has been calculated as 16.2 m3 and 10.2 m3 respectively based on the amine flow rate of the system.

4.14 Demineralization water plant:


Fluor in the feasibility study of Mongstad, a 5276 ton CO 2 per day CCP has calculated the DM water requirement as 20 tons per hour (Fluor, 2005). Therefore based on the CO2 captured per day by the CCP model, the DM water hourly requirement can be found out. A DM water plant comprises of a sand filter, an activated charcoal filter, a cation resin bed, an anion resin bed, a mixed anion resin bed, a degasser unit, a storage tank and DM water transfer pumps. For a 1500 MW NGCC CCP model the calculated DM water hourly requirement is 45 m3 and the area footprint of DM plant with 45 m3/hr capacity is 20 m x 6 m (SKM, 2009). The area requirement for a DM water plant is the function of flow rate and can be approximated by the equation;

Where, D is the diameter of biggest cylindrical vessel in the DM plant. This correlation has been used because length of DM plant does not depend much on biggest vessel diameter while the width of DM plant is function of biggest vessel diameter. The relation between flow rate and cylindrical vessel diameter is given by the equation

4.15 Control Room:


A control room for the CCP is required from where the operators can control the CCP. As such there is no standard area specified for a control room, however it should be spacious enough to contain all CCP control, monitoring and display unit as well as provide space for the operators to sit comfortably and control field
62

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


equipments from remote. A 5m x 10m area will be used for the control room for 500 MW and 400 MW CCP while a 5m x 8m area will be used for the 250 MW CCP model.

4.16 Cooling Towers:


The cooling water system provides cooling water to the CCP to remove heat from the process. However, the cooling water system needs to dissipate this heat to the environment. Therefore cooling towers are required in the CCP model. The CCP is proposed to have its own stand-alone cooling towers and to optimize space hybrid cooling towers have been proposed. Other options could have been air-cooled cooling towers or natural draft cooling towers; however they would require more space than the hybrid cooling towers. The area footprint of the cooling tower is dependent upon the amount of heat that needs to be dissipated from the system. The major heat sources include - DCC cooler, lean amine cooler, compressors, pumps and CO2 condenser.

(Table 16:) Temperature and specific heats used in CCP model calculation (Coskun, 2009) Temperature DCC inlet DCC outlet Steam at stripper outlet C 80 30 120 Specific heat Flue gas Water Steam KJ/kg.K 1.13 4.18 2.02
63

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


CO2 Condenser saturation Lean amine cooler inlet Lean amine cooler outlet Absorber wash water inlet Absorber wash water outlet 45 70 35 50 30 Amine (30 % MEA ) 3.42

The inlet temperature of the cooling water system chosen for the CCP model is 27 C while the outlet temperature is 42 C. Based on the total heat that needs to be dissipated from the system, the flow rate of the cooling water system can be determined using the formula:

Based on the flow rate, the cooling tower area can be determined using the cooling tower calculator provided by GEA, the leading manufacturer of cooling tower technology (GEA, 2011). Figure 30 shows the area required for a cooling tower of 500 MW plant with thermal heat load of 209.5 MW.

Figure 30: Area requirement by the 500 MW NGCC plant at 90% capture efficiency (GEA, 2011)
64

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


The heat calculation for the CCP model is very conservative as high margins in temperatures have been included. As a result, the required area calculated by the CT Calculator (GEA, 2011) is considered to be more than adequate for the CCP models. Table 17 shows the heat energy in MW required to be dissipated by the CCP model for different plant capacity and capture efficiency.

(Table

17:) The heat energy (in MW) to be dissipated by the cooling tower at different capture efficiency Capacity 500 MW 400 MW 250 MW 90 % CC Efficiency
210 MW 173 MW 113 MW

85 % CC Efficiency
201 MW 166 MW 108.9 MW

80 % CC Efficiency
193 MW 159.6 MW 104.6 MW

75 % CC Efficiency
185 MW 152.9 MW 100.3 MW

Fig 31 shows the contribution of different equipments of CCP to total cooling tower heat load for a 500 MW plant at 90 % capture efficiency. It is clear from the Fig 31 that major part of heat load of cooling tower comes from lean amine cooler and DCC.

DCC Cooler CO2 condenser Lean amine cooler Absorber wash water cooler Pumps & Compressor

Figure 31 : Break-up of cooling tower heat load

65

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

5. Layout Design of CCP


CCP layout is concerned with the spatial arrangement of CCP plant equipments and its interconnections such as ducts, piping, conveyors, transportation etc. A good layout design of plant essentially achieves a fine balance between safety requirements, ease in construction, operation and maintenance, cost economics, plot area utilization, protection of the public and environment, protection for personnel and equipment in emergency and provisions for any expected future expansion (Mecklenburgh, 1985). A good layout design not only reduces precious time during construction but it also minimizes the construction cost by reducing ducts and pipes lengths. A good layout therefore provides safe, economical and reliable flow of materials and people and a good working environment to the people working in the plant or living in the areas surrounding the plant. Any possible disasters that may affect the plant must be for-seen and necessary provisions for disasters and emergencies management must be clearly identified and made during the layout design stage to contain the disasters at source point itself and prevent any spread out of contaminants to the other areas of plant and beyond. "A good layout cannot compensate for a bad process design or bad engineering design however a bad layout will lead to unsuccessful and unsafe venture irrespective of however well the project has been designed" (Mecklenburgh, 1985).

5.1 CCP layout principles:


For the design of the NGCC CCP model various layout models are possible based on the availability of land. The CCP could be located either downstream of the HRSG or to the available nearby area adjacent to the HRSG. Both layout designs are feasible however the downstream location of CCP simplifies the layout and reduces the duct lengths required. Majority of feasibility studies on CPP including Fluor's Tjeldbergodden propose downstream layout (SKM, 2009; Fluor, 2005) while in Mongstad Fluor has proposed a side-stream layout to utilize the available nearby space (Fluor, 2005). For this CCP model, the downstream layout has been chosen based upon the process flow diagram and the equipments / units are arranged in the order of their flow. The major layout design principle while choosing the model are outlined below Sufficient space downstream the NGCC unit is available to accommodate the carbon capture plant. Optimize the utilization of the available land area in most efficient manner. Sufficient space is provided around equipment for access during construction, operation and maintenance. The fire-fighting and other emergency facilities of the existing plant would be used. The fire-fighting mains in the CCP area would be connected to the main firefighting mains of the existing NGCC plant. The cooling water would be supplied from the central plant reservoir and any additional pump required would be installed in the main plant area. Therefore the area required for the installation of cooling water make-up pumps has not been considered in this model layout. The electricity requirement for the CCP would be provide through installation of additional transformer in the switchyard.
66

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


The CCP will have its own stand-alone cooling tower and a single cooling tower has been chosen over multiple cooling towers because the space required by a single cooling tower is less than multiple cooling towers for dissipating the same amount of heat at same cooling water flow-rate. The equipment arrangement has been done in-line to simplify erection and to provide sufficient space for big hydraulic cranes to operate during construction or maintenance. The make -up water requirement of the DM plant would be provided from the DCC excess water and the rest of the DCC excess water could be fed to cooling water system reducing the amount of make-up required from the main plant central reservoir. The rain-water drainage system of the CCP would run parallel to the access road and would terminate in main plant rain water drainage system. The neutralized effluent from the solvent sump would be pumped to the main effluent treatment plant and therefore CCP would not require a new effluent treatment plant. The CCP plant will have its own operating control room and DM plant. The access road running parallel to the NGCC plant would be extended to the CCP. The CCP would be inside NGCC plant boundary and therefore will use the security and administrative facilities of the main plant (because CCP will have chemicals that have lot of permit requirements and the safe handling and storage of chemicals need to be ensured).

5.2 CCP Plant layout consideration:


The minimum possible area requirement by the CCP would be the sum total of the footprints of its various components, however various constraints prevent the CCP model to reach this theoretical minimum (Mecklenburgh, 1985). Adequate clearances around CCP equipments are necessary not only for ease during construction, operation and maintenance but they are also required to isolate it during emergencies like fire, chemical leakage, equipment failure or accidents. Therefore the most economical layout is the one that minimizes duct lengths and pipes but ensures adequate clearances are provided for the safety of plant and personnel. The major considerations while designing the layout are outlined below: All the pumps except solvent sump pump net positive suction head (NPSH) requirement have been met by providing necessary gravity flow. The same pipe rack is being used for transportation of steam and condensate. The waste from the reclaimer waste tank would be removed periodically and would be safely disposed of meeting all environmental norms and regulations. DCC and absorber column are constructed with concrete and lined with rubber. DCC, absorber column and cooling tower would require piling to take the load of the heavy structure and NGCC plant has necessary approach road width up to the CCP plot for the big pilings machines to reach the CCP plot.
67

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


The equipments that require frequent attendance can be reached in shortest possible time from the control room. Access roads to heavy equipments are provided so that they could be carried directly with the hydraulic cranes during construction and maintenance. MEA storage tank has a bund around it to contain 110 % of its liquid storage capacity during emergencies like leakage or fire.

The layout chosen for the 500 MW CCP model has 10 m main access road running parallel to the plant so that each major equipments is accessible via hydraulic cranes (Appendix 3). A 5 m pipe-rack has been considered in this model to carry the steam piping from LP-IP cross over piping to reboiler and reclaimer and to carry condensate back to the feed water system. The velocity of flue gas in the duct is usually in the range of 1220 m/s (Engineeringtoolbox, 2011) therefore to carry the flue gas of 500 MW NGCC CCP a duct with width of 68 m would be required. In the CCP model, 10 m wide area is used to provide space for the duct to carry flue gas from the absorber back to the flue gas heater. The clean flue gas from absorber after getting heated in the flue gas heater is ducted back to the main chimney to be released to the atmosphere. The control room is located close to DM plant and other equipments so that in case of any failure, the equipments could be reached in shortest possible time. A secondary access road, 4 m wide near absorber column is designed to reach pumps, filters, heat exchangers and coolers, soda ash injection system and MEA storage tank. Since these equipments are small and not very heavy, small cranes can reach them using secondary access road. Appendix 3 shows the model layout used for 500 MW and 250 MW NGCC CCP.

68

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

6. Results
The objective of the project was to understand the empirical relationship between the land area requirements by the CCP for different NGCC plant capacity. The other important aspect of the project was to understand how land area requirement is affected by the carbon capture efficiency of the CCP. Impact of reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement on land area requirement was also studied to understand the possible reduction in land area that could be achieved through reduction in amine regeneration energy. Finally the impact of flue gas recirculation on land area requirements by the CCP was studied. To study the impact, three different CCP models of 500 MW, 400 MW and 250 MW respectively were created. Thereafter, for each model CCP equipments were sized for 90%, 85%, 80% and 75% capture efficiency. A downstream plot layout design for the CCP model was used and the equipments were plotted spatially using CAD to calculate the land area requirement by the model at different capture efficiencies.

A. Relationship between land area requirement of CCP at different NGCC capacity


The land area requirement by the CCP at different NGCC plant capacity is shown in the Fig 32. It is an exponential relationship and the land area requirement for a NGCC CCP for any given capacity can be calculated using equation (33)

Where, Y = Area required by CCP in m2 and X= Capacity of the NGCC in MW.

Area required by CCP (90% capture efficiency) at different NGCC plant capcity
11500 10500 9500 8500 7500 6500 5500 200 y = 61.066x0.8365 Area (m2) 9231 11000

6174

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

Capacity (MW)

Figure 32: Area required by a 90 % carbon capture plant at different NGCC capacity.

69

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Area required per MW for CCP at different NGCC plant capacity (90% CC efficiency)
26 Area (m2) 24 24.7 23.0775 22

22
20 18 200 250 300 350 Capacity (MW) 400 450 500

Figure 33: Area required per MW for CCP at different NGCC plant capacity (90% CC efficiency) Figure 33 shows the area required by the CCP on per MW basis. It is clearly evident from Fig 33 that as the size of the CCP increases, the area required per MW decreases, which is quite normal and expected result. It is important to understand that all calculations have been based for single absorber train system using similar downstream CCP plant layout. It can also be clearly seen from the Fig 32 that for a 500 MW plant if two absorber trains were used in place of a single absorber train, than almost 12.5 % extra area would be required which is a very important result. Therefore to reduce the area requirement of the CCP, the first important step is to reduce the number of absorber trains. As a rule of thumb, the area requirement by the NGCC CCP can be calculated as:

This is a conservative estimate and it is unlikely that even in worst cases area more than the value calculated using the thumb rule would be required.

(Table 18:) Area required by the CCP per MW (SKM, 2009; URS, 2009, IEA, 2005, DECC, 2009) Area /MW (m2) 25 47 75 16 14 29 Reference Model IEA, 2005 CCR Guidelines (DECC, 2009) SKM, 2009 URS, 2009 % of model value 100% 188 % 300% 64 % 56% 116%

From the table 18, it is clear that the area required by the CCR guideline is overestimated by 200% compared to the value predicted by the model. Therefore there is a scope for reduction in the area prescribed in DECC CCR by at least 66%. The area calculated by the model is also on a higher side compared to the URS and SKM (URS, 2009 and SKM, 2009) but this is because of higher design margins and worst case assumptions used in the model.
70

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


B. Relationship between land area requirement of CCP and capture efficiency.
The relationship between area requirement and capture efficiency is quite complex to determine because of the various possible number of CCP layout that could be used to arrange the equipments. The major part of the CCP including the absorber, DCC, control room, DM plant and fan are independent of capture efficiency while flue gas heater and ducts are negligibly affected by capture efficiency. The capture efficiency affects the size of the stripper, CO2 compression system, reboiler, amine pumps, amine filters, amine coolers, reclaimer, cooling tower and MEA storage tank. Based on the downstream layout chosen for the CCP model, the equipments were rearranged based on the size calculated at different capture efficiency. However it appears that different layout arrangement will give different sensitivities because the sensitivity of area requirement is not very high to capture efficiency. A better method to understand how the capture efficiency will affect the size of the CCP is to understand the impact of capture efficiency on CCP equipment size. This method has a benefit that it does not take layout into account and helps to understand the impact of capture efficiency on CCP equipments directly. Fig 34 shows the sensitivity of land area requirement of the CCP with capture efficiency for NGCC plants with 500 MW, 400 MW and 250 MW capacity. It is evident from the Fig 34 that the sensitivity of the equipment area with the capture efficiency follows a linear relationship but is not very high. The prime reason for this is that the equipment having the major share in CCP area are not affected by capture efficiency, while the cooling tower, with the biggest area footprint in the CCP is only mildly affected by capture efficiency.

Equipment area sensitivity with capture efficiency


3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 90% CC Efficiency 85% CC Efficiency 80% CC Efficiency 75% CC Efficiency

Area (m2)

500 MW 400 MW 250 MW

Carbon capture efficiency (%)

Figure 34: Equipment area sensitivity with capture efficiency Figure 35 shows the equipment area required per MW at different capture efficiency. It can be seen from the Fig 35 that the equipment area requirement per MW is lowest for 500 MW and highest for 250 MW. Further 250 MW shows slightly non-linear characteristics because certain equipments like pumps, filter, CO 2 compressor are available in standard size only. For 250 MW at 90% and 85% capture efficiency, only one standard equipment was suitable while another one was suitable for capture efficiency of 80% and 75 %, giving sensitivity non-linear characteristics.

71

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Equipment area per MW at different capture efficiency
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 90% CC Efficiency 85% CC Efficiency 80% CC Efficiency 75% CC Efficiency

Area (m2)

500 MW 400 MW 250 MW

Carbon capture efficiency (%)

Figure 35: Equipment area per MW at different capture efficiency. Fig 36 shows the sensitivity of land area footprint with carbon capture efficiency for a 500 MW NGCC plant CCP. This sensitivity analysis of land area footprint must be taken in the context of the downstream layout chosen for the CCP model. It is evident that sensitivity for this model is a non - linear step-wise function and is highly dependent on layout chosen for the model. From the Fig 36 it can be interpreted that approximately 2% saving in land area can be achieved with each 5% reduction in capture efficiency for this layout.

Sensitivity of area footprint with carbon capture efficiency for a 500 MW NGCC plant CCP
11500 Area (m2) 11000 10500 10000 90% CC Efficiency 85% CC Efficiency 80% CC Efficiency 75% CC Efficiency 11000 10890 10560 10340

Capture efficiency (%)

Figure 36: Sensitivity of area footprint with carbon capture efficiency for a 500 MW NGCC plant CCP.

C. Relationship between land area requirement and amine regeneration energy requirement.
The amine regeneration energy is expected to decrease by 30 % in coming decades and therefore it is important to understand, the possible reduction in CCP area footprint with decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement. The amine regeneration energy requirement is proportional to steam flow requirements, therefore a decrease in amine regeneration energy requirement would lead to decrease in steam flow rate. In the CCP model, steam flow rate decides the size of the pipe rack, the stripper, the reboiler, the reboiler condensate pump, the reboiler condensate tank, the reclaimer and reclaimer condensate tank.

72

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


(Table 19:) Area required by CCP plant equipments that are affected by steam flow rate (CCP for 500 MW NGCC with 90 % capture efficiency). Equipment Stripper Reboiler Reboiler condensate tank Reclaimer condensate tank Reclaimer Reboiler condensate pump Pipe rack Total Area 52.3 19.2 9.1 40.9 1.1 0.3 1000 Multiplication factor 4.11 4.11 4.11 4.11 4.11 4.11 1 land area on CCP 215 79 37 168 5 1 1000 1505

Table 19 shows the land area occupied by CCP equipments that are affected by steam flow rate for a CCP (500 MW NGCC CCP with 90 % capture efficiency). The equipment area is multiplied by the multiplication factor to obtain the area occupied by the equipments in the carbon capture plant. The possible reduction in area foot print can be calculated using equation :

Using the above equation, the possible reduction in area that can be achieved for a 500 MW NGCC CCP by reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement is listed in the Table 20. These values have been calculated based on the layout chosen for this CCP model and are highly dependent upon the layout design of the CCP. Therefore these values are not absolute but in general they are sufficient to prove that with reduction in amine regeneration energy even by 3040 %, the land requirement for the CCP is unlikely to reduce by more than 34% of the total area footprints.

(Table 20:) Reduction in land area footprint with amine regeneration energy requirement for a 500 MW NGCC CCP at 90 % capture efficiency. Reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement (%) 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % Possible reduction in total land area footprint (%) 0.7 % 1.45 % 2.23 % 3%

73

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


D. Reduction in Land area requirement with flue gas recirculation.
One of the novel methods proposed by the carbon capture project (Thomas, 2005) for reduction in land area footprint requirement is the introduction of flue gas recirculation. Technically it is possible to re-circulate flue gas by as much as 40 % and still have a stable combustion inside the gas turbine (Elkady et. al., 2009; Jansohn et. al., 2011). Therefore land area requirement by the 500 MW NGCC CCP was calculated at different recirculation rate to understand the possible reduction in land area footprints that could be achieved through recirculation. The equipments that are affected by flue gas recirculation are flue gas heater and the absorber column. Flue gas recirculation would require additional ducts; however these ducts could be accommodated in the same space through which flue gas was returned back to the flue gas heater from the absorber. It is possible because, earlier the space was designed to carry the same volume of flue gas while now it is divided into two streams, one going to the flue gas heater and the other going to the compressor inlet. Either an additional fan could be installed or a side tapping from the centrifugal fan of the CCP with dampers to reduce pressure can be used to pump flue gas from the outlet of absorber to the compressor inlet. Figure 37 shows the area requirement by a 500 MW NGCC CCP with 90 % capture efficiency at different recirculation rates.

Area requirement for a 500 MW NGCC CCP at different % recirculation of flue gas
12000 Area (m2) 11000 10000 9000 8000 No Recirculation 10% Recirculation 20% Recirculation 30% Recirculation 40% Recirculation 11000 10835 10698 10560 10423

Recirculation (% of flue gas flow)

Figure 37: Area requirement by a 500 MW NGCC CCP with 90 % capture efficiency at different recirculation rates. From the Figure 37 it is clearly apparent that the sensitivity of land area requirement with flue gas recirculation is not very high. The prime reason for this is that flue gas recirculation impacts just the size of absorber and flue gas heater while the size of all other equipments are independent of flue gas recirculation. Figure 38 shows the % reduction in area requirement for a 500 MW NGCC CCP with 90 % capture efficiency with flue gas recirculation. This reduction in area footprint too is sensitive to CCP layout chosen and therefore the values shown in the Figure 38 are based only on the CCP layout chosen. A different chosen layout will have different values, however the range of values are likely to remain same. Therefore, it can be interpreted that although the percentage reduction in area with flue gas recirculation is highly dependent upon the chosen layout for the CCP, it is unlikely that more than 56 % reduction in area footprint could be achieved even for flue gas recirculation up to 40%

74

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Percentage reduction in area(%)

Reduction in area footprint of a CCP for 500 MW NGCC at different flue gas recirculation rate
6 4 2 0 10% Recirculation 20% Recirculation 30% Recirculation 40% Recirculation 1.5 2.8 4 5.3

Flue gas recirculation (%)

Figure 38: Reduction in area foot print of a CCP for 500 MW NGCC at different flue gas recirculation rate

75

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

7. Conclusion and scope for future work


The aim of the thesis was to answer the research questions raised in the introduction section using the model developed for the CCP project. The conclusions presented in response to these questions are based on the models and layout developed for this project. High margins have been taken while modeling equipments and layout so that the area obtained is suitable even for the worst case scenario. Further it is important to understand that for arranging same equipments, different layout selection can result in different area requirements. Therefore, the results have to be taken in the context of downstream layout chosen for this CCP model.

The impact of variation in plant capacity, carbon capture efficiency, possible reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement and flue gas recirculation on land area footprints required by the CCP can be described by the equation (37)

Where, Y= land area footprints of the CCP. Capacity = capacity of the NGCC plant before capture (in MW) Capture Efficiency = the capture efficiency of the proposed CCP (in %) Recirculation rate = the recirculation rate (in %) Reduction in amine energy req. = Reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement (in %) And A, B, C, D, a, b, c, d are constants. Two versions of this model equation have been developed. One is based on the minimization of difference between the predicted value by the model equation and the actual value obtained from the CCP layout. The other is based on minimization of maximum error between the predicted value and the value obtained from CCP layout.

Model Equation 1: This version of model equation was developed by minimizing the overall squared error between the value predicted by the model equation and the area calculated from layout of the CCP. This equation has an average error of 0.7% with maximum error of 3%. Table 21 shows the value of the constants for this model.

76

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Table 21: Value of the constants for model Equation 1 A 7.572409 B 26.81028 C -18.2047 D -8.83607 E -42.6769 a 1.13058 b 1.002678 c 0.864072 d 0.88812

Model Equation 2: This version of model equation was developed by minimizing the maximum error between the value predicted by the model equation and the area calculated from the layout of the CCP. This equation has an average error of 0.8% with maximum error of 2%. Table 22 shows the value of the constants for this model. Table 22 Value of the constants for model Equation 2 A 7.572651 B 26.82171 C -18.2047 D -8.83607 E -42.6755 a 1.131898 b 1.002406 c 0.864072 d 0.88812

Using the model equation (37), the area required by the NGCC CCP can be calculated. It can be proved using equation (37) that area requirements as provided in the guidance notes is overestimated and a 66 % reduction in area is feasible based on the CCP model. The area footprint sensitivity to the reduction in amine regeneration energy requirement and flue gas recirculation is not very high. Therefore a massive reduction in the CCP area cannot be expected in future from the technological development of amines and flue gas recirculation (max 10-15% reduction in area footprint can be expected). Other important conclusion from the project is that reducing the number of absorber trains can significantly reduce the land area footprints of the CCP. It is worth noting that all the results derived above are based on the single absorber downstream layout chosen for the CCP model and the results are likely to change, if different layout designs are used. However, the range of impact is likely to remain same.

Limitations of the project model: 1. The project is based on Fluor Econoamine plus (EFG+) process and all major parameters are based on the data provided by Fluor.
77

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


2. Where a range is provided, the higher data has been used so that model predicts accurately even in worst case scenario. Consequently the results predicted by the model are on the higher side compared with results of SKM or URS (SKM, 2009; URS, 2009). 3. The data for equipments have been collected from manufacturers catalog directly, and for same equipment different manufacturers specify different area. Therefore it is worth noting that same equipment may have different area specification based on the manufacturer. 4. This project uses equipments that are available in standard product catalog of manufacturers. So some of the equipments have been oversized because for the values calculated from the model, the equipment was not available. Therefore the next higher size was used to meet the need. This is not the case when a project is undertaken. Usually most of the manufacturers provide customized products based on customer needs but these are proprietary data and are not available in public domain. 5. For some of the equipments such as the knock-out pot and the cooling tower, the calculators provided by manufacturers for preliminary design estimation has been used. Generally, the preliminary estimates are roughly on a higher side than the normal design requirement. 6. The results have been calculated based on a single layout design. The layout for the CCP can be designed in a number of ways and it was not possible to try all possible layouts for this project. 7. Absorber, Stripper, Cooling tower and knock-out pot were calculated using model while it was not possible to model all equipments in a single project. Therefore simple correlation was used to obtain area required by certain equipments when product catalog for that equipment was not available from the manufacturer.

Scope for Future work: The problem dimensions and the scope defined in the project was sufficient to answer the research questions raised in the introduction section However, in the allotted time-frame of the project it was difficult to carry out various layout designs possible for the CCP and understand how layout design impacts the area footprint required by the CCP. Therefore the scope of the project can be extended and it would be interesting to explore a few research questions related to CCP for NGCC like1. Impact of various layouts on the area footprint of NGCC at different capture efficiencies. 2. Impact of carbon capture efficiency of CCP on total cost of the CCP for the NGCC. 3. This project uses single cooling tower design for the CCP model, however the number of cooling towers for the same heat load can be changed resulting in different area layout. Various layouts of cooling towers could be tried to optimize area utilization. Therefore it would be important to understand how the total area footprints of the CCP are related with number of cooling towers because cooling tower occupies 30% of the total equipment area footprint. 4. Reboiler data for different capacity of CCP at different capture efficiency has been obtained from SKM report using a simple correlation. It would be a good idea to model the reboiler and obtain equipment area from the model.

78

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Bibliography
Acechempack, 2011. Structured Tower packing Online] Available at: http://www.tower-packing.com/Dir_structured_packing.htm (Accessed 3/06/2011) Alco, 2011. Dehydration Units. [Online] Available at: http://www.alcogasoil.com/products/dehydrationstandard/dehystandard30.htm (Accessed 3/07/2011) Alfa Laval, 2011. Plate heat exchangers. [Online] Available at: http://www.alfalaval.com/solution-finder/products/gasketedindustrial-range-phe/pages/documentation.aspx?Source=http%3a%2f%2fwww.alfalaval.com%2fsolutionfinder%2fproducts%2fPages%2fdefault.aspx%3ftype%3dProductCategory%26firstItemID%3d11393475-0471-460d-99374b70c7f22830%26secondItemID%3df996d1f7-6085-4155-b715-08343956a605 (Accessed 11/08/2011) Alstom, 2011. Gas Turbines. [Online] Available at: http://www.alstom.com/power/fossil/gas/gas-turbines/ (Accessed 3/06/2011) Amann J.M.G. & Bouallou C. 2009a. CO2 Capture from Power Stations Running with Natural Gas (NGCC) and Pulverized Coal (PC): Assessment of a New Chemical Solvent Based on Aqueous Solutions of N-Methyl Di-Ethanol Amine + Tri-Ethylene Tetra-Amine. GHGT-9. Energy Procedia 1, 909 916 Amann J.M., Kanniche M. & Bouallou C. 2009b. Reforming natural gas for CO2 pre-combustion capture in combined cycle power plant. Clean Techn Environ Policy 11, 6776 AMR Process Inc, 2011. Gas Dehydration. [Online] Available at: http://www.amrprocess.com/natural-gas/gas-dehydration (Accessed 25/08/2011) Amrollahi Z., Ertesvg I.S. & Olav Bolland O. 2010. Thermodynamic analysis on post-combustion CO2 capture of natural-gas-fired power plant. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 352, xxxxxx (Article in press) Amundsen T.G, i E.L & Eimer D.A. 2009. Density and Viscosity of Monoethanolamine + Water + Carbon Dioxide from (25 to 80) C.Journal of Chemical Engineering, 3096-3100. Anderson S. & Newell R. 2003. Prospects for carbon capture and storage technologies. [Online] Available at: http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=Anderson+S.+%26+Newell+R.+2003.+Prospects+for+carbon+capture+and+storage+technolog ies&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart (Accessed 4/04/2011) Apex, 2011. TC Technical booklet. Available at: http://www.apexpumps.com/assets/downloads/TCtechnicalbooklet.pdf (Accessed1 6/07/2011) Arnod K & Stewart M, 1999. Surface production operations Design of gas handling system and facilities. Vol 2. Gulf Publishing Company, Texas, USA. Aspen, 2011. Aspen Tutorial - Distillation [Online] Available at: http://courses.washington.edu/overney/Aspen/Aspen_Tutorial_Unit_6.pdf (Accessed 2/06/2011) Babcock-Hitachi, 2011. Non Leakage gas-gas heaters. [Online] Available at: http://www.bhk.co.jp/english/energy/environmental/ggh/index.html (Accessed 21/08/2011) BERR, 2008. Towards carbon capture and storage. . [Online] Available at :http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file46810.pdf (Accessed 14/04/2011) Bolland O. & Undrum H. 2003. A novel methodology for comparing CO2 capture options for natural gas-fired combined cycle plants. Advances in Environmental Research 7, 901911 Boteroa C., Finkenratha M., Bartletta M., Chub R., Choi G. & Chinn D. 2009. Redesign, Optimization, and Economic Evaluation of a Natural Gas Combined Cycle with the Best Integrated Technology CO2 Capture. Energy Procedia 1, 38353842 BWE, 2011. Gas-Gas heaters. [Online] Available at: http://www.bwe.dk/pdf/brochure-02%20GGH_06.pdf (Accessed 16/06/2011) CCP, 2010. CO2 Capture project Update on selected regulatory issues for CO 2 capture and geological storage. [Online] Available at: http://www.co2captureproject.org/reports/regulatory_report.pdf (Accessed 29/05/2011)
79

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


CCS 2011. The CCS guide. An information website. [Online] Available at: http://www.ntnu.no/ccs/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=88&Itemid=163 (Accessed 4/04/2011) CPE, 2005. Chemical process engineering FAQ. [Online] Available at: http://www.eng-tips.com/faqs.cfm?fid=1153 (Accessed 3/08/2011) Davison, J.E., 2005. CO2 capture and storage and the IEA greenhouse gas R & D programme In: Workshop on CO2 Issues, Middlefart, Denmark, 24 May, 2005 DECC 2009. Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR). [Online] Available at: http://www.decc.gov.uk/publications/basket.aspx?FilePath=What+we+do%5cUK+energy+supply%5cDevelopment+consents+and+pl anning+reform%5celectricity%5c1_20091106164611_e_%40%40_ccrguidance.pdf&filetype=4 (Accessed 11/04/2011) Chemsof, 2011. Packed Tower Sizing. [Online] Available at: http://www.chemsof.com/spreadsheet.htm (Accessed 3/06/2011) Coskun C., Oktay Z. & IIten N. 2009. A new approach for simplifying the calculation of flue gas specific heat and specific exergy value depending on fuel composition. Energy, 1898-1902 Department of Energy and Climate Change, 2011. Applications Under Consideration. Recent Decisions on Applications. [Online] Available at: https://www.og.decc.gov.uk/EIP/pages/applications.htm (Accessed 11/04/2011) Derwent, 2011. Water Services Limited. [Online] Available at: http://www.derwentwatersystems.co.uk/ (Accessed 16/07/2011) Dillon D.J., Panesar R. S., Wall R.A., AllamR.J., White V., Gibbins J. & Haines M. R. 2004. Oxy-combustion process for CO2 capture from advanced supercritical PF and NGCC power plant. [Online] Available at: http://uregina.ca/ghgt7/PDF/papers/peer/145.pdf (Accessed 7/04/2011) Eaton, 2011. Filtration Products Clearamine. [Online] Available at: http://www.eaton.com/Filtration/USA/Products/AutomaticSelfCleaningProducts/TubularBackwashingFilters/ClearAmineFilters/inde x.htm (Accessed 13/06/2011) Elkady, A. M., Evulet, A. T., Brand, A., Ursin, T. P. & Lynghjem, A. 2009. Application of Exhaust Gas Recirculation in a DLN F-Class Combustion System for Post-combustion Carbon Capture. ASME Volume 131, 034505-1 Enggcyclopedia, 2011. 2-Phase Separator design calculator Vertical knock-out drum. [Online] Available at: http://www.enggcyclopedia.com/calculators/equipment-sizing/2-phase-separator-design-calculator-vertical-knock-drum / (Accessed 16/08/2011) Engineering toolbox, 2011. Recommended air velocities in ducts. [Online] Available at: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ductvelocity-d_928.html (Accessed 16/05/2011) EPRI, 2003. Steam Turbine and Generator Designs for Combined-Cycle Applications. [Online] Available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/47567936/EPRI-Steam-Turbine-and-Generator-Designs-for-Combined-Cycle-Applications (Accessed 17/04/2011) Erik, 2009 . Aspen HYSYS Simulation of CO2 Removal by Amine Absorption from a Gas Based Power Plant. [Online] Available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/50166237/Aspen-HYSYS-Simulation-of-CO-Removal (Accessed 28/06/2011) Ertesvg, I.S., Kvamsdal, H.M. & Bolland, O., 2005. Exergy analysis of a gasturbine combined-cycle power plant with pre-combustion CO2 capture. Energy 30, 539. Escher, 2011. Reference List Gas Dehydration and Glycol regeneration units. [Online] Available at: http://www.google.co.uk/#q=size+of+TEG+mmscfd&hl=en&prmd=ivns&ei=mlaTriKIcqp8QPFsoC7DA&start=10&sa=N&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=714149cc57a4f45c&biw=1272&bih=607 (Accessed 11/06/2011) Evans J.B, 2003.Fan selection and sizing to reduce inefficiency and low frequency noise generation. Fan Noise, International symposium Senlis. 23- 25 Sep, 2003. Falk-Pedersen, O., Dannstrom,H., Whzko,R.,Bier,C.,1999. Natural gas sweetening using membrane gas/liquid contactor. The 49th Laurence Reid Conditioning Conference.
80

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Florin N. & Fennell P, 2009. Product title/description: Assessment of the validity of Approximate minimum land footprint for some types of CO2 capture plant provided as a guide to the Environment Agency assessment of Carbon Capture Readiness in DECC's CCR Guide for Applications under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989. (Online] Available at: http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/What%20we%20do/UK%20energy%20supply/Development%20consents%20and%20planning %20reform/electricity/553-imperial-college-review-ccr-guidance.pdf(Accessed 11/04/2011) Fluor Daniel, Inc., 2000. Electricity Production and CO2 Capture via Partial Oxidation of Natural Gas. IEA Report Number PH3/21 GCS, 2011. Gas Cleaning System gas cooling. [Online] Available at: http://www.sulphuricacid.com/techmanual/GasCleaning/gcl_gascooling.htm (Accessed 23/06/2011) GCCSI, 2010. Defining CCS Ready: An Approach to an International Definition. [Online] Available at: http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/sites/default/files/CCS%20Ready-Full-Report-Intl-Def.pdf (Accessed 12/04/2011) GE Energy, 2011. Heavy duty gas turbine products. [Online] Available at: http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/products/gas_turbines_cc/en/downloads/GEH12985H.pdf (Accessed 4/04/2011) GEA, 2011. Cooling Tower Calculator. [Online] Available at: http://www.gea2h.com/opencms/opencms/gem/en/calculators/CT_Calculator.html (Accessed 29/05/2011) Gibbins J., Lucquiaud M., Chalmers H., Bosoaga A.P. & Edwards R. 2009. UK Capture readiness: CCGT owners neednt feel left out. Modern power systems, 17-20 Gttlicher, G., 2004. The Energetics of Carbon Dioxide Capture in Power Plants. U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory. Grosvenor, 2011. Chemical Dosing Systems. [Online] Available at: http://www.grosvenorpumps.com/s/Chemical_Dosing_Systems.html (Accessed 16/08/2011) Goulds, 2011. Heavy Duty process pumps. [Online] Available at: http://www.gouldspumps.com/download_files/3180/b3180-85.pdf (Accessed 6/07/2011) Herzog H. and Golomb D. 2004. Carbon Capture and Storage from Fossil Fuel Use. [Online] Available at: http://sequestration.mit.edu/pdf/enclyclopedia_of_energy_article.pdf (Accessed 4/04/2011) Hailong L., Ditaranto M. & Berstad D.2011. Technologies for increasing CO2 concentration in exhaust gas from natural gas-fired power production with post-combustion, amine-based CO2 capture. Energy 36, 1124-1133 Herzog H. and Golomb D. 2004. Carbon Capture and Storage from Fossil Fuel Use. [Online] Available at: http://sequestration.mit.edu/pdf/enclyclopedia_of_energy_article.pdf (Accessed 4/04/2011) on tao ar chal ., Burer M. & Daniel Favrat. 2006. Multi-objective optimization of an advanced combined cycle power plant including CO2 separation options. Energy 31, 31173134. Howden, 2011. Centrifugal or Axial fans. [Online] Available at: http://www.howden.com/en/Products/CentrifugalFans/CustomEngineered/AxialOrCentrifugal.htm (Accessed 6/07/2011) Huntman, 2011. Diglycolamine Solvent Quality Improvement with Thermal Reclaiming. [Online] Available at: http://www.northernstar.ab.ca/ftp/images/pres/bobveroba.pdf (Accessed 9/07/2011) IEA 2010. Key world energy statistics. [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2010/key_stats_2010.pdf (Accessed 14/06/2011) IEA GHG 2004. Improvement in power generation with post combustion capture of CO 2 [Online] Available at: http://www.canadiancleanpowercoalition.com/pdf/AS5%20-%20PH4-33%20post%20combustion.pdf(Accessed 5/04/2011) IEA GHG 2007. CO2 capture ready plants [Online] Available at: http://www.iea.org/papers/2007/CO2_capture_ready_plants.pdf (Accessed 5/04/2011) IEA, 2005. IEA, GHG Retrofit of CO2 capture to natural gas combined cycle power plants. Report no 2005/1. January 2005. IPCC, 2005. Carbon dioxide capture and storage. [Online] Available at: http://www.ipcc-wg3.de/publications/special-reports/specialreport-on-carbon-dioxide-capture-and-storage (Accessed 14/06/2011) Jacobs Consultancy, 2005. IEA, GHG Retrofit of CO 2 capture to natural gas combined cycle power plants. Report no 2005/1. January 2005. Jansohn P., Griffin T., Mantzarasa I., Marechalc F. & Clemensd F. 2011. Technologies for Gas Turbine Power Generation with CO2 Mitigation. GHGT-10. Energy Procedia 4, 19011908
81

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Kanniche M., Bonnivard R.G.,Jaud P., Marcos J.V., Amann J.M. & Bouallou C. 2010. Pre-combustion, post-combustion and oxycombustion in thermal power plant for CO2 capture. Applied Thermal Engineering 30, 5362 KEPRI. 2009. Development of Amine Absorbents for Post-Combustion Capture. [Online] Available at: http://www.co2captureandstorage.info/networks/cap12pdf/3-8.pdf (Accessed 18/06/2011) Koch Glitsch, 2011. Intalox Packed Tower system - Metal Random packing. [Online] Available at: http://www.kochglitsch.com/Document%20Library/KGMRP-1.pdf (Accessed1 6/07/2011) Kohl A. & Nielsen, 1997. Gas Purification. Gulf publishing company, Texas. Kruger, 1998. Technical Bulletin Fan types. [Online] Available at: http://www.krugerfan.com/brochure/publications/Tbn007.pdf (Accessed 6/04/2011) Kvamsdal H.M., Jordal K. & Bolland O. 2007. A quantitative comparison of gas turbine cycles with CO 2 capture. Energy 32, 1024 Loraine, 1999. Managing reboiler steam side operation, improves equipment reliability and steam quality. [Online] Available at: http://www.martechsystems.com/downloads/tech_managingreboilerops.pdf (Accessed 16/08/2011) Lozza, G. & Chiesa, P., 2002. Natural gas decarbonization to reduce CO 2 emission from combined cycles. Part A. Partial oxidation. J. Eng. Gas Turb. Power 124, 8288. Lucquiaud M. & J Gibbins J. 2009. Retrofitting CO2 capture ready fossil plants with post-combustion capture. Part 1: requirements for supercritical pulverized coal plants using solvent-based flue gas scrubbing. Journal of Power and Energy. IMechE Vol. 223 Man Diesel and Turbo, 2011. RG Internally geared compressors. [Online] Available at: http://www.mandieselturbo.com/files/news/filesof12079/MDT_RG.pdf (Accessed 2/07/2011) Markussona N. & Haszeldinea S 2009 Capture readiness lock-in problems for CCS governance. GHGT-9. Energy Procedia 1, 4625 4632 Mecklenburgh J.C, 1985. Process plant layout. Ist Edition. George Godwin, London, Great Britain. Metz B., Davidson O. R., Bosch P. R., Dave R., & Meyer L.A. 2007. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Online] Available at: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/contents.html (Accessed 4/04/2011) o ller. B.F., Assadi M.& Potts I. 2006. CO2-free power generation in combined cyclesIntegration of post-combustion separation of carbon dioxide in the steam cycle. Energy 31, 15201532 Nord L.O., Anantharaman R. & Bolland O. 2009. Design and off-design analyses of a pre-combustion CO2 capture process in a natural gas combined cycle power plant. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 3, 385392 Page S.C. ,Williamson A.G. & MasonI.G. 2009. Carbon capture and storage: Fundamental thermodynamics and current technology. Energy Policy 37, 33143324 Peeters A.N.M., Faaij A.P.C. & Turkenburg W.C. 2007. Techno-economic analysis of natural gas combined cycles with postcombustion CO2 absorption, including a detailed evaluation of the development potential. International journal of greenhouse gas control 1, 396417 Perry R.H, Green D.W. & Maloney J.O, 1984. Perrys Chemical Engineers handbook. 6 th Edition. Mackgrow Hill Company, London. Popa A., Edwards R. & Aandi I. 2011. Carbon Capture Considerations for Combined Cycle Gas Turbine. GHGT-10. Energy Procedia 4, 2315-2323 QB Johnson, 2011 . TEG Dehydrators. [Online] Available at: http://www.qbjohnson.com/p/10365/Default.aspx (Accessed 5/06/2011) Romeo L.M., Bolea I. &Escosa J.M. 2008. Integration of power plant and amine scrubbing to reduce CO 2 capture costs. Applied Thermal Engineering 28, 10391046 Romano M.C., Chiesa P. &Lozza G.2010. Pre-combustion CO2capture from natural gas power plants, with ATR and MDEA processes. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 4, 785797 Rubin, E.S., Chen, C., Rao, A.B., 2007. Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO 2 capture and storage. Energy Policy 35 (9), 44444454 Rubin, E.S. & Rao A.B.2002. A Technical, Economic and Environmental Assessment of Amine-based CO2 Capture Technology for Power Plant Greenhouse Gas Control. [Online] Available at:
82

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp;jsessionid=21B758957A7E2D9DBA7616FE71AFB618?purl=/804932-MqrF4u/native/ (Accessed 16/07/2011) SDS, 2011. Spray Coolers. [Online] Available at: http://www.spraydrysys.com/spray-coolers/spray-cooler.htm (Accessed 22/07/2011) SKM, 2009. Sinclair Knight Merz, Space requiremnts for a post-combustion carbon capture plant for a 1500 MW CCGT, Issue A, 15th December 2009 SKM, 2011. Carbon capture ready CCGTs- Regulation and Engineering. [Online] Available at: http://www.sccs.org.uk/CCR18May/john-wearmouth.pdf (Accessed 14/07/2011) Stork Engineering Consultancy B.V, 2000. Leading Options for the Capture of CO 2 Emissions at Power Stations. IEA Report Number PH3/14. TLT Turbo, 2011.Centrifugal fans for power plants . [Online] Available at: http://www.tlt.de/dateien/243.pdf (Accessed 14/08/2011) Tong Danlu, 2011. Experimental equilibrium data for CO2 in 30 wt % MEA solution. Imperial College London. URS, 2009. Cockenzie Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Power Station- Carbon Capture Ready (CCR) Feasibility Study. Issue No 3 49306730 / LERP0001 Thomas, 2005. Carbon dioxide capture for storage in deep geologic formations : results from the CO 2 capture project Valenti G., Bonalumi D. & Macchi E. 2009. Energy and exergy analyses for the carbon capture with the Chilled Ammonia Process (CAP) GHGT-9. Energy Procedia 1, 10591066 WEO, 2009. World energy outlook 2009 edition.[Online] Available at: http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/2009.asp (Accessed 17/07/2011)

83

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Appendices
Appendix 1: Design of Absorber
The absorber model was created in the MS Excel to calculate the area that would be required at different plant capacity and at different capture efficiency. The general characteristics of the model have already been discussed in the absorber section. In this section, the details are provided how the absorber model calculates the diameter of the absorber column at different plant capacity and capture efficiency. This model is based on the Strigle modified Eckerts GDPC correlation as described in the Perrys and Kohl and Nielsen (Perrys, 1984; Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). The model is based on 30 % MEA + water solvent used for capturing CO2 from the flue gas. 1. Choose the capacity of the plant. 2. Define efficiency of the plant. 3. The model calculates the amount of CO2 that would be produced. The calorific value of fuel used is 11000 kcal/ kg which is a conservative figure (the range is 11000 12000 kcal/ kg). The fuel is assumed as 100 % methane. 4. The CO2 composition in flue gas varies from 3 3.6 % based on different fuel used. This model used conservative figure of 3% CO2 in flue gas. The total molar flow of flue gas can be calculated as weight of CO2 and its percentage in flue gas is known. The % of moisture in flue gas has been reported between 10 11 % in the literature; therefore in the model the moisture percentage of 10 % in flue gas has been used. 5. The partial pressure of CO2 at inlet is know (the partial pressure of CO2 is equal to its concentration in flue gas); the partial pressure at outlet is calculated by the model based on the capture efficiency. 6. The lean amine at the absorber top inlet has initial CO2 loading of 0.15 mol of CO2 /mol of amine. 7. From the equilibrium diagram (Kohl and Nielsen; Tong, 2011), the maximum possible CO2 loading of amine has been determined as 0.53 mol of CO2 / mol of amine. 8. Since the flue gas flow rate is known (Gm), therefore the minimum amine circulation rate (Lm) required to achieve the required capture efficiency can be calculated using the mass balance equation (38)

It is important to note here that, this equation is valid only when the concentration of solute in solvent is low. Further Y1 and Y2 are molar concentration of CO2 in inlet and outlet amine solvent. Since MEA has 30 % wt composition in amine solvent, therefore the loading capacity of amines should be divided by 8.91 to obtain CO2 loading in terms of mol of CO2 /mol of solvent. 9. The actual amine flow rate is 1.2 to 1.5 times the theoretical minimum amine flow rate calculated using Equilibrium diagram (Perrys, 1984; Kohl & Nielsen, 1997). Therefore in the model the value used in 1.45 which is very conservative figure. 10. The density of flue gas and 30 % MEA solvent used in this model are as follows =1.25 kg/m3 and
84

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


= 1040 kg / m3 (Amundsen, 2009) 11. Since the amine solvent and flue gas flow rate and densities are known calculate relative flow capacity using Strigle modified Eckerts GDPC as given by equation (39)

(39)
12. Read the flow capacity factor from the Fig 39 corresponding to the Relative flow capacity calculated using equation (39)

13.
14. Select the packing material for the absorber column. Usually ceramic intalox saddles are used for corrosive liquids and therefore for this model ceramic intalox saddle packing with the packing factor of 22 / feet has been selected. The packing factor is substituted in the flow capacity factor to calculate gas mass velocity (G* ). Since this velocity is in lb/ft2.sec, therefore it should be converted to kg /m2.sec. Thereafter the diameter of the column can be calculated using the equation

where, D = diameter of the column (m) and G* = gas mass velocity kg/m2.sec 15. Once the diameter is known, the area footprint occupied by the absorber column can be calculated using equation (42)

85

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit

Figure 39: Generalized Pressure Drop Correlation (GDPC) for packed towers (Chemsof, 2011). Determination of Absorber height: Since the column height does not have much impact on the net area footprint required by the absorber system therefore preliminary design method has been used in the model to estimate absorber column height.

Where number of theoretical stage required is 20 and HETP is estimated to be 6 feet or 1.83 m (AceChemPack, 2011). Add another 34 stages for flue gas washing so the total number of stages required would be 2324.

Appendix 2: Design of Stripper


The design of the stripper column is similar to the design of the absorber column and is based on Strigle modified Eckerts GDPC. 1. Based on the amount of CO2 captured by the absorber, the stripper steam requirements are calculated. 2. For this model energy requirement of 3.65 MJ/kg of CO2 has been used (the range is 3.4 MJ/kg of CO2 to 4 MJ/kg of CO2 (Erik, 2009) 3. Based on the energy requirement, the amount of steam generated in the reboiler can be calculated. 4. The highest of steam flow rate at the bottom of the stripper or steam and CO2 flow rate at the top of the stripper should be used as the gas flow rate (Gm). For this model steam flow rate is higher therefore it is used as the Gm. 5. The amine flow rate for the given capacity is already known from the absorber model.
86

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


6. The stripper operates at 120C and 1.9 bar pressure. Therefore the density of amine and steam at operating temperature should be found out. In the model the density of amine used is 1020 kg/m3 while the density of steam is 1.22 kg/ m3 (Amundsen, 2009). 7. Since the amine solvent and steam flow rate and densities are known calculate relative flow capacity using Strigle modified Eckerts GDPC as given by equation (44)

(44) 8. Read the flow capacity factor from the Fig 39 corresponding to the Relative flow capacity calculated using equation (44) 9. 10. Select the packing material for the stripper column. Select ceramic intalox saddle packing with the packing factor of 22 / feet. The packing factor is substituted in the flow capacity factor to calculate gas mass velocity (G* ). Since this velocity is in lb/ft2.sec, therefore it should be converted to kg /m2.sec. Thereafter the diameter of the column can be calculated using the equation

where, D = diameter of the stripper column (m) and G* = gas mass velocity kg/m2.sec 11. Once the diameter is known, the area footprint occupied by the stripper column can be calculated using equation (47)

87

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Appendix 3 A: Layout Design of the CCP for 500 MW NGCC at 90 % Capture efficiency

88

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Appendix 3 B: Layout Design of the CCP for 250 MW NGCC at 90 % Capture efficiency

89

Engineering Design of a Generic NGCC CO2 capture plant retrofit


Appendix 4 : Clearances / Space allocation for the model layout.
Clearances / Space provided Clearance between Flue gas Heater and DCC Primary Road Secondary Road Pipe rack Minimum clearance between equipments Area reserved for ducts Clearance of major equipments from main road Bund area around MEA Storage tank Between Cooling tower and primary road Between DCC and Fan Between Fan and Absorber Clearance around stripper 500 MW (m) 12 10 4 5 1 10 5 8 4 12 10 2 250 MW (m) 6 10 4 3 0.5 6 5 5 3 6 6 1

90