JTMMAN

POWER

NET 256 MW
COMBINED-CYCLE
POWER PLANT WITH
ZERO CO2 EMISSIONS
Prepared For: Mr. Jim Sorensen
Prepared By: JTMMAN Power

CH E 465
Team 5
Theresa Cho, Aji Kefas, Jessie Wang, Maryam
Gul, Michelle Liu, Nicole Temple
Executive Summary

To address impacts of increasing greenhouse gas emissions, the Climate Leadership Plan
(CLP) was introduced by the Government of Alberta in 2015. CLP initiatives include the
implementation of carbon pricing as well as a strategy to phase out coal-generated electricity by
2030. The strategy outlined by the CLP does not address an alternative method to meet the
growing provincial power requirement. Combined-cycle power plants are considered an efficient
method of power generation. Oxyfuel combustion conditions provide an ideal flue gas stream for
carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration processes. The objective of this project is to design an
economically feasible combined-cycle power plant that produces zero CO 2 emissions.
This report presents the design of a net 256 MW power plant, which is comprised of three
process units. The first unit is an air separation unit that produces 80.3 tonnes/hr of 98.2 mol%
purity oxygen. This stream is produced by employing cryogenic distillation to separate air.
Nitrogen is a saleable by-product of this process. The second unit utilizes a gas and steam turbine
in a combined-cycle configuration to generate power. A total of 341 MW of power is produced
by this unit, but after accounting for operating power requirements, a net 256 MW of power is
sent to the grid. CO2 in the flue gas of the power generation unit is compressed and dehydrated
for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processes. On an annual basis, 9.8 million tonnes of CO 2
are captured for re-use, which would have been otherwise released to atmosphere. The water
content in the stream is reduced to 67 ppmv (3.2 lb H2O /mmscf).
A detailed economic analysis was conducted to determine the feasibility of the proposed
process. The project requires a capital investment of $1.4 B, with projected annual operating and
revenue costs of $278 MM and $585 MM, respectively. The revenue stream is comprised of
marketed electricity, nitrogen, CO2 used for EOR, and carbon tax credits. A cash flow analysis
was performed based on a 25-year plant lifetime. The net present value obtained from this
analysis is $1.2 B with a payback period of 10 years. The results obtained in the economic
analysis indicate that the proposed process is economically feasible.
The feasibility of the proposed process was also analyzed with regards to risk,
environment impacts, and social benefits. A high-level risk assessment highlighted the necessity
for the implementation of mitigation methods outlined for major risks identified. Environmental

i
benefits of the proposed process outweighed the impacts according to the environmental analysis.
Predominantly positive social impacts further justify the proposed project.
The project is to be carried out following the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction
Management (EPCM) model, over a five-year period starting with conceptual design.
Engineering is scheduled for completion by early 2020 to allow for construction start-up by the
spring of 2020. The plant is targeted to be fully operational by the spring of 2023. Approximately
20 months of the total five-year project life will be devoted to the completion of engineering
design, while 30 months will be allocated for the construction phase. Commissioning and start-up
is forecasted to take up to nine months in total.

ii
Table of Contents
Executive Summary i
Table of Contents iii
List of Tables v
List of Figures v
1. Introduction and Statement of Objectives 1
2. Background 2
4. Project Justification 3
4.1 Air Separation Unit 3
4.2 Power Generation Unit 3
4.3 Carbon Dioxide Unit 5
5. Alternatives Considered 6
5.1 Option 1: Do Nothing 6
5.2 Option 2: Design a Net 256 MW Power Plant with Zero CO2 Emissions 6
A comprehensive evaluation of technologies considered is presented in Appendix A. 6
5.2.1 Air Separation Unit 6
5.2.2 Power Generation Unit Configuration 7
5.2.3 Carbon Dioxide Unit 8
6. Project Description 10
6.1 Process Description 10
6.1.1 Air Separation Unit 11
6.1.2 Power Generation Unit 11
6.1.3 CO2 Unit 12
6.2 Process Flow Diagrams (PFD) 13
6.3. Summary of Material and Energy Balances 18
6.4 Equipment List 19
6.4.1 Air Separation Unit 20
6.4.2. Power Generation Unit 21
6.4.3. CO2 Unit 22
6.5 Utility Requirements and Sources 24
6.6 Materials of Construction and Control Strategy 24
6.6.1 Materials of Construction 24
6.6.2 Control Strategy 25

iii
 6.7 Assumptions, Constraints, and Limitations of the Design 25
6.7.1 Assumptions 25
6.7.2 Limitations 25
6.8 Project Execution Strategy 26
6.8.1 Engineering Plan 26
6.8.2 Procurement Plan 26
6.8.3 Construction Plan 27
7. Project and Net Social Benefit Analyses (Economic, Environmental, Safety, Risk, Society) 29
7.1 Economic Analysis 29
7.1.1 Fixed Capital Cost 29
7.1.2 Working Capital Cost 31
7.1.3 Operating Costs and Revenue 31
7.1.4 Capital Expenditure 33
7.1.5 Engineering Work Force Requirements 34
7.1.6 Trades Labour Work Force Requirements 35
7.1.7 Discounted Cash Flow Analysis 36
7.1.8 Sensitivity Analysis 37
7.1.9 Financing Plan 38
7.1.10 Summary of Economic Analysis 38
7.2 Environmental Analysis 39
7.3 Safety and Risk Analysis 40
7.3.1 Risk and Process Hazards Assessment 40
7.3.2 . Potential Impacts and Applicable Regulations 41
7.3.3. PFD Based PHA and P&ID HAZOP 42
7.3.4 Applicable Code and Regulations and Long-Term Management of Hazards and
Risks and Hazards 42
7.3.5 PSV Sizing 43
7.4 Net Social Benefit Analysis 43
8. Conclusions and Recommendations 44
8.1 Conclusions 44
8.2 Recommendations 44
9. References 46
10. Appendices 53

iv
List of Tables

Table 1. Specifications of final CO2 used for EOR 9

Table 2. Overall material balance 18
Table 3. Overall energy balance 19
Table 4. Summary of equipment for all units 23
Table 5. Annual plant utility requirements 24
Table 6. Annual cost of revenue streams 33
Table 7. Economic variables for base and subsidized case 38

List of Figures

Figure 1. Forecasted long-term electricity load growth in Alberta by AESO 4

Figure 2. Forecasted future capacity by AESO 4
Figure 3. Forecast of natural gas feedstock price 5
Figure 4. Block flow diagram (BFD) of proposed process 10
Figure 5. Overall project schedule 28
Figure 6. Fixed capital cost breakdown 30
Figure 7. Annual operating cost distribution in 2023 32
Figure 8. Breakdown of capital expenditure 34
Figure 9. Distribution of engineering hours over project lifecycle 35
Figure 10. Distribution of construction hours 36
Figure 11. Cumulative discounted cash flow for a 25 year operating time 37
Figure 12. Sensitivity analysis 38

v
1. Introduction and Statement of Objectives

Increasing levels of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere have

intensified efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. In 2015, the Alberta government introduced a policy
to phase out coal-generated power by 2030 and implemented a carbon levy on CO 2 emissions.
Currently, coal generated power plants account for 38% of Alberta’s electricity generation [1].
With the implementation of this policy, there is opportunity to develop and implement cleaner
energy projects to sustain future growth in the province [2]. The elimination of coal-generated
power plants in Alberta will put a significant constraint on the province’s electricity supply if
electricity production from alternative energy sources does not address this deficit.
To supplement Alberta’s energy demands and sustain future population growth, the
design of a net 256 megawatt (MW) natural gas combined cycle power plant with zero CO 2
emissions is presented. The plant will utilize pure oxygen for combustion in the gas turbine to
generate electricity. Waste heat from the combustion process will be recovered as steam and used
to drive an additional turbine. The CO2 in the flue gas will be recovered and sent by pipeline to a
nearby oil field for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Available carbon credits can be
marketed to other facilities for the captured CO 2. Adhering to the policies introduced by the
Climate Leadership Plan (CLP) and taking advantage of the growth in the power sector, this
project provides an excellent opportunity to design a combined cycle power plant for future
implementation. This project has completed the conceptual design and some front-end
engineering of a combined cycle power plant with the capacity to generate a net 256 MW of
power.
The first objective of this project is to design an air separation unit (ASU) to produce a
pure oxygen stream for use in oxyfuel combustion. The second objective is to design a
combined-cycle power generation unit (PGU) with the capacity to generate a net 256 MW of
electricity. The third objective of this project is to ensure that the overall facility will have zero
CO2 emissions. This objective will be addressed through the design of a carbon dioxide
compression and dehydration unit (CDU). An economic analysis, complete with a project
execution plan, was carried out to determine the economic feasibility of the process. The
potential risks and hazards associated with this project were investigated, complete with a
process hazard assessment (PHA), and a hazard and operability study (HAZOP). An analysis for
1
both environmental and social impacts was conducted for the facility. Conclusions and
recommendations are made for this project based on the findings of the investigations.

2. Background

In 2015, the CLP was introduced by the Government of Alberta, which outlined a long-
term strategy to combat greenhouse gas emissions [3]. This plan introduced a provincial carbon
levy and the phase out of coal-powered generation plants in an effort to lower CO 2 emissions [3,
4]. In 2015, Alberta contributed to 38% of Canada’s total greenhouse gas emissions, where the
electricity sector is one of the top two contributors [2]. As of 2016, coal-powered plants
accounted for 38% of Alberta’s electricity generation [1]. The elimination of coal-generated
power will create a deficiency in the province’s electricity supply if not addressed.
Combined cycle power plants optimize power generation by using heat from the gas
turbine exhaust to increase overall efficiency [5]. The waste heat recovered is used to generate
steam, which powers a steam turbine, producing more electricity without extra fuel input. Use of
pure oxygen produced by the ASU for combustion in the gas turbine can further increase
efficiency and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions [6]. The ASU produces pure nitrogen
streams, which generate additional revenue for the facility. CO 2 is recovered from the flue gas
generated by oxyfuel combustion in the gas turbine, which can be utilized in enhanced oil
recovery processes (EOR).

3. Proposed Solution

The following solution is proposed to meet the objectives of this project. First, an ASU
was designed to produce pure oxygen from air, which is utilized for oxyfuel combustion in the
gas turbine. The PGU has been designed to generate enough power to sustain the facility, while
providing a net 256 MW of power to the grid. To meet the objective of producing zero CO 2
emissions, the flue gas stream from the power generation is compressed and dehydrated for
enhanced oil recovery (EOR). The proposed power plant will be built north of Edmonton,
Canada, in close proximity to an oil field. Natural gas feed will be supplied from one of the five

2
major natural gas pipelines in Alberta and received at the battery limits of the proposed power
plant.

4. Project Justification

4.1 Air Separation Unit

The separation of air is required to provide the pure oxygen needed for oxyfuel
combustion in the gas turbine of the PGU. Oxyfuel combustion produces a simplified flue gas
stream that enables easier CO2 sequestration and limits nitrous oxides (NOx) production.
Cryogenic distillation is the most economically feasible for O 2 production rates greater than 50
tons per day [7]. Additionally, high purity nitrogen is produced as a by-product in the process,
which will generate an additional source of revenue through the initial air separation. Nitrogen is
commonly used in chemical processing, food and beverage packaging, health care, oil and gas
recovery, metal production, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology [8].

4.2 Power Generation Unit

The long-term outlook predicted by Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) outlines
continual electricity load growth between the present and 2038, as seen in Figure 1 [9]. This
forecast highlights future demand for alternative power generation methods in future years after
coal-generated power is phased out [9]. As presented in Figure 2, the use of combined-cycle
power generation is expected to grow between the present and 2038 to become one of the top two
sources of power for the province [9]. Investment and development of infrastructure necessary
for combined-cycle power generation will be required as the demand for power continues to
increase.

3
Figure 1. Forecasted long-term electricity load growth in Alberta by AESO [9]

Figure 2. Forecasted future capacity by AESO [9]

4
 To produce 256 MW of power for the facility, natural gas is required as a feedstock. As
shown in Figure 3, the increase in natural gas price under the base case is expected to remain
relatively stable over the next 10 years at $4.5/GJ [10]. The stability of natural gas prices
provides further justification for the implementation of this project.

Figure 3. Forecast of natural gas feedstock price [10]

4.3 Carbon Dioxide Unit

As previously mentioned, Alberta’s electricity sector is one of the top contributors to
national CO2 emissions [2]. The CLP includes initiatives such as the introduction of carbon
pricing and a plan to phase out pollution from coal-generated electricity by 2030 [2]. These two
policies form the main drivers for the inclusion of a CO 2 sequestration process into the design of
the facility. The 2018 cost for CO2 emissions is $30/tonne CO2 and is expected to increase to
$50/tonne CO2 by 2022 [2]. Due to potential legislation changes, the client has recommended an
increased carbon price of $150/tonne in 2023. Since the proposed combined cycle power plant
will be designed to achieve zero CO2 emissions, carbon pricing will become a revenue source for
every tonne of CO2 captured, adding economic value to an environmental initiative. Additional
revenue can be generated through sale of sequestered CO2 for EOR processes at $40/tonne [11].

5
5. Alternatives Considered

5.1 Option 1: Do Nothing

The do nothing approach requires no engineering design. The investment that would be
required to design and operate a combined-cycle power facility could be redistributed to other
projects. It is not a viable long-term option, as the elimination of all coal-generated power plants
will create a constraint in the province’s energy supply. Energy demand will increase with
population growth and increasingly stringent government policies to decrease carbon emissions
will be implemented. This creates a need to develop or further expand into cleaner sources of
energy generation. Alternatively, a pre-existing facility could be purchased to generate the
required 256 MW of power to the grid; however, these facilities may not meet the zero CO 2
emissions target.

5.2 Option 2: Design a Net 256 MW Power Plant with Zero CO 2 Emissions
A comprehensive evaluation of technologies considered is presented in Appendix A.

5.2.1 Air Separation Unit

With energy efficiency and emission considerations as major drivers for this project, the
design of an ASU is included in this project to obtain high purity O 2 for combustion in the gas
turbine. In normal air combustion, high quantities of N 2 absorb some of the energy generated,
decreasing the energy that is available to drive the gas turbine. Additionally, the presence of N 2
can cause the formation of NOx during combustion, which are unwanted air pollutants. Initial air
separation can produce high purity N2, providing an additional source of revenue for this project
[12]. Two modes of operation for air separation are available: cryogenic and non-cryogenic.
Cryogenic air separation is currently the most energy efficient method for producing large
quantities of high purity O2 (>96%) and N2 products. Thus, this project will use cryogenic
distillation as the means for air separation.

6
5.2.2 Power Generation Unit Configuration

5.2.2.1 Plant Arrangement

Combined-cycle power plants are available in either multi or single shaft configurations
for the gas and steam turbines. A multi-shaft plant arrangement consists of separate power
generators for each turbine, while a single shaft is shared by both turbines. The main advantage
of single-shaft systems is the reduced capital cost associated with purchasing fewer generators,
transformers and other electrical subsystems. A disadvantage of a single shaft generator is the
increased cost of maintenance. Additionally, more time is required to carry out routine
maintenance procedures, leading to production losses. In this project, the chosen plant
arrangement must have the capacity to power the facility while delivering 256 MW of electricity
to the grid. A multi-shaft configuration is favoured for the operation of a single steam turbine
alongside a single gas turbine [13].

5.2.2.2 Gas Turbine

Two types of gas turbines were evaluated for use in the PGU. The first option considered
was a custom turbine designed specifically for oxyfuel combustion conditions. The second option
was to recycle CO2 from the flue gas to make up for the missing N2 in the air stream [14]. This
design allows for the use of a conventional turbine as opposed to an expensive custom turbine.
Additionally, recycling CO2 to the gas turbine ensures that the composition of the flue gas is
dominated by CO2. This aids the CO2 sequestration process.

5.2.2.3 Heat Recovery Steam Generator

Heat recovery steam generators (HRSG) can be equipped to recover heat as steam for
three pressure levels; high, medium, and low. Different steam levels are generated according to
the facility steam requirements. For this process, high pressure steam is generated to drive the
steam turbine, while low pressure steam is used for facility heating requirements. HRSGs can be
equipped either with or without duct firing. Duct firing is utilized in HRSGs to increase the
temperature of the flue gas through additional combustion. In order to meet power production
requirements, duct firing is employed to increase power generated by the steam turbine.

7
5.2.2.4 Oxygen Control
O2 concentration in the flue gas must be below 10 ppm in order to adhere to strict EOR
specifications [15]. Three methods were considered to control the O 2 content in the flue gas. A
catalytic oxidizer can be used to remove excess oxygen in the flue gas. Catalyst deactivation can
occur due to high water concentration in the process stream, which is around 10% by volume at
an operating temperature of 135oC [16]. Employing this oxygen control method at the operating
conditions of the process stream is not advisable. Another option investigated for oxygen control
is to feed excess O2 through the gas turbine. The O2 remaining in the flue gas after combustion in
the gas turbine will be utilized for combustion in the duct burners. The flow rate of the natural
gas to the duct burners should be controlled to ensure that virtually all of the remaining O 2 is
combusted as this point. Additionally, an O2 sensor will be installed downstream of duct burners
to ensure that the O2 concentration is monitored. If the O2 concentration exceeds the limit for
EOR, the natural gas feed rate will be adjusted accordingly. This option reduces capital cost
while meeting EOR specifications.

5.2.3 Carbon Dioxide Unit

A high purity (>95%) CO2 stream is required for use in EOR processes [17]. The
specifications necessary for CO2 EOR can be referenced in Table 1. Multiple CO2 purification,
dehydration, and compression methods are available to achieve these specifications. The
maximum water content in the final stream is 84 ppm (4 lb H 2O/MMSCF), as requested by the
client.

8
 Table 1. Specifications of final CO2 used for EOR [17, 18]

Parameter Specification

Carbon Dioxide, CO2 95% (minimum)

Nitrogen, N2 4% (maximum)

Water, H2O 84 ppm (maximum)

Oxygen, O2 10 ppm (maximum)

Hydrogen Sulphide, H2S 10-200 ppm (maximum)

Hydrocarbons 5% (maximum)

Glycol 0.04 mL/m3 (maximum)

Temperature, T 40℃

Pressure, P > 86 barg

5.2.3.1 CO2 Purification

Three methods were considered to ensure that the final CO 2 content is sufficient for use in
EOR processes. The first method considered is to do nothing. As previously mentioned, CO 2
recycle in the gas turbine results in a CO2 dominated flue gas composition. NOx content in the
flue gas is low enough to be considered negligible [19]. The do nothing option was chosen, as the
flue gas being processed does not need any further purification, aside from compression and
dehydration. The two other methods investigated were amine scrubbing and cryogenic
distillation. Amine scrubbing is a mature technology that uses an amine, usually MEA, to absorb
CO2 from flue gases [20]. An additional option researched was the use of cryogenic distillation,
which operates in the same manner as outlined for the ASU. Utilizing this technology is very
energy intensive and is not necessary to achieve EOR specifications [21, 22].
Freezing and corrosion are major concerns of increased H2O content in the final CO2 line.
A portion of the H2O is knocked out during compression; however, an additional dehydration
unit is required in order to meet the 84 ppmv requirement. Three technologies were considered to
dehydrate the CO2 stream: TEG dehydration, molecular sieves, and auto-refrigeration. TEG
dehydration uses triethylene glycol (TEG) to absorb the water from the CO 2 stream [23]. The

9
TEG is thermally regenerated for re-use. The second dehydration method investigated was the
use of molecular sieves. Molecular sieves utilize a solid desiccant to remove the H 2O from the
CO2 stream. Molecular sieves can achieve very low dry gas H2O content, but tend to have higher
capital and operating costs when compared to TEG dehydration [24]. Auto-refrigeration was also
considered as a potential dehydration technology as it has lower capital and operating costs than
TEG dehydration; however, it was not able to achieve the required H 2O removal [25]. TEG
dehydration was the method selected to remove the H 2O from the CO2 stream.

6. Project Description

6.1 Process Description

This project is comprised of three units: the ASU, PGU, and CDU denoted as Unit
100, Unit 200, and Unit 300, respectively. A block flow diagram of the overall process is
shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Block flow diagram (BFD) of proposed process

10
6.1.1 Air Separation Unit
The ASU produces pure oxygen required for oxyfuel combustion in the downstream
PGU. Filtered ambient air is compressed to 951 kPag using eight stages. Fin fan air coolers
provide interstage cooling to 40°C and a portion of H 2O is removed from the air stream in
the knock-out drums. The compressed air is passed through molecular sieves for final
removal of all remaining H2O and CO2 present in the air stream. The dehydrated air is
precooled to 28.5°C using cryogenic N2 product gas and is further cooled through turbo gas
expansion. Following expansion, the air is subcooled to liquefaction conditions of -171.7°C
in a cold box heat exchanger using cold products from cryogenic distillation. A double
Linde column consisting of a high pressure (HP) and low pressure (LP) tower is used to
separate the air into N2 and O2. Air is initially separated in the HP column. A 30.5 mol% O 2
enriched stream from the bottom of the HP column and a mostly pure N 2 stream from the
condenser of the HP column are sent through a subcooler and throttled before entering the
LP column. Ultra-high purity N2 at 99.9 mol% is drawn from the overhead, while lower
purity N2 at 97.9 mol% is drawn from the second stage of the LP column. High purity O 2, at
98.3 mol% is drawn from the bottom of the LP column. Both N 2 product streams from the
LP column are used as cooling agents in the subcooler and the cold box heat exchanger. The
O2 product stream from the LP column is also used for cooling in the cold box heat
exchanger. The lower purity N2 stream is then sent to a plate and fin heat exchanger to
precool the feed air, while the O2 product stream is compressed to 50 kPag and sent to the
PGU.
The ASU contains a set up for the regeneration of the molecular sieves. Each
molecular sieve is designed for 16 hours of online operation before regeneration is required.
The regeneration process is carried out using heated, dry air at 260°C at a flow rate of 64
kg/s.

6.1.2 Power Generation Unit

The PGU is composed of a General Electric (GE) 7E.03 gas turbine (50 Hz) and a
General Electric 800 Series REHEAT STF-A650 steam turbine. The total electricity produced in
the PGU is 341 MW. The gas turbine produces 91 MW, while the remaining power is generated
by the steam turbine.

11
 O2 stream from ASU is fed into the gas turbine at a flow rate of 44.6 kg/s, where it is
subsequently compressed and reacted with natural gas. Natural gas is supplied to the combustion
chamber at a flow rate of 8.95 kg/s. The natural, composed primarily of methane and ethane,
reacts completely with O2 to produce H2O and CO2, as outlined in Equations 1 and 2.

𝐶𝐻 ( )
+ 2𝑂 ( ) → 𝐶𝑂 ( ) + 2𝐻 𝑂 ( ) (1)

2𝐶 𝐻 ( )
+ 7𝑂 ( ) → 4𝐶𝑂 ( ) + 6𝐻 𝑂 ( ) (2)

A key consideration is to maintain and control the combustion temperature. This is

mitigated through the recycle of CO2 from the CDU at a ratio of 4:1. Recycling at this ratio
allows the CO2 to replace the N2 that would be present in conventional combustion using air. The
gas turbine operates at an efficiency of 52.5% with a compression ratio of 13. The exhaust gas
from the turbine exits at 552oC. Additional heat is added though combustion in a HP duct burner,
before passing through the HP HRSG. The HP duct burner requires natural gas to be fed at a
flow rate of 1.90 kg/s. The HP HRSG consists of a superheater, evaporator, and economizer.
Steam is generated in the HP HRSG at a flow rate of 251 kg/s and pressure of 9899 kPag. This
steam is subsequently used to drive the steam turbine. The turbine generates 250 MW of power
at an efficiency of 73.7%. After the steam has passed through the steam turbine, it is condensed
and recycled back to the HP economizer. A LP duct burner is located downstream of the HP
HRSG, providing additional heat to increase LP steam production. A sophisticated control
system is utilized to ensure that the natural gas flow rate fed to the LP duct burner is sufficient to
meet O2 content specifications for EOR processes. The LP HRSG, located downstream of the LP
duct burner, is composed of an evaporator and water preheater. The LP HRSG generates 14.2
kg/s of steam at a pressure of 400 kPag.

6.1.3 CO2 Unit

The CDU compresses and dehydrates the flue gas leaving the PGU. The flue gas
consists of 77 mol% CO2 and 21 mol% H2O as it enters the CDU. Flue gas from the HRSG
is fed to the CDU at a flow rate of 293 kg/s at a temperature of 135 oC and pressure of 43
kPag. It is mixed with a CO2 recycle stream at 135oC and 50 kPag at a flow rate of 0.4 kg/s.
As the flow rate of the recycle stream is small in comparison to the flow rate fed from the
12
PGU, it has an insignificant effect on the equipment sizing in the CDU. In order to reduce
the load on the compressor and dehydration unit, a large portion of the water is knocked out
of the stream after being cooled by a fin fan cooler. The CO 2 quality after this step is
sufficient for recycle to the PGU. A CO2 stream of 237 kg/s is recycled to the PGU at this
stage; thus, leaving 34 kg/s of CO2 to be processed in the CDU. A seven stage centrifugal
compressor is used to pressurize the CO2 from 43 kPag to 15400 kPag. Interstage cooling is
utilized when stream temperatures approach 200oC. A TEG dehydration unit is installed
after the fourth compression stage to ensure that the H2O content in the final CO2 stream
meets EOR specifications. The inlet pressure of the CO2 into the TEG dehydration unit is
1890 kPag. This unit consists of a contractor, to absorb the water from the CO 2, and a
regenerator, complete with a still, reboiler and condenser, where the water is removed from
the TEG thermally. TEG enters the contactor at a concentration of 99.7% by mass. The
TEG circulation rate in the dehydration unit is 33.4 L TEG/kg H 2O (4 gal TEG/lb H2O). A
portion of the dry CO2 is used as stripping gas in the TEG regenerator to increase the TEG
concentration. A stripping gas rate of 82.5 std m3/m3 TEG (11 scf/gal TEG) is required. The
water content in the CO2 stream after the TEG dehydration unit is 67.2 ppmv (3.2 lb
H2O/mmscf). Some CO2 will also be absorbed by the TEG, thus requiring recycle to the
CDU inlet. As the TEG regeneration unit operates at atmospheric pressure, a single stage
centrifugal compressor is used to raise the pressure of the recycle stream to 50 kPag. The
CO2 that has been sufficiently dehydrated continues through the last three compression
stages. The final CO2 stream is sent by pipeline to a nearby oilfield at supercritical
conditions (40oC and 15400 kPag).

6.2 Process Flow Diagrams (PFD)

The process flow diagrams for each unit are presented in the following section.

13
14
15
16
17
6.3. Summary of Material and Energy Balances

Appendix C outlines the material and energy balances for each unit. Minor discrepancies
observed in the mass and energy balances can be attributed to rounding error. The overall
material balance is shown in Table 2 and the overall energy balance is shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Overall material balance

Overall Material Balance

Inlet Stream Mass In (kg/s) Mass Out (kg/s)
Feed Air 199.9
Feed Natural Gas 11.99
Cooling Water 9486.33
Outlet Stream
Low Purity Nitrogen 137.42
High Purity Nitrogen 15.56
Low Pressure Steam 14.19
Spent Cooling Water 9472.14
Liquid Carbon Dioxide 32.62
Water Removed by
Knock Out Streams 25.41
Total 9698.22 9697.34

18
 Table 3. Overall energy balance
Overall Energy Balance
Description Energy In (MW) Energy Out (MW)
Feed Air 58.42
Feed Natural Gas 6.56
Cooling Water -17900.00
Low Pressure Steam 11.00
Spent Cooling Water -17330.00
Water Removed by
Knock Out Streams -46.97
liquid Carbon Dioxide
Product -0.23
Low Purity Nitrogen 41.60
High Purity Nitrogen 4.43
Column Reboilers 28.05
Column Condensers 27.59
Compressors 73.97
Air Coolers 166.43
Turbine 4.40
Combustion Chamber 152.80
Duct Burners -606.67
Gas Turbine 91.00
Steam Turbine 250.00
Pump 9.56
Heat of Reaction -522.75
Total -17723.44 -17757.37

6.4 Equipment List

Table 4 summarizes the equipment required for the process. Detailed equipment
specifications and operating parameters can be found in Appendices D-F. Major process line
sizing is shown in Appendix G.

19
6.4.1 Air Separation Unit
6.4.1.1 Air Feed Compressor (K-100)
The air feed compressor brings atmospheric air to 951 kPag after eight stages of
compression and reaches a maximum operating temperature of 182 oC. An axial air compressor
was chosen due to its operability with higher efficiencies and ability to handle high flow rates
compared to centrifugal compressors. The air compressor operates with 85% adiabatic efficiency.
Water is removed through interstage cooling and knockout drums. The compressor was designed
for a flow capacity of 265 Sm3/s and shaft power of 99 MW based on start-up conditions to
account for the additional air required to establish the regeneration gas loop for the molecular
sieves.

6.4.1.2 Molecular Sieves (T-100A/B/C/D/E/F)

The molecular sieves remove any remaining H2O and CO2 left in the feed air to prevent
ice formation in the cryogenic section. Two trains of three molecular sieves are required for the
air flow rate. For each train, two molecular sieves are in operation while one molecular sieve is in
regeneration mode for one adsorption cycle. The inner vessel diameter is 4.9 m with a height of
11.6 m. Zeolite adsorbent 13X was selected for its ability to remove H 2O and any trace CO2 from
the feed air stream. Stainless steel was chosen as the material of construction due to the acidic
environment created by the presence of CO2 and H2O in the vessel.

6.4.1.3 Coldbox Heat Exchanger (E-102A/B)

Coldbox heat exchangers (E-102A/B) cool incoming feed air to near liquefaction
conditions using products from the distillation columns. A brazed aluminium plate and fin heat
exchanger was selected to maximize heat transfer and thermal conductivity [26]. The required
heat transfer area for this heat exchanger is 47,514 m2.

6.4.1.4 High Pressure and Low Pressure Distillation Columns (T-100A/B and T-101A/B)
Each combined distillation tower consists of a HP column (T-100A/B) at the bottom and
a LP column at the top (T-101A/B). A combined condenser-reboiler (E-103A/B) integrates heat
between the two towers and improves overall efficiency. The HP columns perform the initial
separation of air into N2 and O2. The column operates at a pressure of 389 kPag and at a

20
temperature of -176oC. The HP tower has a height of 18.1 m, a diameter of 3.7 m, and 62 valve
trays with 0.25 m tray spacing. The LP column uses N2 and O2 from the HP column to further
purify the streams. The column operates at 60 kPag and a operating temperature range of -192 oC
to -179oC. The LP tower has a height of 35.0 m, a diameter of 4.5 m, and 129 valve trays with
0.25 m tray spacing.

6.4.2. Power Generation Unit

A detailed P&ID of the condenser downstream of the steam turbine is located in
Appendix B. The data sheet compiled for this condenser can be referenced in Appendix H. The
cooling water is delivered to the condenser by three parallel pumps. The detailed datasheets for
the pumps can be found in Appendix I.

6.4.2.1 Gas Turbine (GT-200)

O2, recycled CO2, and natural gas are fed to the combustion chamber of the natural gas
turbine. Upon combustion, the gas turbine generates electricity through the conversion of thermal
energy to mechanical energy. A GE frame 7E.03 gas turbine with a capacity of 91 MW was
selected for the facility [27]. The gas turbine model was selected based on the desired net power
production of the unit. O2 and recycled CO2 are compressed in the gas turbine with an overall
compression ratio of 13 and a polytropic efficiency of 52.5%, as specified by the manufacturer.

6.4.2.2 HP Heat Recovery Steam Generators (E-200. E-201, E-202)

The HP HRSG is comprised of four sections: a duct burner, an economizer, an
evaporator, and a superheater. Duct burners raise the temperature of the exhaust gases to 2180 oC;
therefore, molybdenum alloy refractory metal is selected for construction material. The HRSG is
designed for natural circulation with horizontal exhaust flow and vertical tubes to minimize field
fabrication [28]. Due to a required heat exchange area of 19,400 m 2, finned tubing is used for
compact design. The superheater is designed with a combination of bare and finned tubes. Bare
tubing is used near the duct burner, while finned tubing is used in lower temperature areas to
ensure fin integrity is preserved [29]. All tubes are designed for complete drainage during regular
maintenance [30].

21
6.4.2.3 Steam Turbine (ST-200)
A GE 800 series REHEAT STF-D600 steam turbine was selected for the process. This
turbine model was selected based on the net power requirement, while accounting for the
generation capacity of the gas turbine. The condenser is attached directly below the steam turbine
with a heat exchange area of 18,000 m2 and heat duty of 598 MW.

6.4.3. CO2 Unit

6.4.3.1 Multistage CO2 compressor (K-300)
A seven stage centrifugal compressor is employed to pressurize CO 2 from 43 kPag to
15,400 kPag. An inline centrifugal compressor is typically selected for CO 2 compression service
[31]. The compressor operates with an adiabatic efficiency of 80% and a compression ratio per
stage of two. Under normal operating conditions, the multistage CO 2 compressor requires 13.1
MW of power.

6.4.3.2 TEG Dehydration Unit (CT-300, RG-300)

The TEG dehydration unit is used to remove water from the final CO 2 stream to avoid
line freezing and corrosion. The TEG contactor (CT-300) is used to absorb water in the CO 2
stream to lean TEG. The contractor was sized according to standards outlined by GPSA, and has
a diameter of 2.1 m and a height of 9.6 m [32]. Twelve bubble cap trays are used to provide
sufficient contact between the TEG and CO2 stream for water removal. Bubble cap trays are
typically used in TEG processes due to low liquid flow rates compared to gas flow [32]. The
TEG regeneration column was calculated to have a diameter of 0.5 m and a height of 3.3 m.

22
Table 4. Summary of equipment for all units

23
6.5 Utility Requirements and Sources

Utility requirements for this project include electricity, boiler feed water (BFW), cooling
water, wastewater treatment, and steam. Electricity requirements for each unit are met using a
portion of the electricity generated onsite. BFW fed to the LP HRSG is purchased continuously.
The BFW fed to the HP HRSG is made up of 97% recycled water, while 3% is purchased to
make up for losses to the environment during the steam cycle. Cooling water is required to
condense exhaust steam from steam turbine and requires 9,472 kg/s water continuously pumped
to the condenser (C-200). Wastewater from knockout drums in the ASU and CDU contains
dissolved concentrations of CO2, and may require pH adjustment before discharge to the rivers.
Low grade utility steam at 10.8 kg/s is required for heating the regeneration gas in the ASU and
the reboiler in the CDU. Table 5 summarizes the annual utility requirements for this facility.

Table 5. Annual plant utility requirements

Annual Cooling Water Use 2.77E+08 m3

Annual BFW Use 6.39E+05 m3

Annual Wastewater Production 8.20E+05 m3

Annual Steam Use 3.14E+05 t

6.6 Materials of Construction and Control Strategy

6.6.1 Materials of Construction

Material selection is based on the operating temperature, pressure, and fluid composition
of process streams. Preliminary level material selection is based on Ulrich and Vasudevan [33].
Due to the presence of CO2 and H2O in the majority process streams, stainless steel is the most
common material selected for equipment in the units. Selection of carbon steel is justified for
equipment isolated from acidic environments, such as water service pumps. High operating
temperatures and high corrosion risk in the HRSG require refractory metal such as molybdenum
alloys. The cold box heat exchanger and reboiler/condenser system in the ASU also require

24
special consideration of material selection due to low operating temperatures in cryogenic units.
Heat exchangers in the cryogenic section of the ASU are constructed of brazed aluminum, as it
allows for efficient heat transfer at low temperatures [26].

6.6.2 Control Strategy

Control loops monitoring temperature, flow rate, pressure, and composition are included
in the process design to properly maintain safe operation. Automatic controllers are used to
enhance and improve response of installed control systems. The control system is equipped with
alarms to notify operators of unusual conditions.

6.7 Assumptions, Constraints, and Limitations of the Design

6.7.1 Assumptions
The main assumptions for the design are:
● Natural gas undergoes complete combustion
● NOx formation is negligible under oxyfuel combustion
● Natural gas composition is constant
● Design methods outlined in Ulrich and Vasudevan are applicable to our process

6.7.2 Limitations
Using VMGSim to simulate the process presents several limitations:
● The ASU was simulated in VMGSim at steady state condition, while molecular sieve
regeneration is a transient process.
● Turbines and HRSGs cannot be directly simulated in VMGSim. Components of the units
were used to mimic the equipment, which may result in simulation error.
● VMGSim does not have detailed equipment to select for simulation. Using generic
equipment in place of specialized equipment could incur inaccuracies (compressors and
heat exchangers).
● VMGSim is not necessarily the best software to model supercritical CO 2.
● The excessively high temperature observed at the HP duct burner in the HRSG (>1000
o
C) could be caused by unknown limitations in VMGSim.
25
6.8 Project Execution Strategy

The project execution strategy details a plan to carry out the engineering, procurement,
and construction phases of this project. Due to the extensive scope required to complete this
project, an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Management (EPCM) approach is
utilized. With the large scope of the project, the alternative approach of Engineering,
Procurement, and Construction (EPC) is not recommended due to the limited number of firms
with the technical expertise and resources to carry out design and construction. In contrast, an
EPCM approach will allow for a competitive bid comprised of an increase number of firms that
have the construction expertise required to build the ASU, PGU, and CDU. Guthrie’s Method
was used to estimate the man hours required for engineering and construction for this project
[34]. A detailed outline of the project execution strategy, including estimated time and manpower
required for the design phases through to construction and commissioning of the project can be
found in Appendix J.

6.8.1 Engineering Plan

To complete the engineering stage of the project, 560,779 engineering hours will be
required. The engineering phase covers the preliminary planning to select the appropriate
technology, and will be carried through to the completion of both front-end engineering design
(FEED) and detailed design. During the preliminary design/FEED stage, detailed process design
will be completed, while preliminary design will be carried out for the mechanical, civil,
electrical, and instrumentation scope of the project. At the detailed engineering stage, all
engineering drawings for each engineering discipline will be completed and finalized. Following
the completion of the preliminary and detailed design stages, a constructability and risk review
workshop will be scheduled to identify potential construction challenges, such as accessibility,
that can be mitigated through design choices.

6.8.2 Procurement Plan

The procurement phase of the project will commence near the final stages of detailed
design and will consist of tender document preparation, a competitive bidding stage, proposal
review and contract award. As this project will follow an EPCM model, procurement will be
done for construction services, in addition to equipment purchase. For larger, complex units of
26
equipment, such as the gas turbine, the HRSG and the condenser combination unit, equipment
delivery time can take up to 52 weeks [35]. Additionally, large pressure vessels and high duty
compressors require 40 to 75 weeks for delivery; thus, procurement this equipment will be done
during the latter stages of detailed design to ensure timely delivery for the equipment installation
phase of construction [35].

6.8.3 Construction Plan

To complete the construction of the project, 18,910,720 estimated hours will be required.
The construction phase of the project will commence with site testing, such as geotechnical
investigation for ground stability, followed by site preparation. As winter months make
geotechnical tests of sites and ground preparation difficult due to winter frozen ground
conditions, the project has been planned so that detailed design and procurement can be
completed by spring of 2022. This will allow for site testing and preparation to begin in March or
April of 2022. Following site preparation, the construction will be carried out in the following
stages: foundation layout, utilities installation and tie-ins, equipment installation and erection,
piping and electrical installation, final tie-ins between the three process units, close out of the
construction phase with inspections to qualify for a Construction Completion Certificate (CCC),
and a Final Acceptance Certificates (FAC). A total of 9 months is devoted to start-up and
commissioning.
Figure 5 shows the project execution schedule and presents a strategy to carry out the
design, procurement, construction, and commissioning/start-up phases for this project.
Calculations to determine the capital expenditure, engineering work force requirements, and
trades labour work force requirements can all be found in Appendix J.

27
 28

Figure 5. Overall project schedule

7. Project and Net Social Benefit Analyses (Economic, Environmental, Safety,
Risk, Society)

7.1 Economic Analysis

Economic feasibility of the proposed process was evaluated using various economic
measures. These include examination of the effect of fixed capital cost from purchased
equipment, working capital cost, annual operating costs, and cash flow analysis. This includes
the determination of net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR). The economic
analysis was conducted using methods outlined in Ulrich and Vasudevan. A sensitivity analysis
was also conducted to determine the impact of key variables on the NPV. A brief discussion of
the mentioned economic measures can be found in this section while a more detailed breakdown
of the calculation and justification can be referenced Appendix K.

7.1.1 Fixed Capital Cost

Fixed capital cost consists of the total facility installed cost. Purchase costs determined
for equipment were outlined in values for US Gulf Coast (USGC) in 2004; therefore, factors for
inflation, currency, and location were applied. The Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index
(CEPCI) for USGC 2004 is 400; thus, equipment cost was inflated to the most recent CEPCI
value of 567.5 for 2017 to account for inflation [36]. A location factor of 1.2 was applied to
account the change in location to Edmonton, Alberta and the currency was converted from USD
to CAD assuming the current conversion rate of 1.25. When required, other sources for costing
were utilized such as Colt engineering costing charts for the air feed compressor and ACHE
software for fin fan air cooler costs [37]. The fully installed cost for the power plant module was
provided by the technical advisor.
Figure 6 shows the distribution of fixed capital cost with an extended break down of bare
module cost for each unit found in the right most pie chart. The total fixed capital cost was
estimated to be $1.41 B.

29
Figure 6. Fixed capital cost breakdown

7.1.1.1 Location Effects on Equipment Cost

Costs of equipment obtained required a location adjustment of 1.2 for Edmonton, Alberta.
Additionally, location adjustment was applied to the installation factor (F- BM) to account for
construction costs due to changes in weather, labour costs and construction costs. F BM was
adjusted by examining direct field labour factors for various equipment types as specified by
Guthrie’s factor method [38]. Direct field labour (DFL) factors were adjusted to account for
construction in Alberta’s greenfield, winter work, and indirect project expenses such as
construction camps and scaffolding.

7.1.1.2 Field Fabrication versus Shop Fabrication

In this project, both field and shop fabrication will be utilized due to the large scale of the
process. Shop fabrication will comprise the majority of the fabrication; however, some field
fabrication will also be required due to equipment such as the HRSG in the PGU, and the HP and
LP distillation towers in the ASU. These units are too large for safe transportation. Shop
fabrication is preferred for most equipment as it reduces labour costs, decreases fabrication
time,improves quality due to controlled environments, and improves efficiency due to intensive
quality testing [39]. Additionally, shop fabrication reduces safety and environmental risks on site
30
due to large construction capacity, and reduces delays due to weather [39]. In order to maximize
shop fabrication, large equipment that cannot be transported as a single module will be fabricated
in parts and assembled on site.

7.1.1.3 Work Included and Excluded

The cost for the power module was estimated as a total installed cost per kW of electricity
production. This value is inclusive of all the equipment required in the PGU excluding pumps.
This cost is considered a high level estimate due to limited reference data for the proposed design
equipment specifications. Cost of packaging of N2 gas for sale was excluded in economics as it is
out of project scope. Since this project is built on an undeveloped plot, DFL adjustments for
existing facilities and turnaround were excluded. Natural gas and EOR pipelines were considered
outside of the battery limits of the plant. All piping within the facility is also excluded as detailed
engineering analysis is required to determine full scale of piping

7.1.2 Working Capital Cost

Working capital is the cost required to start production beyond construction cost.
Working capital for projects with high capital investment are estimated at 10% of the fixed
capital cost. This yields a working capital cost of $141 MM. Additionally, business working
capital cost was determined as the total cost required to purchase utilities and raw material for the
facility for 2 months. The business working capital cost was calculated $5 MM. The total
working capital cost for the facility is $146 MM.

7.1.3 Operating Costs and Revenue

Annual operating expense comprises the cost of raw materials, utilities, operating
labour,supervisory labour, maintenance, indirect expenses, and general expenses. An on-stream
factor of 92.3 % was assumed, resulting in 8085 total annual onstream hours, with two weeks of
downtime on a semi-annual basis. Figure 7 outlines all operating costs for startup in 2023.

31
Figure 7. Annual operating cost distribution in 2023

7.1.3.1 Raw Materials

Annual raw material costs was calculated to be $4.86 MM. Raw materials in this project
consist of natural gas, zeolite and TEG. Zeolite cost was estimated at $3.58/kg CAD from
Alibaba as suggested by the technical advisor [40]. TEG cost was obtained as a package cost of
$2508 per 220 kg TEG [41]. Natural gas prices were forecasted for the operational year by
observing market trends and accounting for inflation. Natural gas price was predicted to be
$4.5/GJ from 2021 and assumed to stay relatively constant throughout the lifespan of the project
[42].

7.1.3.2 Labour Costs

Annular labour cost was estimated to be $2.23 MM. This value accounts for operators
and supervisory staff. The ASU and PGU employ 2 operators per shift, while the CDU employs a
single operator. An additional operator for each shift is employed for cover. There are 6 operators
are on site per shift, for a total of 16 shifts per week. The base operating salary for power plant
operators is $93,900, which was inflated from the base case [43]. The cost of supervisory staff
cost was estimated at a quarter of annual operator wages.

32
7.1.3.3 Utilities
Annual utility costs was determined to be $30.8 MM. Cooling water contributes to the
majority of the utility cost as high flow rates are required to condense steam from the steam
turbine. The unit cost for cooling water was determined to be $0.042/m 3 [44]. BFW was
estimated to be $9.68/m3.

7.1.3.4 Revenue
Annual revenue consists of the selling price of electricity, CO 2 for EOR, Carbon Tax
credits, and N2 price. Electricity and Carbon Tax credit values were provided by the client at
$80/MWh and $150/t by 2023, respectively. These prices were assumed to stay constant
throughout the lifetime of the plant. N2 price was taken to be 200 times less than the packaged
cost. Table 6 summarizes all revenue streams for the facility.

Table 6. Annual cost of revenue streams

Major Product Streams Revenue ($M)

Electricity 166

CO2 for EOR 55

Carbon Credit 142

High Grade Nitrogen 8

Low Grade Nitrogen 214

Total Revenue 585

7.1.4 Capital Expenditure

Figure 8 presents a breakdown of the capital expenditure into the following categories:
engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning/startup. The engineering and

33
procurement cost is calculated as 10% of the subtotal grassroots cost. The total for engineering
and procurement was calculated to be $113 MM. Engineering costs make up 80.5% of this value,
while the remaining 19.5% covers the procurement cost. Construction comprises the total cost of
installation at $346M. The commissioning and start up cost was estimated at 8% of subtotal
grassroots facility and contingency cost. The value calculated for commissioning and start up
cost is $90.8 MM. Additional information on the breakdown of capital expenditure can be found
in Appendix K.

Figure 8. Break down of capital expenditure

7.1.5 Engineering Work Force Requirements

Figure 9 shows the breakdown of engineering hours required over the duration of the
project lifecycle. At the peak of the design phase, 245 engineering and support staff members
will be required to carry out the engineering work. This value is reduced to 70 engineering and
support staff members during the preliminary level and completion stage of design. Peak

34
engineering effort will be devoted to the detailed design phase. Additional information on the
planning of engineering effort requirements can be found in Appendix J.

Figure 9. Distribution of engineering hours over project lifecycle

7.1.6 Trades Labour Work Force Requirements

Figure 10 shows the breakdown the hours required for facility construction. The majority
of construction work is to be completed in the late spring to summer months. During peak
construction seasons, an estimated 4728 workers and trades people will be required, while the
workforce can be reduced to 788 workers in the winter months. Additional information on the
planning of construction effort requirements can be found in Appendix J.

35
Figure 10. Distribution of construction hours

7.1.7 Discounted Cash Flow Analysis

Discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis was performed for the 25-year plant life
assuming a 5-year EPCM period before plant operation begins in 2023. An inflation rate of
3%, a discount rate of 10% and a tax rate of 27% or provincial and federal tax were used [45].
Capital cost allowance (CCA) was assumed as 15% for the first year and 30% for subsequent
years. The internal rate of return (IRR) was determined in order to benchmark against typical
minimum allowable rate of return (MARR) hurdle rates of 10% for power generation plants.
Figure 11 displays the cumulative discounted cash flow for 25-year plant life. A tabular form
of the DCF can be referenced in Appendix K.

36
Figure 11. Cumulative discounted cash flow for a 25 year operating time.

7.1.8 Sensitivity Analysis

A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine which variables significantly affect
the NPV. Sensitivities were calculated for ±10% of the base case. The variables analyzed
were cooling water price, electricity price, fixed capital, steam price, Carbon Tax, CO 2 for
EOR price, natural gas price, and wastewater treatment price. The tornado plot obtained for
this analysis is outlined in Figure 12. This shows that fixed capital has a considerable effect
on NPV. Financing options may be required to offset high capital investment.

37
Figure 12. Sensitivity analysis

7.1.9 Financing Plan

Due to the sensitivity of high capital investment, government subsidization of a
portion of the facility and its effect on the economics was explored. The Shell Quest project,
similarly designed for CO2 capture, received 60% of their capital cost from government
funding. This project and Shell Quest have similar capital costs; therefore, an option where
60% of the capital cost was covered by government funding and was applied to the cash flow
analysis. Table 7 outlines the net present value (NPV), IRR, payback period, and return on
investment (ROI) for the base case and subsidized case.

Table 7. Economic variables for base and subsidized case

NPV POT ROI IRR

Base Case $ 1.15 B 10 years 18.2% 16.9%

Subsidized Case $ 1.86 B 5 years 45.6% 31.0%

7.1.10 Summary of Economic Analysis

After examining all economic measures outlined above, it was concluded that this
project is economically feasible with a NPV of $1.15 B, a payout time of 10 years with a
plant life of 25 years. Additionally, the project has a ROI of 18.2%, and an IRR of 16.9%,

38
which was well above the require MARR hurdle rate of 10%. The sensitivity analysis shows
that high capital cost was a major factor affecting the feasibility of the project; therefore,
government funding was explored to examine its effect on the economic analysis. The project
feasibility was further improved with a NPV of $1.86 B, a payout time of only 5 years, a ROI
of 45.6%, and an IRR of 31%.

7.2 Environmental Analysis

A detailed environmental analysis is presented in Appendix L. One of the leading

drivers for this project is the generation of power that result in zero CO 2 emissions. The use of
oxyfuel combustion eliminates the production of air pollutants, such as NO x, putting the
project as a lead in establishing cleaner air for Albertans.
Based on the proposed design, 9.8 million tonnes of CO 2 are captured annually. For
comparative purposes, the Shell Quest Carbon Capture Facility captures approximately 1
million tonnes of CO2 for underground sequestration on an annual basis [46]. Providing a
sustainable CO2 source for EOR processes facilitates the responsible development of bitumen
recovery in mature oil wells [47].
Wastewater comprises one of the main waste streams for the facility. In the ASU,
wastewater streams are generated from the removal of H 2O from air, while spent cooling H2O
required for steam condensation is the main source of wastewater in the PGU. For the CDU,
wastewater originates from the dehydration of the CO2 stream. Key concerns associated with
the wastewater streams are the stream temperature and dissolved CO 2 content, which can form
carbonic acid. According to the Environmental Quality Guidelines for Alberta Surface Waters,
for protection of freshwater aquatic life, water can only be discharged to the river when the pH
levels are between 6.5 to 9.0 [48]. In comparison, the US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) guidelines impose no limit to the maximum permissible concentration of CO 2 in
wastewater streams [33]. While the concentration of dissolved CO 2 in the wastewater streams
is adequate to discharge to the river, there is concern with thermal pollution. To mitigate the
impacts of discharging process and utility wastewater to the river, all wastewater streams will
be sent to the wastewater treatment plant for further processing, such as pH adjustment, and
removal of contaminants.

39
 Due to the presence of large quantity of fin fans, pumps, expanders and compressors,
as well as the piping required for the operation of this project, noise pollution was also
identified as a one of the main environmental concerns applicable to each of the three units.
Installation of noise reducing equipment, such as vibration dampeners on pump discharges
and insulation on piping can also mitigate the level of noise pollution produced [50].
After environmental analysis, it is concluded that the benefits of this project outweigh
the potential negative impacts. The implementation of this project would establish Alberta and
Canada as international environmental leaders.

7.3 Safety and Risk Analysis

A detailed risk assessment and process hazard assessment for the proposed process can be
referenced in Appendix (M). Additionally, the HAZOP conducted for this facility is outlined in
Appendix N.

7.3.1 Risk and Process Hazards Assessment

A risk assessment and process hazard assessment for the proposed process can be
referenced in Appendix (M). The risk assessment has been established for the process at this
stage of engineering, and should continue to be reviewed and revised. JTMANN power has
identified risks that are inherent to the process. While risks are not avoidable, they are certainly
preventable with the vigilant implementation of appropriate mitigation methods. The major risks
identified for this process typically stem from the volume and type of the components being
processed in the facility. The major risks were quantified according to the risk matrix outlined by
Cocchio and Winkel [51]. High processing volumes of N2 and CO2 were identified as high risk.
The loss of containment of CO2 is of special interest due to carbonic acid formation, as CO 2 is
being processed alongside H2O. Another major risk identified is the oxidative environment
produced by the ASU. O2 is the one of the three components necessary for ignition. Natural gas,
a flammable material, is used in high quantities in the PGU. Another flammable, and potentially
hazardous material processed on site is TEG. The major risks identified often stem from process
conditions that deviate from design conditions, as identified in the PHA.

40
7.3.2 . Potential Impacts and Applicable Regulations
The impacts associated with the major risks outlined were determined based on the
consequences to people, the environment, assets, and production according to standards for risk
management outlined by APEGA [52]. Loss of containment is the root cause for many of the
major risks identified for the facility. One of the most important consequences to consider is the
potential impacts to humans. Many components processed at this facility are harmful to humans.
A large release of N2 or CO2 would result in operator injury or fatality due to asphyxiation [53].
Explosions and fires are a major risk identified for this process due to large amounts of natural
gas, O2, and TEG onsite. In the event of an explosion or fire, humans may be injured or killed by
burns, chemical inhalation, or flying pieces of equipment. Environmental impacts will also occur
in the event of a major unplanned release, especially through air pollution in the event of a fire or
explosion. The fines incurred would be dependent on the parameter released. N 2, O2, and CO2
have been identified to have widespread impact in the event of a major release. These parameters
are not included on Dow’s Chemical Exposure Index (CEI) material list. Dispersion modelling of
these components is required to determine the evacuation radii in the event of a major release. It
is especially important to observe the bounds of the oxidative environment relative to natural gas
combustion in the PGU. This data will help inform the next stage of engineering to determine if
further modifications need to be made to the current plot plan. Dispersion modelling can also be
used to ensure that the PSVs installed vent to a safe location. Another important consideration in
the event of a major loss incident is the impact to the facility assets. A breach of equipment
would require replacement or repair before the unit can be brought online. In the event of a fire
or explosion, there is a chance that surrounding equipment would be at risk due to flying
material. DOW Fire and Explosion Index (FEI) was utilized to determine an appropriate radius
for high risk equipment handling natural gas and TEG. The detailed calculation was included in
Appendix O. This data was used to allow for a safer design with regards to equipment placement.
As this facility requires the operation of all three units to meet production and environmental
initiatives, the maintenance of vital equipment in any unit would require a facility wide shut
down. Major loss incidents that impact operators would be subject to investigation under the
Alberta Occupational Health and Safety Act [54].

41
7.3.3. PFD Based PHA and P&ID HAZOP
A detailed what-if PHA analysis was performed through the use of a checklist, for each of
the three units that compose the facility: the ASU, the PGU, and the CDU. The purpose of this
analysis is to identify process hazards that result from upset operating conditions. Effects of
parameters such as temperature, flow rate, and pressure were analyzed. One of the main
takeaways determined through the analysis of all three units was that a sophisticated control
system is necessary to ensure operating conditions do not deviate from design. The system must
be designed to handle minor upsets; however, the use of major safeguards must be employed to
ensure the equipment does not operate outside of its limits. This includes the implementation of
important safety mitigation methods such as PSVs and pipe leak detectors located at regular
intervals along the piping.
A HAZOP analysis was performed on the condenser downstream of the steam turbine.
The P&ID drafted for this heat exchanger was utilized to conduct the analysis. The major nodes
identified in the HAZOP are the condenser, the centrifugal pumps, and the piping. A few of the
major process hazards identified for these nodes include equipment integrity, explosion, and
deviation from design conditions. A mitigation strategy has been formulated to safeguard against
the consequences of the risks identified. These strategies include the implementation of
monitoring equipment and alarm systems. Another layer of risk mitigation was included in this
strategy by addressing isolation methods that can be employed by operators. This includes the
use of PPE on site, as well as following outlined safe work procedures. It is important to note
that the HAZOP was only conducted on a small portion of the process. To ensure safe operation
of the facility, a complete HAZOP for all equipment on site should be carried out.

7.3.4 Applicable Code and Regulations and Long-Term Management of Hazards and Risks
and Hazards
The planned facility lifetime is 25 years. The probability of an occurrence of a major
loss incident for this period without safeguards is high. As discussed previously, there is
considerable risk to the people, environment, assets, and production in the event of a major loss
incident. In order to ensure the sustainability of this facility, many long-term safety initiatives
need to be implemented. Safeguards such as PSVs and sophisticated control systems will be
employed to prevent loss incidents resulting from deviations from design conditions. Physical

42
safety mitigation methods will be incorporated into the facility design, such as well-ventilated
buildings, alarm systems, and accessible and remote shutdown buttons. In addition, an intensive
training program will be used to ensure operators are knowledgeable in both everyday and
emergency response procedures. Standard safe work procedures will also be drafted and
utilized for work completed onsite. Safety is a value at JTMMAN Power, and the safety
programs used at this facility will continuously improve as standards change and technology
advances. Even with the implementation of safeguards, risks are not completely eliminated;
therefore, safety standards implemented shall be periodically reviewed and improved to ensure
that the residual risk is sufficiently managed.

7.3.5 PSV Sizing

To ensure there is overpressure protection, PSVs are installed for every pressurized
vessel, including those operating near atmospheric conditions. In addition PSVs are also
installed at the discharges of pumps and compressors. For this project, a detailed PSV sizing
and selection was conducted for PSV-202 using API 520, 521 and 526 guidelines. PSV-202 is
located at the discharge of the condensate pump, P-202, in the PGU, and evaluated for a
blocked outlet overpressure scenario. A pilot-operated PSV was selected, with an effective
discharge area of 2880 mm2 and set pressure of 11,097 kPag to protect the discharge piping of
P-202. The PSV datasheet, accompanied with detailed sizing calculations and rationale for the
selection of the PSV type can be found in Appendix P.

7.4 Net Social Benefit Analysis

Appendix Q outlines a detailed analysis of the net social benefits identified for this
project. Key social benefits determined for this project include job growth, technology
development, lower carbon footprint, satisfying increasing electricity demand, and positive
community influence. This project provides employment opportunities for construction workers
and engineers, especially considering the impending shutdown of coal-fired power plants. The
implementation of this project would help establish Alberta’s role as an environmental leader,
while enhancing Canada’s reputation worldwide, which could provide economic benefits.
Electricity is the key product stream created through the implementation of this project, which
will assist in satisfying increasing electricity demand in the future.
43
 Negative social impact is caused by high capital cost investment necessary for project
implementation as well as high water consumption. Carbon credits and government subsidies are
considered plausible funding options, which could end up increasing personal income tax rates.

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

8.1 Conclusions

Based on the analyses conducted, the following conclusions are made:

 The proposed process provides an economically feasible method for generating power as
coal-fired power generation is phased out
 More positive environmental and net social impacts provide further justification for the
process
 The addition of a government subsidy would shorten the payback period of the project,
increasing economic feasibility.
 Changes to the price of nitrogen, BFW, and capital costs have a significant effect on the
economic analysis for the proposed project
 Risks are inherent to the proposed process, and require sufficient mitigation to ensure that
the residual risk is managed.
 The implementation of this process would solidify Alberta as a green energy leader on an
international scale.

8.2 Recommendations

Based on the final overview of the proposed design, the following improvements are suggested
for future stages of design:
 A catalytic oxidizer can be considered for installation downstream of the CDU to remove
excess amount of O2.
 To prevent corrosion, deaerators should be designed to remove dissolved O 2 and
CO2 from condensate/feedwater to LP and HP HRSGs.
 During the early stages of the proposed design, the LP stream from the LP HRSG was to
be utilized by the ASU. It was determined later that the ASU would require HP Steam
44
 instead of LP Steam. As future recommendations, the LP HRSG will not be necessary as
HP HRSG will supply required steam.
 Use two gas turbines instead of a single gas turbine. Using two gas turbines will
reduce the amount of supplementary heating required by the duct burners. This will
lower the required process temperature in the HRSG, which is beneficial as
temperature control is a major concern in the PGU.
 Explore potential opportunities to receive government funding.
 It is recommended to simulate overall process in more advanced modelling software
due to limitations in VMGSim.
 A complete HAZOP analysis should be conducted for the entire facility before final
approval of design
 Proceed with dispersion modeling for application in risk analysis

45
9. References

[1]. Alberta Energy. (2017). Alberta Electricity Overview.[pdf document]. Retrieved from
http://www.energy.alberta.ca/Electricity/pdfs/Elec101.pdf

[2]. Government of Alberta. (2016-17) Climate Leadership Plan Progress Report. Retrieved
from https://www.alberta.ca/assets/documents/CLP-progress-report-2016-17.pdf

[3]. Government of Alberta. (2017). Phasing out coal pollution. Retrieved from
https://www.alberta.ca/climate-coal-electricity.aspx

[4]. Government of Alberta. (2017). Fiscal Plan-Climate Leadership Plan. Retrieved from
http://finance.alberta.ca/publications/budget/budget2017/fiscal-plan-climate-leadership-plan.pdf

[5]. Polyzakis, A. L., Koroneos, C., & Xydis, G. (2008). Optimum gas turbine cycle for
combined cycle power plant. Energy Conversion and Management, 49(4), 551-563.
[6] Coombe, H.S., & Nieh, S. (2007). Polymer membrane air separation performance for portable
oxygen enriched combustion applications. Energy Conversion and Management, Vol 48, 1499-
1505.

[7] Universal Industrial Gases Inc. (n.d). Production/ Supply System optimization. Retrieved from
http://www.uigi.com/optimalplant.html

[8]. Praxair Technology Inc. (2018). Industrial Gases. Nitrogen. Retrieved from
http://www.praxair.co.in/gases/buy-liquid-nitrogen-or-compressed-nitrogen-gas?tab=industries.

[9]. Alberta electric system operator (AESO). (2017). AESO 2017 Long-Term Outlook.
Retrieved from https://www.aeso.ca/download/listedfiles/AESO-2017-Long-term-Outlook.pdf.

[10]. AECO-C Natural Gas Price. Retrieved from Alberta Energy Regulator. Retrieved from
https://www.aer.ca/data-and-publications/statistical-reports/aeco-c
46
[11]. Godec, M. L . (2011). Summary of Costs for CO2-EOR. In Global technology roadmap for
CCS in industry. Sectoral assessment: CO2 enhanced oil recovery.

[12]. HIS Markit. (2016). Air Separation Gases. In Chemical Economics Handbook. Retrieved
from https://ihsmarkit.com/products/air-separation-gases-chemical-economics-handbook.html

[13]. Rao, A. D. (2012). Combined cycle power plant configuration. In Combined Cycle
Systems for Near-Zero Emission Power Generation (1.6). Woodhead Publishing. Retrieved
from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt00C51KE9/combined-cycle
systems/combined-c-cycle-power

[14]. International Energy Agency. (2000). Key Components For CO2 Abatement: Gas Turbines.
Retrieved from
http://www.ieaghg.org/docs/General_Docs/Reports/PH3_12%20Gas%20Turbines.pdf
[15]. Stuart Thomson. (2005). Liberty global's technology roadmap. London: Informa
Telecoms & Media Group.Retrieved from
http://hub.globalccsinstitute.com/sites/default/files/publications/15676/global-technology-
roadmap-ccs-industry-sectoral-assessment -co2-enhanced-oil-recovery.pdf

[16] Gholami, R., Alyani, M., & Smith, K. (2015). Deactivation of pd catalysts by water
during low temperature methane oxidation relevant to natural gas vehicle converters.
Catalysts, 5(2), 561-594. 10.3390/catal5020561 Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1706282848

[17] Stuart Thomson. (2005). Liberty global's technology roadmap. London: Informa Telecoms
& Media Group. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/221802384

[18] WorleyParsons Limited. (2013). CCS learning from the LNG sector: A Report for the
Global CCS Institute. Retrieved from https://hub.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/global-
technology-roadmap-ccs-industry-sectoral-assessment-co2-enhanced-oil-recovery-19

47
[19]. Australian National Low Emissions Coal Research & Development. (2012). Control of
impacts of nitrogen. In Gas quality control in oxy-pf technology for carbon capture and storage.

[20] Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. (2012).Module 2: CO2 capture. In Building capacity

for CO2 capture and storage in the APEC region.

[21].Leung, D. Y.C., Caramanna, G., & Mercedes, M. (2014). An overview of current status of
carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
Vol 39, 426-443.

[22].Yu,C. H., Huang, C. H., & Tan, C. S. (2012). A Review of CO2 Capture by Absorption and
Adsorption. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, Vol 12, 745–769
[23]. (2004). Section 20: Dehydration In Gas Processors Suppliers Association (12 Edition).
Engineering Data Book (pp. 20-1 to pp.20-48). Tulsa, Oklahoma: Gas Processors Suppliers
Association.

[24].Kemper, J., Sutherland, L., Watt, J., & Santos, S. (2014). Evaluation and analysis of the
performance of dehydration units for CO2 capture. Energy Procedia, 7568-7584.

[25]. Maddocks, J., McKay., W., and Hansen., V. “Acid Gas Dehydration - A DexPro
Technology Update. Retrieved from
https://gasliquids.com/content/2011_AcidGasDehydrationDexpro.pdf

[26]. “Brazed Aluminum Heat Exchangers.” Chart Energy and Chemicals. Retrieved from
http://files.chartindustries.com/Brazed-Aluminum-Heat-Exchangers.pdf

[27].“7E.03 Gas Turbine (60 Hz).” GE Power. Retrieved from

https://www.gepower.com/gas/gas-turbines/7e-03

48
[28]. “Cogeneration and Combined-Cycle Principles Workshop Introduction to HRSGs.”
Innovative Steam Technologies. Retrieved from: http://www.iagtcommittee.com/downloads/
2009papers/Training%20Session4%20%20More%20Heat%20Recovery%20Steam%20Generato
rs.pdf

[29]. Ganapathy, V. (1996). “Heat Recovery Steam Generators: Understand the Basics.”
Chemical Engineering Progress. Retrieved from
http://www.angelfire.com/md3/vganapathy/hrsgcep.pdf

[30]. Heat Recovery Steam Generators. (2007). API Recommended Practice 534 (Second
Edition). Retrieved from: https://eclass.srv.ualberta.ca/pluginfile.php/
4064772/mod_resource/content/2/API%20534%20Heat%20Recovery%20Steam%20generators.
pdf

[31]. IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme. (2011). Types and sizes of compression
machinery. In Rotating equipment for carbon dioxide capture and storage.

[32]. (2004). Section 20: Dehydration In Gas Processors Suppliers Association (12 Edition).
Engineering Data Book (pp. 20-1 to pp.20-48). Tulsa, Oklahoma: Gas Processors Suppliers
Association.

[33]. Ulrich, G.D. and Vasudevan, P.T. (2004). Chemical Engineering Process Design and
Economics: A Practical Guide. (Second Edition) Durham: Sheridan Books. Pg. 96-99.

[34] Guthrie, K.M., (1974). Process Plant Estimating, Evaluation, and Control. Solana Beach,
CA: Craftsman Book Company of America.

[35] Church., L., and Jamieson., M., “Project Execution Strategies: Site Influences.” University
of Alberta CH E 465 Notes. Retrieved from
Eclass:https://eclass.srv.ualberta.ca/pluginfile.php/4064997/mod_resource/content/2/Execution%
20Strategies%20-%20EPC%20II.pdf

49
[36] Chemical Engineering Essential for the CPI professional. (2018).CEPCI UPDATES:
JANUARY 2018. Retrieved from: http://www.chemengonline.com/cepci-updates-january-
2018-prelim-and-december-2017-final/

[37] Colt Engineering Corp. “6.4 Compressor (Centrifugal Air Compressors C/W electrical
driver)”. Retrieved University of Alberta CH E 465 from class course notes:
https://eclass.srv.ualberta.ca/pluginfile.php/4064928/mod_resource/content/2/6_Compressors.
pdf

[38] Green D. W. & Perry R.H. (2007). Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook (8th Edition).
McGraw-Hill Publishing. Table 9-13
[39] STI Group (2006).The Main Advantages of Shop Fabrication for Industrial Piping.
Retreived from: http://setxind.com/fabrication/main-advantages-shop-fabrication-industrial-
piping/

[40] Alibaba.com.(2018).”Search: Zeolite 13X”. Retrieved from:

https://www.alibaba.com/showroom/zeolite-x.html

[41] EMDmillipore. (2017). 808245 | Triethylene glycol. Retrieved from:

http://www.emdmillipore.com/CA/en/product/Triethylene-glycol,MDA_CHEM-808245

[42] AECO-C Natural Gas Price. Retrieved from Alberta Energy Regulator
https://www.aer.ca/data-and-publications/statistical-reports/aeco-c

[43] Payscale Inc. (2018). Power Plant Operator Salary (Canada): National Average. Retrieved
from: https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Job=Power_Plant_Operator/Salary

[44] DIESEL PRODUCTION FACILITY (2008).Utility Costs. Retrieved from University of

Alberta CH E 465 from class course notes:

50
https://eclass.srv.ualberta.ca/pluginfile.php/4064932/mod_resource/content/1/utilities%20cost
s%202008.pdf

[45] KPMJ. (2028). Corporate Tax Rate.Retrieved from Income Tax Rates for General
Corporations: https://home.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/ca/pdf/2018/04/federal-and-
provincial-territorial-income-tax-rates-for-general-corporations-2018.pdf

[46]. Shell. (n.d.). CCS Facility Exceeding Expectations. Retrieved from

https://www.shell.ca/en_ca/about-us/projects-and-sites/quest-carbon-capture-and-storage-
project/carbon-capture-and-storage.html

[47]. US Department of Energy. (2010). Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery. Retrieved
from the National Energy Technology Laboratory Website:
https://www.netl.doe.gov/file%20library/research/oil-gas/CO2_EOR_Primer.pdf

[48]. Government of Alberta, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development.

(2014). Environmental Quality Guidelines for Alberta Surface Waters. Retrieved from
the Government of Alberta website: http://aep.alberta.ca/water/education-
guidelines/documents/EnvironmentalQualitySurfaceWaters-2014.pdf

[49]. Ulrich, G.D. and Vasudevan, P.T. (2004). Chemical Engineering Process Design and
Economics: A Practical Guide. (Second Edition) Durham: Sheridan Books. Pg. 526-529

[50]. (n.d.). Decoupled Barrier Materials for Pipes & Ducts Noise Reduction. Retrieved from:
http://www.acoustiguard.com/products/pipes-ducts/decoupled-barrier-materials.html

[51] Cocchio, J. R. and Winkel, G. (2014). Module 5-20: Hazard and Operability Process
(HAZOP). In Engineering Safety and Risk Management Program University of Alberta.

[52] https://www.apega.ca/assets/PDFs/risk.pdf

51
[53] Yanisko, P. and Croll, D. (2012). Use Nitrogen Safely. Air Products and Chemicals Inc..
Retrieved from http://www.airproducts.com/~/media/downloads/article/U/en-use-nitrogen-
safely-312-12-023.pdf

[54]
http://www.qp.alberta.ca/1266.cfm?page=O02.cfm&leg_type=Acts&isbncln=9780779775699&d
isplay=html

52
10. Appendices
Appendix A - Technologies Considered
Appendix B - Engineering Drawings and Stream Tables Package
Appendix C - Overall Material and Energy Balance Table
Appendix D - Air Separation Unit Equipment Sizing and Selection
Appendix E - Power Generation Unit Equipment Sizing and Selection
Appendix F - Carbon Dioxide Unit Equipment Sizing and Selection
Appendix G - Process Line Sizing
Appendix H - Detailed Heat Exchanger Sizing and Datasheet
Appendix I - Detailed Pump Sizing and Datasheet
Appendix J - Project Execution Strategy
Appendix K - Economics Analysis
Appendix L - Environmental Impacts Analysis
Appendix M - Risk Assessment and Process Hazards Analysis (PHA)
Appendix N - HAZOP Analysis
Appendix O - FEI Calculations
Appendix P - PSV Datasheet, Sizing and Selection
Appendix Q - Social Impacts Analysis
Appendix R - Process Simulation Package
Appendix S - Three Pertinent Literature Articles
Appendix T - Email Correspondences

53