16th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies GHGT-16

23-27th October 2022, Lyon, France

Advanced Mass Transfer Technology For Post Combustion Carbon Capture

Xiaobo Luoa, Kari Forthuna,1, Jiru Yinga, Asbjørn Strandb, Dag Eimerc
a
Compact Carbon Capture AS – a Baker Hughes company, Ytrebygdsvegen 215, 5252 Blomsterdalen, Norway
b
Fjell Technology Group AS, Thormøhlensgate 49A, 5006 Bergen, Norway
c
University of South-Eastern Norway, Kjølnes Ring, NO 3918 Porsgrunn, Norway

Abstract

The rotating packed technology employed by Compact Carbon Capture (CCC) utilizes centrifugal acceleration to
intensify mass transfer, thereby reducing equipment size and costs. In principle, CCC’s technology is absorbent-
agnostic and is expected to be applicable to a wide range of flue gases. CCC has been validated at TRL 5 with MEA
at Equinor’s test facilities (PLAB) in Porsgrunn (Norway) at a nominal capacity of 5 tonnes per day using a synthetic
flue gas stream.

In this abstract it is explained how this is achieved and demonstrated in a pilot plant, that has taken the technology to
TRL52.

The key elements in this pilot plant are the absorber and the desorber, but all auxiliary equipment foreseen deployed
in a real, full-scale plant were included. The chemical engineering design of this pilot plant was made based on first
principles with data needed provided from laboratory measurements or found in the literature. The slight exception
was one empirical relation pre-prepared in a lab-scale pilot that took care of the characterisation of the mass transfer
packing used for the absorber. This allowed a full absorber design. The design estimates thus prepared were carried
out using dedicated Fortran routines.

The CCC technology has a number of novelties incorporated. Rotating packed beds (RPB) are used in both the
absorber and the desorber. These were typically rotated at 500-800 rpm. The absorbent used is a more concentrated
aqueous monoethanolamine (MEA) than is normally used. The standard concentration used was 70 % by weight.
The absorber was designed for crossflow configuration. Flue gas passed axially upwards while liquid was
transported by the high g-forces radially outwards. The absorber was designed for flexible operation with up to 4
RPBs available for capture of CO2. The absorbent was introduced through distributors that received the liquid from
a channel in the axle. There were interstage coolers available for flexibility, but not all were used simultaneously.
The CO2 absorber was followed by a corresponding absorber to carry out a water wash for MEA removal in two
stages. There were demisters mounted between CO2 capture and the water wash and after the water wash. The
desorber was also rotating. In this unit the rich absorbent enters near the axle and is pre-warmed by heat recovery

1
Corresponding author, Tel +47 938 44 295, kari.forthun@bakerhughes.com
2
Definition according to Part 19 – European Commission Decision C(2014)4995
 PCCC5 Forthun, Ying, Strand, Eimer 2

from the regenerated lean absorbent. On entry there is an element of pressure let-down leading to some of the CO2
(and water) flashing off and heading for the gas exit. The flash also leads to a reduction in temperature. The liquid
from this flash, CO2 rich absorbent, moves radially outwards due to the large g-forces. It first goes through a packed
section where mass and heat transfer take place between this liquid and a gas phase stream generated in a steam tube
section radially outside the said packing. Here tubes heated by steam supplies heat to the desorber in order to drive
the desorption. This section is gas-continuous with liquid flowing over the axially arranged steam tubes and also
moving as droplets or equivalent between the tubes. The lean absorbent is collected at the outer periphery by devices
that also recover its kinetic energy.

The pilot plant nominal capacity was 5 TPD CO2. Outer diameters of the absorber and desorber were both around
0.8 m. The flue gas was artificially made by air and CO 2.

The pilot plant was operated successfully through numerous batch tests, a number of 5 hours loop tests and finally
for 100 hours over a working week. Operating conditions were in the typical range of conventional applications for
the absorber, but the desorber was operated a higher than normal pressure leading to temperatures up to 160 oC. The
very short residence times allow such a practice without excessive absorbent degradation.

Results achieved include 90 % CO2 recovery, less than 3 ppm of MEA in treated gas, and achieving rich and lean
loadings of 0.4 and 0.2 mol/mol respectively. The technology may be used with any absorbent. Power is used to
rotate the RPBs, but the higher desorber pressure leads to savings in the compression of CO2 that more than
compensates.

This very compact design of absorber and desorber enables shop fabrication. Entire capture plants may be prepared
and shipped to site in adequate units. A rendering is shown in Figure 1 below. Process intensification factors for the
absorber and the desorber were in the range 20 to 100 respectively. Absorbent inventory in the plant is reduced
accordingly.

Figure 1. Flue gas fan, absorber and container skids for desorber and auxiliaries.

In conclusion, it can be claimed that an extremely compact CO2 capture plant has been demonstrated at pilot plant
 PCCC5 Forthun, Ying, Strand, Eimer 3

level. Low volume, small footprint and low weight are all desirable results. It is believed that size reduction and
enabling standardized shop fabrication will lead to considerable cost reductions. It is currently anticipated, that the
capacity per module is capable of being scaled up to roughly 220.000 TPA CO2 for now, but this will develop as all
technologies. The further development and maturation of this technology is ongoing through a demonstration plant
(30 TPD) campaign, currently at the stage of the detailed design. Upon completion of the said campaign and the
pertinent testing, TRL 7 based on 10% CO2 concentration in flue gas is expected to be accomplished.

Keywords: Absorption; Desorption; Process intensification; Pilot plant; Compact design