Practical Experience in Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Using Reactive Solvents in Large Pilot and Demonstration Plants

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijggc
Practical experience in post-combustion CO2 capture using reactive

solvents in large pilot and demonstration plants
Raphael Idem a, , Teeradet Supap a , Huancong Shi a , Don Gelowitz a , Max Ball b ,
Colin Campbell b , Paitoon Tontiwachwuthikul a
a
b
Clean Energy Technologies Institute, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, Saskatchewan S4S 0A2, Canada
Saskatchewan Power Corporation, 2025 Victoria Avenue, Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 0S1, Canada
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 23 February 2015
Received in revised form 28 May 2015
Accepted 6 June 2015
Available online 7 July 2015
Keywords:
Solvent-based CO2 capture
Emissions
Pilot and demonstration plants
Commercial plants
Aerosol formation
Sampling and analytical techniques
Heat duty for regeneration
a b s t r a c t
Signicant progress on post combustion carbon dioxide (CO2 ) capture technology using reactive solvents
has been reported since the IPCC report of 2005. This has included both the advances in the fundamental
knowledge of the technology and practical experience in pilot, demonstration and commercial plants. This
second paper looks specically at the latter aspect. There has been a widespread deployment of pilot and
demonstration plants as well as the birth of a commercial size CO2 capture plant. The research and development work being carried out in pilot and demonstration plants have enabled the use of real conditions
to study the CO2 capture process and to provide realistic guidance in the design of commercial plants.
The lessons learned from the pilot and demonstration plants have been very varied but have contributed
to the continuous improvement of the amine-based CO2 capture technology in terms of off gas emissions,
operational issues, solvent management, corrosion, plant size reduction, new and blended amine solvents,
and non-amine based solvents. Some of these issues have been resolved through the development and
use/experimentation of corrosion inhibitors, degradation inhibitors, non corrosive materials as construction materials, and non thermal reclaiming methods, as well as the application of operating conditions
that are compatible with the solvent system used. Since the solvent-based CO2 capture technology constitutes a relatively new industry, measurement standards involving sampling and analysis of the off-gas,
and analysis of the solvent system in use were not in place prior to the IPCC 2005 report. Therefore, the
emergence of the demonstration plants has thrown light on both the need for these standards and what
are currently in place. Specically, sampling techniques are being introduced which aim to reliably obtain
representative samples from the off-gas of an amine based CO2 capture plant. Techniques are also being
developed to analyze the current complex amine solvent system itself.
Progress has also been seen on the reporting of the heat duty for solvent regeneration, especially
for smaller pilot plants. Bigger demonstration plants have been hesitant to share results on heat duty.
However, reports from small pilot plants show that heat duty improvements have been achieved based
on two approaches: namely, development of energy efcient solvents and process optimization. Based
on these two approaches, the heat duty has been brought down from about 5.01.8 GJ/ton CO2 produced.
On this issue, it has been noticed that even though the solvent used in conjunction with the process
optimization method employed are capable of providing an acceptable heat duty (i.e., close to 1.8 GJ/ton
CO2 produced), the actual heat duty obtained in pilot and demonstration plants, in most cases, is higher
than design specications.
Catalysis in amine-based post combustion CO2 capture has become a new trend which may possibly
pave the future direction for solvent-based post combustion CO2 capture. Solid mineral catalysts are used
in one approach, whereas a biocatalyst is employed in another approach. Both approaches are expected
to see extensive research and development work all the way to demonstration plants in order to perfect
the respective processes, and to generate reliable data for design of a commercial plant. Thus, future
trends could see signicantly smaller vessels and heat duties for post-combustion CO2 capture from
combustion ue gases using reactive solvents. These would result in signicantly lowering the cost for
post-combustion CO2 capture. More activity at pilot plant and large demonstration scale plants on the
use of amino acid salts and chilled ammonia process have been coming up (CAP), which may help to
enhance the performance of these alternative post combustion capture processes.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Corresponding author. Fax: +1 306 585 4855.

E-mail address: Raphael.idem@uregina.ca (R. Idem).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.06.005
1750-5836/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
R. Idem et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Pilot, demonstration and commercial PCC CO2 capture projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Pilot plants (50 ton/day) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1.
Amine based processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.1.
Typical process description of a CO2 capture pilot plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.2.
University of Regina CO2 capture technology development pilot plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.3.
Boundary dam (BD) eld demonstration plant (decommissioned 2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.4.
University of Texas CO2 capture pilot plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2.5.
Hitachi/Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) pilot plant (University of North Dakota) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2.6.
Heat duty, absorber efciency and CO2 purity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2.7.
Degradation, heat stable salts (HSS) and off gas emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.8.
Corrosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.3.
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.3.1.
Heat duty, absorber efciency and CO2 purity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3.2.
Degradation, HSS and emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3.3.
Corrosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.4.
Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.5.
Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.6.
Amino acid salts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.6.1.
North America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.6.2.
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.7.
Aqueous/chilled ammonia process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.8.
Ionic Liquids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.9.
Summary of lessons learned from small pilot plant operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Large demonstration plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.1.
Amine based process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.2.
Aqueous/chilled ammonia process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2.1.
North America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2.2.
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Commercial plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.1.
Amine based Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Experience with practical implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.1.
Degradation and degradation products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.2.
Off gas: sampling and analytical techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.2.1.
Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.3.
Main body of liquid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.3.2.
Online analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Minimizing heat duty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.1.
Current approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.2.
Novel approaches and future trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1. Introduction
The literature (IPCC, 2005) has shown that there are three basic
CO2 capture strategies: (i) post combustion CO2 capture (PCC), (ii)
precombustion CO2 capture, and (iii) oxyfuel combustion CO2 capture. As the name implies, post combustion CO2 capture refers
to the capture of CO2 after the fossil fuel has been burned and
the energy extracted, whereas precombustion capture deals with
the decarbonisation of the fuel before the resulting non-carbon
fuel is used for energy production. Oxyfuel combustion refers to
the strategy of using almost pure oxygen (O2 ) to burn the fossil
fuel to obtain energy. Since the nitrogen content is negligible, the
exhaust gas conceptually contains mainly CO2 , and thus, requires
minimum CO2 separation. This review paper focuses on post combustion carbon dioxide (CO2 ) capture using reactive solvents. The
preponderance of information in the literature appears to show
that signicant research, development and deployment work has
been performed in CO2 separation and capture by absorption using
chemical solvents, which has led to its more rapid maturity over
time compared with other techniques (Feron et al., 2009; AbuZahra et al., 2013). The literature (Shi et al., 2014; Idem et al., 2011;
Feron et al., 2009; Abu-Zahra et al., 2013) has also shown a comprehensive scope of work ranging from molecular level computational
chemistry simulation, to fundamental laboratory scale studies, and
then to pilot plant and demonstration plant studies to a full blown

commercial scale CO2 capture plant. Numerous studies on PCC by
absorption using chemical solvents were reported prior to 2005,
and some of the ndings went into the IPCC report on CO2 capture
and storage (CCS) of 2005 (IPCC, 2005). The state of the art at that
time included KerrMcGee/ABB Lummus Crest Process (Barchas
and Davis, 1992), the Flour Daniel ECONAMINE process (Sander
and Mariz, 1992; Chapel et al., 1999), and the KEPCO/MHI Process
by Kansai Electric Power Co., Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (Mimura
et al., 2003, 1999). After then, it is clear that PCC by absorption
using chemical solvents has blossomed considerably. For example, the solvent technology now includes new MHI solvents (MHI,
2012), Cansolv (2015), HTC Purenergy (2015), Aker (2015), Hitachi
(Kikkawa et al. 2010), Toshiba (Suzuki et al., 2012), etc. (for conventional amine based solvents), and ionic liquids- based solvents
((a) The US Department of Energy (DOE), (b) The US Department
of Energy (DOE)) being developed by Ion Engineering, amino salts
(Feron et al., 2009; Siemens, 2011) being developed by TNO/E.On
and Siemens, aqueous/chilled ammonia (Feron et al., 2009) being
developed by Alstom, etc. (for non-amine based solvents), as well
as variants and/or combinations of the listed solvent strategies
(Feron et al., 2009). Signicant progress has been reported since
the IPCC report of 2005. A parallel review paper (Liang et al.,
2015) looks at and provides a summary on Recent progress and
new developments in post-combustion carbon-capture technology with reactive solvents in terms of fundamental aspects while
the current review paper looks at Practical experience in postcombustion CO2 capture using reactive solvents in large pilot and
demonstration plants.
2. Pilot, demonstration and commercial PCC CO2 capture
projects
A rapid spread of pilot plant and demonstration plant studies
on PCC by absorption using chemical solvents is obvious as seen
by the number of pilot plants, demonstration plants and even a
full blown commercial CO2 capture plant having been constructed
and commissioned. Some are currently in use for comprehensive
studies or for commercial purposes, since 2005. Critically important information has been gathered from these experimental pilot
and demonstration plants as well as the commercial scale plant.
Work at each scale has provided unique insights which are necessary to enabling growth of a commercially competitive low carbon
energy option through CCS. The plants from which data have been
obtained and shared to contribute knowledge to the general public are scattered around the globe. In this regard, Abu-Zahra et al.
(2013) have compiled a list of small pilot plants (i.e., dened in
this paper to mean pilot plants with capacity 50 ton/day) for CO2
capture activities using solvents. This is shown in Table 1 with the
pilot plants listed by capacity and by region. The table also shows
the status of each pilot plant (i.e., completed, ongoing, under construction, planning, and decommissioned, etc.). In regards to large
scale post combustion CO2 capture demonstration plants, Table 2
(Abu-Zahra et al., 2013) shows a compilation of such plants listed by
region, with the status for each plant also being provided. In addition, regarding commercial plants, Table 3 shows such plants listed
per region with the status of each plant also being provided. Some
of these pilot plants, demonstration plants as well as commercial
plants from each region (where applicable) have been selected for
more detailed discussion based on solvent technology type, uniqueness and lessons learned, especially where information is available,
in order to provide the basis for the lessons learned.
3. Pilot plants (50 ton/day)
3.1. Amine based processes
The amine based pilot plant are presented by region in order to
show global distribution as discussed below.
3.2. North America
There are a number of small pilot plants that have been used
for post combustion CO2 capture studies in North America. These
include two University of Regina (UofR) pilot plants, namely,
1 ton/day technology development pilot plant and (UofR) consortium 4 ton/day Boundary Dam demonstration plant that was
decommissioned in 2012 (Fig. 1), as well as C2P3 University of
Texas Separations Research Program (SRP), and Hitachi/EERC pilot
plant (University of North Dakota). For each of these pilot plants, the
focus is on the results obtained with regards to heat duty, absorber
efciency, ue gas source, degradation, corrosion, CO2 purity and
off gas emissions.
3.2.1. Typical process description of a CO2 capture pilot plant
The processes involved in these plants, and in fact other pilot
plants are very similar and typical. Consequently, the CO2 capture
process in pilot plants is described using the University of Regina
(UofR) Technology development pilot just as an example, as shown
in Fig. 2 (Idem et al., 2006). However, a very brief description is also
given for the other pilot plants.
3.2.2. University of Regina CO2 capture technology development

pilot plant
The process ow diagram of the UR pilot plant is shown in Fig. 2
(Idem et al., 2006). Typical of post combustion solvent based CO2
capture process, this pilot plant consists of three main units connected in series as follows: (i) ue-gas generation/pretreatment
unit, (ii) absorption-based unit for CO2 capture, and (iii) postconditioning unit for product purication. In brief, a steam boiler
(250 kW) produces both ue gas and high quality steam for the CO2
capture unit. A 30 kW micro gas-turbine available in the same unit
can help to produce a low CO2 concentration feed. This unit contains three absorber columns each of which is composed of three
0.3 m-diameter sections for a total height of 10 m packing height,
and also equipped with a series of temperature sensors and gas
sampling points at a regular interval. The stripper column is also of
the same height. The post-conditioning unit has a CO2 -wash scrubber, and a separate chiller to cool the CO2 gas down to 4 C. From
here, the CO2 product is either released to the atmosphere or is
passed through a dryer and purication unit for further treatment
to meet food-grade specications.
A control system (in this case, a DeltaV process control/instrumentation and data acquisition system) is used to
control, monitor, and record a complete spectrum of process operating conditions that include temperature, ow rate, CO2 removal
efciency, CO2 production rate, and more importantly, the energy
consumption for CO2 capture. These data can be retrieved from the
control system (DeltaVs) historian database and saved in a spreadsheet format for detailed analysis. There is no yash in this ue
gas since it is obtained by burning natural gas. Consequently, the
only conditioning necessary to be performed on the raw ue gas
before entering the CO2 capture unit is to clean and cool it to the
desired absorber inlet temperature by passing it through an inlet
gas scrubber.
3.2.3. Boundary dam (BD) eld demonstration plant

(decommissioned 2012)
The BD CO2 capture unit processes ue gas of 1.4 104 m3 /day
produced from the coal-red electrical power plant of Saskpower
and which has a CO2 capture capacity of 4 ton/day. The Boundary
dam pilot plant consists of three main components that are connected in series as follows: (i) a high-efciency bag-house unit for
yash removal, (ii) an SO2 scrubbing unit, and (iii) an amine based
CO2 capture unit. The removal of CO2 from ue gas is achieved
in an 18 inch i.d. absorber and 16 inch i.d. regenerator using an
aqueous solution of amine. An amine reclaimer is also available
for amine purication. The following analytical facilities are also
installed within the plant: (1) continuous on-line SO2 and O2 analyzer located downstream of the SO2 scrubber, (2) on-line analyzer
for CO2 concentration along the side of the CO2 absorption column,
(3) a data logging system installed to retrieve and transmit the data
of process temperature and pressure to the control room, (4) local
gauges and routine manual logs used for the daily operation of different plant facilities, and (5) corrosometer and electrochemical
probes installed to continuously and respectively monitor shortterm and long-term corrosion rates at various points in the plant.
The feed to the BD pilot plant normally contains 1215% of
CO2 as well as some amounts of undesirable yash, oxygen (O2 ),
and trace contaminants such as sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) and nitrogen dioxides (NO2 ). The presence of y ash in gas stream brings
about a number of operational problems such as deposition or caking on process equipment, blocking ow, wrenching pumps and
pump seals, and clogging equipment and instrumentation. In the
BD power plant, most of the y ash is removed from the ue gas
before discharging to the atmosphere through the ue stack. This
plant was decommissioned in 2012. Both plants provide lessons
Table 1
Post combustion CO2 capture pilot plants (modied from Abu-Zahra et al., 2013).
Capacity
Technology/solvent used
Operational status
Reference
C2P3 University of Texas

Separations Research Program
(SRP)
UofR (University of Regina)
UofR/consortium Saskpower
power station Boundary Dam
(Saskatchewan)
CESAR/CASTOR (Dong Energy
in Denmark)
CO2CRC/International Power
(Hazelwood coal-red power
plant, Australia)
MHI-KEPCP (MHI Hiroshima
R&D Centre)
MHI-KEPCP Nanko Pilot Plant
3 ton/day
MEA and 2 variants of PZ-Promoted K2 CO3
2002-Onging
Wang et al. (2011)
1 ton/day
4 ton/day
MEA and MEA/MDEA

Fluors Econamine FGTM Technology, MEA,
RS-X solvents
19992000
2000-Ongoing
Wang et al. (2011)

Wang et al. (2011)
24 ton/day
20062012
Wang et al. (2011)
50 ton/day
30 Wt% MEA, CASTOR-1 and CASTOR-2,

CESAR1 and CESAR2
BASF PuraTreatTM and other new solvents
2009-Ongoing
Wang et al. (2011)
1 ton/day
KS-1TM
2004-Ongoing
2 ton/day
TM
Wang et al. (2011) and Mitsubishi Heavy

Industries, Ltd. (2012)
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (2012) and
Imai and Mitchell (2008)
Feron et al. (2009)
MHI-KEPCP Kansai power

station
MHI-KEPCP/J-Power
Matsushima Thermal Power
Station of Electric Power
Development Co. (Nagasaki)
Alstom and DOW Chemical
Alstom/EPRI/We Energies
(Wisconsin)
Imperial College London
Siemens and E.ON (Staudinger
power station, Germany)
Tampa Electric/Siemens Big
Bend station project (Florida)
Tarong Energy/CSIRO/Stanwell
corporation Tarong Power
Station (QLD)
CSIRO/China Huaneng Group
Gaobeidian power station
(Beijing)
CSIRO/Delta electricity
Munmorah power station
(New South Wales)
CSIRO transportable pilot plant
(China)
CSIRO Loy Yang power station
(Victoria)
EnBW CHP Plant Heibronn
SINTEF/NTNU pilot plant
(Norway)
Sigma Power Ariake Co.
Ltd/Toshiba Mikawa Power
plant (Japan)
Hitachi/TEPCO Yokosuka
Power Plant
Hitachi/EERC pilot plant
(University of North Dakota)
KS-1
and other solvents
1991-Ongoing
KS-1TM
1991-Ongoing
10 ton/day
KM-CDR Process with KS-1 solvent
2006-Ongoing
Wang et al. (2011) and Mitsubishi Heavy

Industries, Ltd. (2012)
1800 ton/year
15,000 ton/year
Proprietary advance amine technology

Chilled ammonia
2009-Ongoing
2008-Ongoing
Journal (2009)
Feron et al. (2009)
1.2 ton/day
NA
MEA
Amino acid salt formation
2012-Ongoing
2009-Ongoing
London (2012)
Siemens (2011)
1 ton/day
Amino acid salt
2013-Ongoing
Siemens (2011)
1,000 ton/year
MEA
2010-Ongoing
Stanwell (2012) and CSIRO (2013)
3,000 ton/year
Amine based solvents
2008-Ongoing
CSIRO (2013) and Wardhaugh (2010)
3,000 ton/year
Aqueous ammonia
2009-Ongoing
CSIRO (2013); and Wardhaugh (2010)
600 ton/year
Alternative solvent
1,000 ton/year
Amine based solvents including MEA
2008-Ongoing
CSIRO (2013) and Wardhaugh (2010)
7.2 ton/day
1.2 ton/day
Amine solvent
New CO2 capture solvent
-Ongoing
-Ongoing
Wauschkuhn and Unterberger (2011))

SINTEF (2013)
10 ton/day
Amine based Toshiba solvent
2009-Ongoing
Suzuki (2012)
4.5 ton/day
MEA and Proprietary solvents including H3

(Hitachis proprietary solvent)
MEA and H3-1 Solvent
0.05 Nm3 /s
Project
CSIRO (2013)
Wu et al. (2010)
2010
Kikkawa et al. (2010)
10
Table 1 (Continued)
Project
Capacity
Babcock-Hitachi Kure Research

Laboratory (Japan)
Hitachi/Electrabel/GCF
Suez/E.ON. mobile pilot plant
TNO/E.ON. Maasvlakte pilot
plant
RWE/BASF/Linde RWE Coal
Innovation Centre
(Niederaussem)
RWE/Cansolv
Technologies/BOC/IM
Skaugen/The Shaw Group
Inc./Tullow Oil Plc. (South
Wales)
RWE Aberthaw pilot plant
Fluor/E.ON Power station
(Wilhelmshaven, Germany)
Cansolv transportable pilot
plant
E.ON/MHI
E.ON/Alstom power (Sweden)
Aker Kvaerner Karsto gas
terminal facilities (Stavanger)
EdF (Le Havre, France)
0.28 Nm3 /s
H3-1 Solvent
24 ton/day
Amine solvents developed by Hitachi
NA
Feron et al. (2009) and Eswaran et al. (2011)
0.69 kg/s
Amine acid salt
2008-Ongoing
Feron et al. (2009)
12 ton/day
Amine solvents
2009-Ongoing
Feron et al. (2009)
24 ton/day
CANSOLV solvents
2010-Ongoing
Feron et al. (2009)
1200 ton/day
72 ton/day
CANSOLV solvents
MEA solvent using Econamine FG+
2012-Ongoing
2010-Ongoing
Matts (2012)
Feron et al. (2009)
0.6 ton/day
CANSOLV solvents
Variable
Feron et al. (2009)
96 ton/day
24 ton/day
4.3 ton/day
KS-1
Chilled ammonia
Various solvents
2010-Ongoing
2009-Ongoing
1998-Currently not operational
Feron et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009) and MIT, (2013a)
Feron et al. (2009)
25 ton/day
2012-Ongoing
Alstom (2012)
6 ton/day
UCARSOLTM FGC 3000 (DOW solvent) using

Alstoms advanced amine process technology
20 wt% EMA using ABB Lumus Technology
2004-Currently not operational
Herzog et al. (2009)
4.8 ton/day
Amine solvents
2009-Ongoing
Feron et al. (2009)
12 ton/day
Amine solvents
2008-Ongoing
Feron et al. (2009)
100,000 ton/year
Amine solvents
2009-Ongoing
Feron et al. (2009)
20 ton/day
NA
20082010
MIT (2013b)
1 ton/day
MEA solvent, RS-2 solvent
2010
Elgarni and Aboudheir (2011)
29 ton/day
Proprietary ECO2 solvent
20082010
Reference
Eswaran et al. (2011)
Korean Institute of Energy

Research
Aker Clean Carbon Scottish
power (Longannet)
China Huaneng Group Beijing
Cogeneration Plant
China Huaneng Group
(Shanghai)
First Energy/Powerspan/Ohio
Coal Development ofce (Ohio)
Doosan/Emissions Reduction
Test Facility (FRTF)
ECO2 Burger, Powerspan, Ohio
Operational status
11
Table 2
Large demonstration PCCC projects completed & operating (modied from Abu-Zahra et al., 2013).
Large demonstration PCCC projects completed
Project
Feedstock
Size (MW)
CO2 fate
Status
Ref.
Pleasant Prairie, Alstom, WI, USA

AEP Mountaineer, AEP, WV, USA
Karlshamn, E.ON, Sweden
Ferrybridge CCSPilot100+ , SSE, UK
Aberthaw, RWE, Wales, UK
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
5100 ton/day
30600 ton/day
5100 ton/day
5100 ton/day
360 ton/day
Alstom amine & chilled ammonia

Chilled ammonia
Chilled ammonia
MEA, RS-2
Cansolv
Vented
Saline
Vented
Vented
N/A
Operated
20082009
Operated
20092011
Operated
20092010
Operated
20122013
OperationalJanuary 20132014
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
(2015)
PCCCS (2015)
Large demonstration PCCC projects operating

Jilin, PetroChina, China
Natural Gas Processing
0.2 Mt/year
MEA
EOR
Shidongkou, Huaneng,
China
IFP Energies
nouvelles/EnEL Brindisi
power plant (Italy)
(HiCapt+TM process)
Wilhelmshaven, E.ON,
Germany
Mongstad, Statoil, Norway
Coal
0.1 Mt/year
Amine mix
Commercial use
Coal
54 ton/day
Different solvents
including MEA (20
wt% to 40 wt%)
EOR
Coal
3.5 or 70 ton/day
Vented
Gas
0.1 Mt/year
Plant Barry, Southern

Energy/MHI, AL, USA
Boryeong, KEPCO, South
Korea
South Energy / MHI / SCS /
SECARB / EPR Plant Barry
Power Station (Alabama)
E.W.Brown, University of
Kentucky, KY, USA
Coal
25 MW slip
0.15 Mt/year
10 MW
Fluors Econamine
FG PlusSM
amines, chilled
ammonia
KS-1
Saline
KEPCO wet amine
N/A
Coal
500 ton/day
Coal
Chilled ammonia
and KS-1 solvent
(MHI technology)
Hitachi Solvents
2 MW
Saline
N/A
Operational
Since 2009
Operational
2011
2011-ongoing
PCCCS (2015)
Operational
October 2012
Operational
May 2012
Operational
August 2012
Operational
May 2013
2011-Ongoing
PCCCS (2015)
MIT (2013c)
Under Construction
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
Bouillon et al. (2010)
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
Table 3
Commercial size PCCC projects worldwide.
Commercial size PCCC projects worldwide
Project
Feedstock
Size (MW)
Technology/solvent Used
CO2 fate
Status
Ref.
USA
WA Parish Petra Nova, NRG, Texas
Coal
250
MH1KS-1
EOR
Under construction
PCCCS (2015)
Canada
Boundary Dam, SaskPower, Saskatchewan
Bow City, BCPL, Alberta
Coal
Coal
110
1000
Cansolv
Cansolv
EOR
EOR
Operational October 2014

Planning
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
European Union
ROAD, E.ON, Netherlands
Peterhead, Shell and SSE, UK
Coal
Gas
250
385
N/A
Cansolv
Depleted Oil or Gas

Depleted Gas
Planning
Planning
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
Coal
101250
1.8 Mt/year
amines
Alstom amine technology
EOR
Planning
Planning 2017
PCCCS (2015)
PCCCS (2015)
Rest of the World

Shengli Oil Field EOR, Sinopec, China
PG Elektrownia Belchatow (Poland)
that can be derived from coal power plant and a natural gas power
plant.
of the CO2 fed to the absorber is removed at steady state during a

typical test period.
3.2.4. University of Texas CO2 capture pilot plant

The University of Texas, Austin, United States has a pilot plant
which provides quantitative screening of contactor alternatives and
demonstrates important process concepts. It is located in a facility
at the Pickle Research Center, and permits testing with articial gas
consisting of an air/CO2 mixture in a 16.8-inch absorber/stripper.
The stripper is tested at 0.24 atm. A wide variety of chemical solvents including promoted potassium carbonate, piperazine, etc.,
have been tested in the pilot plant (Dugas, 2006; Rochelle et al.,
2014).
3.2.6. Heat duty, absorber efciency and CO2 purity

Most of the pilot plants, in general operate at an absorber
efciency of 90%. Typical heat duty results reported for studies
performed experimentally and by modeling/simulation for a CO2
recovery (absorber efciency) of 90% from the two University of
Regina pilot plants are shown in Fig. 3 (UofR Consortium Final
Report, 2010). As shown in the gure, these studies reported a
reduction in the heat duty from about 5.0 GJ/ton to about 2.0 GJ/ton
by both experiments and simulation runs, and further down to
1.5 GJ/ton by only simulation runs for various case scenarios. Experimental studies covering the reduction down to 1.5 GJ/ton were yet
to be performed. According to Idem et al. (2006) (UofR Consortium
Final Report 2010), the scenarios used consisted of different combinations of solvent, process conguration, and operating parameters
as indicated in the gure legend. In all cases, the CO2 product purity
was measured to be >99.99% (UofR Consortium Final Report, 2010).
3.2.5. Hitachi/Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC)

pilot plant (University of North Dakota)
The Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC), University of North Dakota in collaboration with Hitachi operates a
200 Nm3 /h (130 scfm) CO2 capture pilot plant. An average of 90%
12
Fig. 1. UofR technology development pilot plant (left) and Boundary Dam demonstration plant (right) (University of Regina Consortium, 2010).
In the case of Hitachi/Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) pilot plant, Ref shows that for 90% CO2 capture, the
solvent recirculation rate needed was about 45% lower and the
energy required to regenerate the Hitachi (H3-1) solvent was about
30% lower than that for 30% aqueous MEA solution. In absolute
terms, recent tests conducted in this pilot facilities using coal-red

ue gas showed that for H3-1 solvent with about 90% absorber
efciency, the regeneration energy/heat duty was in the range of
2.42.8 GJ/t-CO2 .
Fig. 2. Process ow diagram of technology development pilot plant at the University of Regina (Idem et al., 2006).
GJ/tonne CO2
13
6.00
5.50
5.00
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Pilot plant
Modelling
Fig. 3. Heat Consumption for Solvent Regeneration (GJ/tonne CO2 ) for Specic Case
Scenarios (Cases: 15 M MEA with conventional design of pilot plant, 2-RS2 with
conventional design of pilot plant, 35 M MEA with optimized design of pilot plant,
4-RS1 with optimized design of pilot plant, 55 M MEA with full process integration,
6-RS2 with full process integration, 75 M MEA with advanced process integration, 8-RS2 with advanced process integration UofR Consortium Final Report, 2010)
(University of Regina (UofR) Consortium, 2010).
3.2.7. Degradation, heat stable salts (HSS) and off gas emissions
Studies using the two UofR pilot plants (Idem et al., 2006)
show that degradation of solvent and off gas emissions depended
on the ue gas contaminants (composition and concentration),
severity of operating conditions (i.e., temperature and pressure),
type of solvent, whether or not inhibitors (degradation and corrosion) are added in the solvent. It was reported (Idem et al., 2006)
that with an operating strategy involving relatively lower temperatures and pressures, low levels of contaminants in the ue
gas, as well as the addition of appropriate corrosion/degradation
inhibitors where applicable, a stable operation and very low degradation of the amine used were achieved. On the other hand, with
severe operating environments, a more pronounced degradation
was obtained. For example, in the tests done to compare the
Boundary dam demonstration plant operating environment with
the UR technology development plant operating environment for
aqueous MEA and blended MEA-MDEA solvents each with a total
amine concentration of 5 kmol/m3 , the results from analysis of the
lean amine stream showed that degradation occurred in the BD
plant but not in the UofR campus plant. The major compounds
observed included straight chain amines such as 1-propanamine,
cyclic compounds such as 1,2,3,6-tetrahydro-1-nit-pyridine and
2-pyrrolidinone, dialcohols such as 1,2-ethanediol, as well as
sulfur compounds such as isothiocynato-ethane and 1,1dioxidtetrahydro-thiophene. The presence of sulfur compounds were
attributed to contact of aqueous MEA and MDEA with trace
amounts of sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) that survived the scrubbing process in the SO2 unit. As pointed out by Idem et al. (2006), the major
difference between the Boundary Dam pilot plant and the UofR
technology development plant was primarily that the former was
fed with ue gas from a coal-red power plant (which is composed
of CO2 , O2 , SO2 , N2 , particulates, Hg, etc.) whereas the latter is fed
with ue gas derived from the combustion of natural gas (composed mainly of CO2 , O2 and N2 ). This difference in ue gas feed
components was considered to be the major factor responsible for
the difference in the degradation product slate between the two
plants. The other factor may have involved the inhibitor. According to Idem et al. (2006), it was possible that the inhibitor acted
as catalyst to facilitate degradation. In the Boundary dam pilot
plant off gas analyzed qualitatively using draeger tubes, components observed included volatile aldehydes, ketones formats, and
ammonia. Another parameter which impacted operation in the
Boundary dam CO2 capture plant was the presence of yash in the
Fig. 4. Corrosion coupons in areas with signicant corrosion rates (University of

Regina (UofR) Consortium, 2010).
ue gas to the pilot plant process system. This impacted solvent

degradation adversely. In studies at UT Separations Research Program (SRP) pilot plant and Pilot Plant 2 (PP2), Texas, USA using a
piperazine-based solvent process, degradation was reported and
the degradation products were compared with those from CSIROs
Tarong pilot plant of Australia. These products were: total formate,
2-piperazineOH, nitrosopiperazine, nitrate, sulfate, and iron in different concentrations (Rochelle et al., 2014).
3.2.8. Corrosion
Corrosion studies were performed and reported in the UofR
Boundary dam pilot plant (UofR Consortium Final Report, 2010)
as well as in the Technology Development pilot plant (Kittel et al.,
2009). In the Boundary Dam pilot plant, the major contribution to
corrosion, conducted using corrosmeter probes and carbon steel
metal coupons, was the presence of SO2 and SO3 in the ue gas
stream, high total amine concentration, high CO2 loading and high
temperature. Additional studies in the UofR Boundary dam pilot
plant in which coupons were strategically placed in certain locations in the plant over a six months period of operation revealed
that the locations with signicant corrosion were: ue gas stream
to the absorber, SO2 scrubber solution, absorber bottom vapor, and
CO2 product as shown in Fig. 4. In the case of SO2 scrubber solution, there was complete dissolution of the coupon due to severe
corrosion. These corroborated the earlier results that used online
measurements which showed the detrimental effect of the presence of certain compounds in the process streams. In 2009, under
the framework of CAPRICE project, evaluation of corrosion was performed on the University of Regina (U of R) pilot plant using an
online electrochemical probe (Kittel et al., 2009). The tests used
MEA and evaluated corrosion in the process system. Corrosion measurement identied temperature as being a signicant parameter
in increasing the rate of corrosion. MEA concentration also contributed to an increase in the corrosion rate.
3.3. Europe
The listing in Table 2 shows the following small CO2 capture
pilot plant projects in Europe in terms of name of project, location,
CO2 capture capacity and solvent technology used: SINTEF/NTNU
pilot plant (Norway, 0.05 ton/h, new CO2 capture solvent), EnBW
CHP Plant (Heilbronn, 0.3 ton/h, amine solvent), CESAR/CASTOR
Dong Energy (Denmark, 24 ton/day, 30 wt% MEA), CASTOR-1
and CASTOR-2, CESAR1 and CESAR2; Imperial College (London,
1.2 ton/day, MEA), IFP Energies nouvelles/EnEL Brindisi power plant
(Italy, HiCapt+TM process, 2.25 ton/hr, different solvents including
MEA (2040 wt%)), RWE/BASF/Linde RWE Coal Innovation Centre
14
(Niederaussem, 0.5 ton/h, amine solvents), RWE/Cansolv Technologies/BOC/IM Skaugen/The Shaw Group Inc./Tullow Oil Plc. (South
Wales, Cansolv solvent, 1 ton/h, Cansolv solvents), Cansolv transportable pilot plant (25 kg/h, Cansolv solvents) Aker Kvaerner
Karsto gas terminal facilities (Stavanger, 180 kg/h, various solvents), dF Le Havre (France, 25 ton/day, UCARSOLTM FGC 3000
(DOW solvent) using Alstoms advanced amine process technology), Aker Clean Carbon Scottish power (Longannet, 200 kg/h,
amine solvents); Doosan/Emissions test facility (1 ton/day, MEA
solvent, RS-2 solvent). This list is a modication of the one given in
the literature (Abu-Zahra et al., 2013).
3.3.1. Heat duty, absorber efciency and CO2 purity
The heat duty obtained per pilot plant is not readily available
for each of the listed pilot plants. However, it is possible to show
indications of the heat duty in terms of the solvent technology used.
For example, according to Feron et al. (2009), the thermal energy
requirement in a fully integrated plant using the Cansolv solvent
process can be as low as 2.2 GJ/ton CO2 .
3.3.2. Degradation, HSS and emissions
Degradation studies in CO2 capture pilot plant were performed
at Dong Energy CO2 capture pilot plant in Esbjerg as part of the
EU Project CESAR. Degradation based on the MEA solvent process was observed and the degradation products slate included
DEA, formaldehyde, methylamine, acetamide, and ammonia which
were observed in the lean amine inlet and rich amine outlet of
the absorber as well as the offgas outlet of absorber after the
water-wash section. Due to volatility, MEA was also detected in
the offgas (Aas and da Silva, 2015). Also, online measurement of
MEA, AMP, PZ as well as NH3 emissions were observed by Martens
et al. (2012) from the Ebsjerg pilot plant. In another degradation
studies under the auspices of the EU project Cesar and Aker Clean
Carbon, low concentrations of nitrosamines (ppb levels) in MEA
based pilot-plant studies were reported by da Silva et al. (2013). Still
on degradation studies in Europe, da Silva et al. (2013), reported
high MEA emissions as well as nitrosamines in the TNOs CO2
Capture pilot plant at Maasvlakte (The Netherlands). In a separate study in the same pilot plant (TNOs CO2 capture plant at
Maasvlakte, Netherlands), Khakharia (2015) reported emissions of
MEA, nitrosamines, nitramines, and NH3 contained in the aerosolemission due to solvent degradation and corrosion in post combustion CO2 Capture. In a comparative degradation study by Stoffregen
et al. (2014), the oxidation of their BASF OASE blue solvent was
monitored and measured in terms of total organic acid (HSS) during a 6 month operation in the Niederaussem CO2 capture pilot
plant in Germany. They reported that oxidation of BASF OASE
blue solvent was extremely low as compared to that for MEA
solvent.
3.3.3. Corrosion
In 2009, under the framework of CAPRICE project, evaluation of
corrosion using Dong Energys Esbjerg pilot plants was carried out
using the coupon weight loss technique (Kittel et al., 2009). The
tests used MEA and evaluated corrosion on carbon steel. According to Kittel et al. (2009), results showed the highest corrosivity
at higher temperature and uid velocity such as the outlet of the
stripper. MEA concentration was also reported to contribute to
an increase in the corrosion rate. In a more recent study, construction material evaluation was carried out in a pilot scale CO2
capture plant capable of removing 7.2 ton/day of CO2 from a slipstream extracted from a 1000 MW lignite based Niederaussem
power station in Germany (Moser et al., 2011). Various materials
including different grades of stainless steel coupons, stainless steel
tubes and anges, and glass bre reinforced plastic were placed at
different locations throughout the plant during 6 months of oper-
ation with MEA solvent. According to Moser et al. (2011), all the
tested stainless steel materials had excellent corrosion resistance
as evidenced by recording less than 0.001 mm/year corrosion rate.
Accordingly, these materials were deemed suitable for use in postcombustion CO2 capture plants. Equally, they concluded that PTFE
could be used as material for gasket in a solvent based CO2 capture
plant. According to De Vroey et al. (2013), additional investigation
on corrosion using coupons, on-line monitoring using electrochemical probe, and pilot plant inspection were also performed with MEA
solvent separately in both the Dong Energys pilot plant at Esbjerg
(Denmark), and TNOs Maasvlakte pilot plant (The Netherlands).
De Vroey et al. (2013) reported that the weight loss measurement
of coupons (placed in strategic locations throughout the process)
correlated well with on-line measurement using the electrochemical techniques. Corrosion resistance in most zones in the pilot
plants using carbon and stainless steels in the tests was generally good. However, De Vroey et al. (2013) identied the stripper
sump, high temperature lean solvent pipe, reboiler and reclaimer
as critical zones which should be carefully monitored. Studies on
the inter-relationship between corrosion rate, solvent degradation
and NH3 emissions based on MEA solvent process has recently
been reported (Khakharia et al., 2015) using the 6 ton/day TNOs
Maasvlakte CO2 capture pilot plant in the Netherlands. Measurement of corrosion was done using both on-line electrochemical
probe and off-line coupon weight loss. Based on this test, corrosion
was found to generally increase with ue gas oxygen concentration and length of operation but reduce only temporarily with
the addition of amine make-up. Corrosion was also found to be
in a direct relationship to NH3 emission and metal content (more
degradation). This work has suggested the use of online corrosion
monitoring to help detect both early degradation and increased
emissions.
3.4. Australia
In Australia, the listing in Table 2 shows the following small
CO2 capture pilot plant projects in terms of name of project,
location, CO2 capture capacity and solvent technology used:
CO2CRC/International Power (Hazelwood coal-red power plant,
Australia), 50 ton/day, BASF PuraTreatTM and other new solvents,
Tarong Energy/CSIRO/Stanwell corporation (Tarong Power Station
(QLD), 1000 ton/year, MEA), CSIRO Loy Yang power station (Victoria, 1000 ton/year, amine based solvents including MEA).
No studies have been reported on corrosion and heat duty
obtained from each specic pilot plant. On the other hand,
degradation in solvents used in CO2 capture pilot plants in
Australia was reported by Azzi et al. (2014), in which various emissions components including amines (e.g., MEA and DEA
and alkylamine products), NH3 , nitrosamines, aldehydes (e.g.,
formaldehyde and acetaldehyde), heat stable salts (e.g., formate,
acetate, and proprionate) were observed from the absorber outlet,
water-wash liquor, water-wash outlet, solvent liquor, and inlet-gas
streams.
3.5. Asia
Table 2 also shows the small post combustion CO2 capture pilot
plants in Asia. These are: MHI-KEPCP (MHI Hiroshima R&D Centre), 1 ton/day, KS-ITM ; MHI-KEPCP Nanko pilot plant; 2 ton/day,
KS-1TM and other solvents; MHI-KEPCP Kansai power, KS-ITM ;
MHI-KEPCP/J-Power Matsushima Thermal Power Station of Electric
Power Development Co. (Nagasaki), 10 ton/day, KM-CDR Process
with KS-1 solvent; CSIRO/China Huaneng Group Gaobeidian power
station (Beijing), 3000 ton/year, amine based solvents, Sigma Power
Ariake Co., Ltd./Toshiba Mikawa Power plant (Japan), 10 ton/day,
amine based Toshiba solvent; Hitachi/TEPCO Yokosuka Power
15
Plant, 4.5 ton/day, MEA and Proprietary solvents including H3

(Hitachis proprietary solvent); Babcock-Hitachi Kure Research
Laboratory (Japan), 1000 Nm3 /h, H3-1 solvent; Korean Institute of
Energy Research, 250 kg/h, 20 wt% EMA using ABB Lumus Technology (currently not operational); China Huaneng Group Beijing
Cogeneration Plant, 500 kg/h, amine solvents; CSIRO transportable
pilot plant (China), 600 ton/year, alternative solvent.
3.6. Amino acid salts

Although amine-based solvents are effective to capture CO2
from a low pressure ue gases produced from fossil fuel combustion based power plant process, the compounds have been shown
to suffer gradually from chemical breakdowns and other operational related problems as have been mentioned previously. Due
to these reasons, efforts have been put into developing different
types of absorbents with the goal of correcting these amine-solvent
related operational problems. However, in addition to addressing
the operational issues, the new type of absorbents must also at
least perform as effectively in terms of the ability in absorption
and desorption of CO2 as well as being as energy efcient as the
amine-based absorbents. Amino acid has been proposed as a potential alternative to the conventional amines. Structurally, amino acid
contains a CO2 absorbing amino group (-NH2 ) similar to that of the
amine. At the other end of the molecule, amino acid also features
a carboxylic functional group which is often converted to a salt to
help reduce the volatility of the solution during the absorptionregeneration process. These acids were tested specically for the
potential use as lower toxic air scrubbing solution (compared to
MEA solvent) for a navy based submarine. Hook (1997) evaluated
potassium salts of various propanoic acid based amino acids in
terms of CO2 absorption and desorption rates compared to MEA and
hindered AMP solvents. Although a few were found to be comparable to MEA and AMP solvents, carbonate salt crystallization became
the problem as this specically prohibited the use of many of these
amines as a direct replacement for MEA. However, Majchrowicz
et al. (2009) and Aronu et al. (2013) have highlighted the occurrence of salt precipitation during the absorption process as being
an advantage in that it helped to maintain the CO2 partial pressure
driving force for the absorption process even at increased loading.
This was claimed to generate a higher CO2 loading, thus reducing
the energy usage during solvent regeneration. In order to fully benet from this precipitation system, the existing CO2 capture plants
or pilot plant must be modied in terms of the absorber, regenerator, pumps, and other associated equipment for testing with
amino acids so that they can handle solid/slurry formation during
the reaction. This can be a big burden unless a completely new pilot
plant is designed and built specically for this precipitating solvent.
This review paper focuses only on pilot scale testing of this new
absorbent system. Only a few tests of amino acid based technology
for CO2 capture has been evaluated at pilot plant scale (i.e., CO2
capture size of >1 ton/day). To the best of our knowledge, Siemens
AG from Germany is one of the technology developers who has
been able to test its amino acid based proprietary solvent and process conguration known as PostCapTM process at this operational
scale.
3.6.1. North America

The US DOE awarded this project in July 2010 with a $8.9 million grant. This pilot plant was one of 10 selected by the DOE aimed
at developing advanced technologies for capturing carbon dioxide from coal combustion. This pilot plant project is demonstrating
Siemens POSTCAP technology which utilizes an amino acid salt formulation as a solvent for CO2 absorption. It was expected to be
Fig. 5. A pilot scale test of aqueous sodium glycinate (NaGly) for CO2 capture ability
from real power plant ue gases extracted from EVN Drnrohr coal based power
plant in Austria (Rabensteiner et al., 2014).
operational in 2013. So far, no results from this project have been

reported in the open literature.
3.6.2. Europe
Schneider and Schramm (2011) have reported on studies of the
patented process validation in a pilot scale in 2009 using a 1 ton/day
CO2 capture pilot plant set up at unit 5 of EONs Staudinger steam
power plant in Germany. With more than 4000 h in operation by
March 2011, the PostCap process was claimed to reach 90% CO2 capture rate with low energy consumption, nearly zero solvent loss and
high stability (with less than 1% degradation). A more recent work
has reported a pilot scale test of aqueous sodium glycinate (NaGly)
for CO2 capture ability from real power plant ue gases extracted
from EVN Drnrohr coal based power plant in Austria (Rabensteiner
et al., 2014). An absorber and desorber of respective heights of 12
and 8 m (as shown in Fig. 5) were used to treat ue gas containing
1113% CO2 so that the results could reect industrial conditions.
By varying test parameters including NaGly concentration, ue gas
ow rate, liquid to gas ratio, desorber pressure, and absorber height,
NaGly used 40% energy requirement higher than that of a typical
30 wt% MEA tested for comparison. As pointed out by Rabensteiner
et al. (2014), this is an indication that energy consumption will be
one of the areas where amino acid based absorption process might
have to improve in order to compete with the amine based technology. On the other hand, Sanchez-Fernandez et al. (2014) have
reported on simulation work done by The Netherlands TNO, as well
as TU Delft and the UKs Process Monkey for the use of potassium
taurate based precipitating amino acid salts processes called DECAP
and DECAP plus in terms of energy requirement saving within the
CO2 removal unit. The simulation results were claimed to reduce
energy requirement for the DECAP processes by 15% as compared
with that for the MEA baseline case (Sanchez-Fernandez et al.,
2014). However, actual pilot plant test must be used to validate the
modeling data, which no information is available up to the present
date. Although, as recently published in the literature (Abu-Zahra
et al., 2013), TNO/EON Maasvlakte pilot plant is listed as a project
based on the use of amino acid salts as being in operation since
2008. There is still no information available as to conrm if this
TNO related project is the same DECAP process mentioned earlier.
16
aimed to reduce the energy and efciency penalties to existing and new power plants. However, this project was only
awarded to Ion Engineering, LLC to conduct bench-scale development and testing studies. Though, the current information on the
DOE website (http://energy.gov/energy-department-investmentsinnovative-carbon-capture-projects) still describes this project as
one of DOEs investments, the project status is unknown and listed
only as will test an advanced CO2 capture solvent under realistic
slipstream conditions during continuous long-term operation.
3.9. Summary of lessons learned from small pilot plant operations
Fig. 6. Pilot plant test at We Energies Pleasant Prairie Power in Pleasant Prairie,
Wisconsin, USA (Telikapalli et al., 2011).
Thus, pilot plant results are still needed as proof for such claim of
energy reduction discussed earlier.
3.7. Aqueous/chilled ammonia process
Alstom is one of the few leading technology developers in
the eld of chilled ammonia based carbon capture process (CAP).
Alstoms CAP was licensed in 2006 and showed success during multi
stages of laboratory scaled testing with Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI) and industrial funders (Telikapalli et al., 2011). It
was based on these lab results that two pilot plant tests at We
Energies Pleasant Prairie Power in Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin, US
(shown in Fig. 6) and E.ONs Karlshamm in Sweden shown was later
performed in parallel to prove the concept of the CAP process. Both
pilot plants could reach 90% CO2 capture efciency with less than
10 ppm emission of NH3 . A CSIRO report published in 2009 also
mentioned the start up of an aqueous ammonia based CO2 capture plant at Delta Electricity Munmorah power station in Australia
(Feron et al., 2009). This pilot plant with the process ow diagram
shown in Fig. 7 (Yu et al., 2011) is based on the use of aqueous
ammonia for CO2 capture from the power station without the ue
gas desulfurization (FGD) or deNOx unit. According to the same
report (Yu et al., 2011), various pilot plant trial conditions were
tested using up to 6% aqueous NH3 solution. Although the process
still consumed higher regeneration energy than the conventional
MEA process, it was suggested that this aspect could be improved
by increasing the concentration of NH3 even though the testing
at higher NH3 concentrations was not performed. Besides Alstom,
and CSIRO and Delta Electricity, it was only mentioned that South
Energy, MHI, SCS, SECARB, and EPR Plant Barry Power station in
Alabama, USA have had an on-going CO2 capture pilot test using
chilled ammonia based solvent (Abu-Zahra et al., 2013). The results
however, are not publicly available, to our present knowledge.
3.8. Ionic Liquids
Information is very scanty regarding testing of ionic liquids for
CO2 capture at the pilot plant scale. In North America, according to
the Ofce of Fossil Energy (FE), US Department of Energy (DOE)
website (http://energy.gov/fe/articles/ten-projects-selected-doeadvance-state-art-carbon-capture-coal), DOE announced its funding support for the use of ionic liquids for CO2 capture from
coal combustion as one of the 10 projects in the U.S. that
Pilot plant operations generally have been used to evaluate solvents, operating strategies, and process congurations as well as
process integration and process optimization strategies for CO2
capture in terms of heat requirement for solvent regeneration, type
of heat medium, source, moisture content and temperature of ue
gas stream to absorber, packing or column internals, concentration
of CO2 in the ue gas, ue gas conditioning, lean and rich loadings,
ease of operation, CO2 production, emissions, type of solvent and
solvent stability (Idem et al., 2006). Pilot plant operations are also
used not only to compare results from different pilot plants, but
also for capacity building as well as to evaluate the degree of correlation of different simulation software with experimental data
from different pilot plants such as reported by Luo et al. (2009).
Finally, as has been mentioned earlier, pilot plant operations can be
used to obtain engineering data for design of larger demonstration
plants, which would then be used to design commercial CO2 capture plants. According to Gelowitz et al. (2013b), some pilot plant
operation results are proprietary, but there are others where results
have been made available in the open literature. Nevertheless, there
are indications that some results have shown some of the design
aws and assumptions usually made in designing absorption based
CO2 capture plants. Gelowitz et al. (2013b) points to an example
which attempts to transpose the design philosophy in natural gas
processing to amine based CO2 capture from ue gas. The notable
differences are that natural gas is at high pressure while ues gas
is generally at low pressure; also, natural gas may contain hydrogen H2 S, COS but no O2 (i.e., in a reducing atmosphere), ue gas
contains SO2 , O2 , NOx , etc. (in an oxidizing atmosphere). According
to Gelowitz et al. (2013b), pilot plant operations have highlighted
optimum ranges of operating variables such as ue gas feed temperature, solvent circulation rates, absorber size compared with
the stripper size, stripper pressure, heat exchanger sizes, type of
solvent, etc. that need to be used for optimum plant performance
while minimizing capital costs. The use of these operating variables in addition to the use of eld ue gas such as in the Regina
pilot plant (natural gas generated ue gas) and Boundary dam pilot
plant (coal red ue gas) have also shown the impact of ue gas
impurities on solvent stability, the need to condition the ue gas
stream before it is introduced into the absorber unit, off gas emissions, waste disposal and overall plant performance. Gelowitz et al.
(2013b) also indicates that there is an optimum plant size that is
suitable for pilot plant studies, even though the current authors
note that optimum size depends upon the information for which
the experiment is undertaken. Generally, commercial technologies
are evaluated rst at smaller scale, moving towards larger scale as
uncertainty boundaries are reduced. Gelowitz et al. (2013b) suggest
that the pilot plant should be big enough so that reliable engineering data can be obtained for plant design. At the same time, it should
be small enough to allow for changes in the plant conguration at
a reasonable cost. As has been demonstrated, there are a lot of pilot
plants located in different parts of the world, the ones discussed in
further detail in this review paper were selected on two bases: (1)
some of their operation results are available in the open literature,
and (2) the pilot plants span the CO2 capture capacity spectrum
17
Fig. 7. Pilot plant process ow diagram based on the use of aqueous ammonia for CO2 capture from the power station without ue gas desulfurization (FGD) and deNOx
units (Yu et al., 2011).
of (a) <1.0 ton/day, (b) = 1.0 ton/day, (c) 1.0 < CO2 capture capacity < 10 ton/day, and (d) >10 ton/day. Based on the experience by
Gelowitz et al. (2013b), pilot plant sizes or capacities in the range
of 1.010.0 ton/day are most suitable to provide this optimum size.
For example, on the low end, gas/liquid distribution is sufcient
to represent large scale plant operation. Additionally, the level of
control, types of instrumentation, measurement equipment, etc., is
typical to a large scale facility. If it is smaller than 1.0 ton/day, it
will generally tend to use lab scale type instrumentation and measuring devices. Alternative means are used to ensure column liquid
distribution and there are issues with liquid wall effects on small
diameter columns. If it is above 10.0 ton/day, it requires a signicant amount of resources such as volume of amine solvent, disposal,
electricity, heat, cooling, and other utility related items to achieve
similar results from a unit less than 10.0 ton/day but with a higher
cost. Additionally, conguration changes may require cranes and
other heavy equipment to change piping, replacement of pumps,
valves, etc., and require a large facility footprint to accommodate
the plant and use of this heavy equipment.
Operational issues have been encountered in the amine-based
pilot plants including degradation, corrosion, aerosol formation,
off gas emissions, as mentioned previously. The occurrence of
these issues has allowed remedies to be put in place in subsequent or larger demonstration plants. For example, amine solvents
now have amines that are less prone to degradation and less
volatile, while the plants are constructed with materials that are
less prone to corrosion. Also, in order to minimize degradation as
well as aerosol formation, some solvent technologies adopt a more
enhanced polishing of the inlet ue gas in order to remove degradation and aerosol forming compounds. Furthermore, in order
minimize both degradation and corrosion, some solvent technologies adopt the strategy of adding degradation and corrosion
inhibitor additives in their solvent formulation. More extensive
pilot plant activity is needed regarding the use of amino acid salt,
chilled ammonia and ionic liquids for CO2 capture in order to generate adequate results that can be used in subsequent improved
design for these alternative solvent-based post combustion capture
technologies.
4. Large demonstration plants

4.1. Amine based process
Fig. 8 is a picture representing different sections of TCM, which
is a joint venture set up by the Norwegian state (75.12%), Statoil (20%), Shell (2.44%) and Sasol (2.44%). TCM aims to increase
knowledge on carbon capture technologies, in order to reduce
technical and nancial risk, and accelerate the development of
qualied technologies capable of wide scale international deployment. According to de Koeijer et al. (2011), TCM consists of two
large post-combustion CO2 capture demonstration plants near the
Statoil operated Mongstad renery, located at the Norwegian west
coast north of Bergen. Also, according to de Koeijer et al. (2011), the
amine plant was designed and constructed based on the CO2 capture technology provided by Aker Clean Carbon (ACC). TCM dened
further specications and additional generic functionalities. New
technology elements that were included in the testing and verication matrix included improved solvents. The initial 16 months of
operations involved the testing of monoethanolamine and a new
ACC solvent after which tests were run by the TCM partners. de
Koeijer et al. (2011) indicate that for TCM, the quality and quantity
of emissions from the absorber to air became top priority, which
represented a health and environmental uncertainty, mainly due to
the lack of reliable and accessible experimental data. Some results
from this demonstration plant were presented during GHGT-12 in
Austin, Texas (Maxson et al., 2014; Hamborg et al., 2014a,b; FalkPedersen et al., 2014; Brigman et al., 2014; Morken et al., 2014a,b;
Gorset et al., 2014a,b). Also, Knudsen (2015) validated solvents S21
and S26 for degradation and emissions in TCM. The degradation of
both solvents was found to be much less than MEA. The same trend
was found for total nitrosamine emissions.
Another large CO2 capture demonstration plant that has
operated recently is the SSE Ferrybridge Carbon Capture Pilot
(CCPilot100+ ) plant in the United Kingdom. It has a capacity of
100 ton of CO2 produced per day. It was launched on 30 November
2011 as a collaborative project between government and industry after the completion of its construction phase. The objective
18
Fig. 8. CO2 capture demonstration plant at the Technology Centre Mongstad (TCM) CO2 capture demonstration plant (Mongstad, 2015).
of the project was to test amine based post combustion capture

(PCC) technology on a real working power station. According to
Fitzgerald et al., (2014a), the test program was to run from 2012
to 2013 during which period the process and components would
be optimized, and performance models developed. The 100 ton
of CO2 per day are captured from a ue gas slipstream corresponding to approximately 5 MW of electric power (Fitzgerald
et al., 2014a). This slipstream is extracted after the newly commissioned ue gas desulphurisation unit at the Ferrybridge power
station. The retrot, with the super critical boiler and turbine, are
intended to capture, through an efciency increase from 36% to
45%, 0.5 Mt/year CO2 . According to Fitzgerald et al. (2014a), Ferrybridge represented the largest carbon capture plant of any type
in the UK. Therefore, it also represented a signicant step forward in the world of CCS as a critical bridge between research
and commercialisation. The Doosan Babcock, SSE and Vattenfall
consortium successfully completed the two year test programme
on the CCPilot100+ post combustion carbon capture (PCC) pilot
plant at SSEs Ferrybridge Power Station in December 2013. Some
results from this demonstration plant were presented during
GHGT-12 in Austin, Texas. These were on Ferrybridge CCPilot100+
operating experience and nal test results (Fitzgerald et al.,
2014a,b).
There are other large demonstration plants worldwide.
These include E.ON/MHI (4 ton/h, KS-1), RWE Aberthaw
pilot plant (50 ton/h, Cansolv solvent), Fluor/E.ON power
station (Wilhelmshaven, Germany, 3 t/day, Flour Econamine
FG Plus); E.ON/MHI (4 ton/h, KS-1), IFP Energies nouTM
velles/EnEL Brindisi power plant (Italy (HiCapt+
process),
2.25 ton/h, different solvents including MEA (2040 wt%)), South
Energy/MHI/SCS/SECARB/EPR Plant Barry power station (Alabama,
500 ton/day, KS-1 solvents (MHI) technology), and China Huaneng
Group (Shanghai, 100,000 ton/year, amine solvents).
4.2. Aqueous/chilled ammonia process
4.2.1. North America
Validation using a larger power plant with the capture unit
designed to remove 100,000 ton/year was done in 2009 at AEP
Mountaineer Power Plant in New Haven, USA, also shown in Fig. 9.
This pilot plant test was able to generate 7885% CO2 capture ef-
ciency with 50,000 t/year capacity as of year 2011 (Kozak et al.,

2011).
4.2.2. Europe
A paper has reported more results of Alstoms CAP process runs
conducted at Technology Centre Mongstad (TCM) chilled ammonia pilot plant in Norway (Lombardo et al., 2014). The pilot plant
shown in Fig. 10 designed back in 2008 and commissioned in
2012 is able to treat both renery off-gas from an oil residue
cracker unit as well as the exhaust from a gas turbine based combined heat and power plant at a CO2 capture rate in the range
of 22,00082,000 ton/year. The CAP process carried out at TCM
was reported to produce a similar results to those obtained earlier at the Mountaineer plant with the capture rate between 75
and 85%. Low emission of NH3 was still observed in the TCM based
test.
5. Commercial plants
5.1. Amine based Process
The only operating commercial CO2 capture plant in the
world constructed and commissioned after the IPCC report is the
SaskPower BD3 plant in Estevan near Regina in Canada. An overall view of this plant is given in Fig. 11. The estimated capacity
is 1 Mt/year of CO2 produced. The BD3CO2 capture process uses
the CANSOLV technology. According to Rochelle (GHGT-12, 2014),
this is regarded as a second generation CO2 capture technology
which has improvements over the rst generation CO2 capture
technologies. Prior to the IPCC report, there were three commercially available absorption processes for CO2 capture in post
combustion systems. These were: KerrMcGee/ABB Lummus Crest
Process (Barchas and Davis, 1992), the Flour Daniel ECONAMINE
process (Chapel et al., 1999; Sander and Mariz, 1992), and the
KEPCO/MHI Process by Kansai Electric Power Co., Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries (Mimura et al., 2003, 1999). The lessons learned and
experienced acquired through the project (Monea, 2014), as well
as the technology description of the process (Cansolv, 2014) of the
BD3CO2 capture plant were highlighted during GHGT-12. So far,
news regarding the operation of this plant reveals interesting yash chemistry and waste water chemistry. Also, the design team,
19
Fig. 9. AEP Mountaineer Power Plant in New Haven, USA (Lombardo et al., 2014).
There is one commercial size CO2 capture plant that has been
reported to be under construction. This is the WA Parish Petra Nova,
NRG, Texas for which the source of ue gas is coal, capacity is
250 MW, solvent technology is MHI (KS-1), and is presently under
construction. In addition, there are other commercial CO2 capture
plants that are still in the planning stage. These include the following with their respective source of ue gas, capacity and solvent
technology: Bow City, BCPL, Alberta (coal, 1000 MW, and Cansolv),
ROAD, E.ON, Netherlands (250 MW), Peterhead, Shell and SSE, UK
(gas, 385 MW, and Cansolv), Shengli Oil Field EOR, Sinopec, China
(coal, 101250 MW, and amines), and PG Elektrownia Belchatow,
Poland (N/A, 1.8 M ton/day, Alstom amine technology).
6. Experience with practical implementation
Fig. 10. Technology Centre Mongstad (TCM) chilled ammonia pilot plant in Norway
(Lombardo et al., 2014).
technology vendor, contractors and SaskPowers amine Chemistry

laboratory are active in providing operational support. A full suite
of performance testing is being planned upon completion of tuning
and optimization.
Based on the available reports of studies on pilot plants, demonstration plants, and commercial plants, most amine solvents are
claimed to be better than the benchmark MEA solvent (30 wt%
aqueous MEA) in most performance criteria such as heat duty,
degradation characteristics, volatility, corrosion, etc. In contrast,
the toxicity characteristics of MEA appear to be much less than
these other solvents. On the other hand, amino acid salts is said to
be more stable than the amines but its performance characteristics in terms of heat duty has not yet been veried practically to
be equal to, or let alone surpass that for amines. Chilled ammonia
has not yet been compared to amine solvents on the same basis
while ionic liquids has not yet fully gone into pilot scale studies at this point in time. On the whole, the operation of many
of these pilot plants, demonstration plants and commercial plant
have contributed to the wealth of knowledge on PCC by absorption using reactive solvents. It has created awareness on the need
for optimization strategies that could be used to minimize heat
duty for solvent regeneration, design to minimize plant size, effective and economic ue gas polishing strategies, development of
online analytical methods (van der Ham et al., 2014; Pouryouse,
2015; Pouryouse and Idem, 2008), effective reclaiming methods
(Elmoudir et al., 2014), etc. Operational experience has also brought
to light the need for a thorough understanding of environmental and safety implications in amine processes. In particular, the
20
Fig. 11. Overall View of the commercial CO2 capture plant at the SaskPower BD3 plant (BD3, 2015).
Health, Safety and Environmental characteristics, the formation

mechanisms and the management, of nitrosamines and aerosols
has been seen critical to maintaining a safe and environmentally
acceptable operation. Much of the needed science in this area has
been established or is in progress.
6.1. Degradation and degradation products
As has been shown earlier, most amine solvents do degrade to
varying extents depending on the operating conditions. The degradation products are also varied because of the varying operating
conditions. These include ammonia, aldehydes, ketones, organic
acids, other amines, etc. For secondary amines, nitrosamine is
formed as an additional degradation product. These products are
typically found in the liquid stream in the process and in the
absorber offgas stream (for volatile amines and degradation products). Also, depending on the operating conditions, aerosols are
formed and released in offgas stream. In order to ensure that the
Health, Safety and Environmental characteristics of PCCC plant
using reactive solvents are maintained, appropriate sampling,
monitoring and measurement techniques must be put in place
for the offgas as well as liquid in process and liquid efuents
to ensure an environmentally acceptable operation. It must be
emphasized that a clear distinction should be made between coal,
gas and industrial pilots each of them focusing on separate challenges.
6.2. Off gas: sampling and analytical techniques
6.2.1. Sampling
Typical offgas emissions also likely carry aerosols that can contain trace amounts of amine, degradation products, nitrosamine,
and a number of other formed products, depending on the solvent and operating conditions. Part of the challenges of practical
implementation is that, as part of an operating permit, it is required
that these chemical compounds be identied, quantied and mon-
itored to ensure they fall within the allowable exposure limits as

set by regulatory bodies. The challenge is that currently there are
no standardized methods developed to recover these vapors and
aerosols from amine based carbon capture facilities. Basically, an
extractive sampling system is required similar to that developed by
USEPA Methods 1-8 (USEPA, 2015a; USEPA, 2015b; USEPA, 2015c;
USEPA, 2015d; USEPA, 2015e; USEPA, 2015f; USEPA, 2015g; USEPA,
2015h; USEPA, 2015a; 2015h). However, in order to accurately
quantify aerosols and their compounds, certain modications must
be made on the typical sampling setup. For example, since there
is no particulate matter, the heated lter box and lter assembly
can be removed. Several organizations and institutes in various
parts of the world (including TNO, SINTEF and SaskPower/UofR
from The Netherlands, Norway, and Canada, respectively) are currently working on isokinetic sampling methods to effectively obtain
representative samples. These methods include either one or any
combination of a heated probe, cold probe, high velocity, high
volume, and use of Phase Doppler Interferometer (PDI) to measure size, concentration, and velocity of aerosols, use of sorbent
tubes, and ltration methods. For the most part, impinger bottles
immersed in an ice bath are used to contain the sample along with
the use of a pitot tube, manometer, temperature probes, dry gas
meter, and sample pump.
6.2.2. Analysis of off-gas emissions including amines, volatile degradation products, and nitrosamines. A major problem related to the
analysis of off-gas emissions is that their measurement is extremely
difcult due to the ultra low concentration and complicated matrix
effect in the samples. Unlike bulk liquids, off-gas always contains
amines and other emitted pollutants in extremely small concentrations of which can be as low as part per billion (ppb) level. In
addition, the off-gas samples need to be collected properly to preserve the species in the emission at such low concentrations before
being sent to the laboratory for detailed analysis. As suggested
by most of the method developers listed earlier, the procedure
required to collect the emitted species in off-gas streams is nor-
mally through the use of an effective isokinetic probe system for

sampling the off-gas from the vent stack. An impinger system containing a series of impinger bottles lled with appropriate chemical
solutions is then used to trap the compounds emitted in the off-gas
stream. A dilute acid solution is normally used to trap not only
the amines but also nitrosamines and other emission components.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
recommends the use of hexanesufonic acid diluted with water to
obtain a 2 mM solution to trap MEA, DEA, and TEA from air sample
(NIOSH, 1994). A combination of cold probe, condenser, and liquid absorption system using impingers has been recommended by
SINTEF.
According to SINTEF report (SINTEF Materials and Chemicals,
2012), the impinger solution used was 0.1 N sulfuric acid (H2 SO4 )
to trap the amine, ammonia and also nitrosamines and other compounds. A similar concentration of sulfamic acid was also used
specically for nitrosamines to help prevent an artifact being
formed during sample collection. A separate work evaluated the
amine emissions from its proprietary amine solvent used in pilot
plant run in Japan (Fujita et al., 2013). This work also used a probe
sampling system to sample the off-gas and send to an on-line
proton transfer reaction-mass spectrometry (PTR-MS) for amine
emission analysis. The technique sensitivity was reported to be less
than 10 ppbv. Off-line off-gas samples were also collected using
2 impinger bottles containing an unidentied reagent to trap the
emitted amines for GCMS and LCMS analysis. This off-line technique was reported to have a detection sensitivity of less than 2
ppmv. A similar sampling system was used more recently to measure MEA and nitrosamine emissions related to aerosol formation.
Three impingers bottles with the rst 2 containing 0.1 N sulfuric
or sulphamic acids and the last one being left empty were used. In
addition to MEA, N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), N-morpholine
(NMOR), N-nitrosodiethanolamine (NDELA) and MEA-nitramine
were analyzed from the impinger solution mixture (after sample
pretreatment using liquidliquid or solid phase extraction) using
tandem liquid chromatography triple quadruple mass spectrometry (LCMS-MS-QQQ) (Khakharia et al., 2014a,b). SINTEF (2012)
also recommended sample pretreatment of off-gas samples in its
study to minimize the interference of high concentration of MEA
in the samples prior to the analysis of trace components including
nitrosamines, alkylamines, and ammonia.
The discussion so far has been centered on off-line analysis.
On-line monitoring and measurement of off-gas emissions is also
becoming more common as the technique is capable of giving realtime data, thus allowing any process anomalies to be immediately
detected. Analytical tools used to measure the CO2 plant emissions
on-line normally rely on spectroscopic technique using Fourier
transform infrared analyzer (FTIR). A eld test was conducted at
the Danish Esbjerg CO2 capture pilot plant to show capability of an
online FTIR in measuring inorganic and organic emissions in the
process off-gas (Mertens et al., 2012). The FTIR system tested at
Esbjerg plant was installed downstream of the absorber top having the entire system including probe, probe lter, sampling line,
and the analyzer heated constantly at 180 C to avoid condensation
problem from water saturated off-gas stream. The same FTIR set up
was later used to measure the emissions of MEA and NH3 also from
Ebsjerg pilot plant. The real-time monitoring data generated by the
FTIR helped understand the emission behaviors of NH3 and MEA
and the effect of water wash section used to reduce the emissions
(Mertens et al., 2013). Other works have demonstrated the use of a
different on-line monitoring technique in measuring the emissions
of amines. This is based on a pilot plant test of the Japanese Mikawa
Power Plant of Sigma Power Co., Ltd. (Fujita et al., 2013). This work
incorporated an on-line amine measurement of their pilot plant
off-gas using a proton transfer reaction mass spectrometry (PTRMS). Unlike the FTIR technique discussed previously, the off-gas
21
sampled from the stack was required to be cooled down before

injecting into the instrument. Amine emissions measured from this
on-line instrument was found to be less than that obtained using
the off-line analysis. This trend, which was also observed in the
previous FTIR technique, was thought to be due to the loss of sample while attaching the sample probe. More investigation of these
on-line measurements is needed in order to conrm the accuracy
of the data.
6.3. Main body of liquid
6.3.1. Ofine analysis of amines and degradation products. Amine
analysis is an essential element required during the carbon dioxide (CO2 ) capture process. The amine concentration, which is an
important process parameter in controlling the CO2 absorption
performance, must be accurately determined prior to running the
capture plant. Gas and liquid chromatographic techniques (GC and
LC) are often used to analyze amine components and their degradation products in the solvent mixture. This allows the solvent
blend ratio, largely inuencing the CO2 absorption behavior, to be
accurately monitored. Some recent works on GC method development for liquid analysis are available. According to a report (Rey
et al., 2013), glycol based high polar column of DB-Wax and non
polar CP-SIL 8CB-ms column were used to analyze MEA and its
pyrazine based degradation products. Although GCMS is a powerful tool for amine analysis, the technique still poses a problem
as it cannot effectively analyze all amines due to the highly polar
nature typical of many CO2 capture solvents. One study did not
recommend GCMS analysis for 2-(methylamino)-ethanol (MMEA)
and 2-(dimethylamino)-ethanol (DMMEA) in their oxidative degradation investigation due to noise interference in the resulting
chromatogram (Vevelstad et al., 2013a). Other studies suggested
the use of GCMS for analysis of ammonia (NH3 ), volatile alkylamines, and degradation products generated from amine oxidation
(Vevelstad et al., 2013b, 2014). The LC technique has also become
an alternative to the GC especially with liquid solvent containing
highly polar amines. Tailing problems associated with GC analysis of these amines can be managed more easily with LC by ne
tuning the liquid mobile phase using an appropriate additive such
as triethylamine.
Recent work in the thermal and oxidative degradation work to
quantify 5 single amines of MEA, PZ, 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol
(AMP), 2-amino-2-hydroxymethyl-1,3-propanediol (AHPD), 2amino-1,3-propanediol (Serinol), and one mixed amine solvent
containing AHPD and PZ made use of an ion exchange method
(Bougie and Iliuta, 2014). The IC based technique was also used
to quantify PZ degradation in pilot plant (Nielsen et al., 2013).
6.3.2. Online analysis
In terms of online measurement of amines, though limited, some
work associated with the online technique is available. We have
demonstrated the use of a couple of physical properties of density and refractive index to predict concentration of MEA, MDEA,
and CO2 in their blended system (Pouryouse, 2015; Pouryouse
and Idem, 2008). This technique correlated density and refractive
index data with different concentration ratios of MEA-MDEA-CO2 H2 O mixture into a useful mathematical equation which was used
to accurately determine concentration ratio of all 4 components.
The technique was aimed to replace chromatographic techniques
such as the HPLC for an easier and quicker online analytical tool
for amine composition analysis. Similar work has been recently
done using density, conductivity, refractive index, and sonic speed
data to develop a model in predicting concentrations of MEA and
CO2 in the liquid phase used in a mini-pilot plant (van Eckeveld
et al., 2014). The model was also built based on the presence of
some major degradation products, namely, ammonia, formaldehyde, formic acid, acetic acid, and oxalic acid to ensure its use is
22
also applicable to real-life amine samples containing these products. One more study related to on-line measurement of amine uses
a spectroscopic FTIR by attenuated total reectance (ATR) to carry
out an on-line analysis of MEA solution in a pilot plant (Einbu et al.,
2012). The accuracy measured in terms of relative uncertainty was
comparable with the physical property based on on-line prediction
described earlier.
7. Minimizing heat duty

7.1. Current approach
A major drawback of amine-based post-combustion CO2 capture as well as any other CO2 capture technology is that the energy
required for the process is still too high. In the case of amine-based
post-combustion CO2 capture, about 70% of the energy is expended
during solvent regeneration for CO2 stripping (Idem et al., 2006).
Rochelle (2009) has recently proposed approaches that could be
used to minimize the heat required for regeneration. According to
Rochelle (2009), the theoretical minimum energy of CO2 separation
and compression is estimated to be (0.11 MWh/ton CO2 /435.6 kJ/kg
CO2 ) which remains a challenge to be attained. Accordingly, the
two methods that could signicantly cut heat duty to achieve the
expected value are solvent optimization and process integration.
It has been reported that the heat duty is more dependent
on operating conditions such as temperature (T) and pressure
(P), and less dependent on process congurations, except process integration and heat optimization (Sakwattanapong et al.,
2005). Consistent with the suggestion by Rochelle (2009), a number of researchers have reported measures that have been used to
effectively reduce heat duty (Aroonwilas and Veawab, 2007; Idem
et al., 2006; Rochelle, 2009; Sakwattanapong et al., 2005; Zhang
et al., 2012). These include the development of a series of different novel solvents, which can reduce the heat duty from 1.738
to 0.409 MWh/ton CO2 (i.e., 6256.81742.4 steam kg/kg CO2 ) and
reux ratio of H2 O/CO2 from 0.7 to 0.1 (Feron, 2010). Recently,
efforts have been made to improve Heat Exchanger Network (HEN)
optimization, which exhibits a good potential to improve energy
efciency of an overall power plant with a reduction in the energy
penalty for CO2 capture from 19.4% to 15.9% (Khalilpour and Abbas,
2011).
In the case of solvents, other methods include the blending
of amines to reduce the regeneration energy compared to MEA
(Idem et al., 2006). According to Sakwattanapong et al. (2005), a
large amount of heat (>80% of heat) is used for water vaporization for MEA solutions, and only approximately 50% of heat is used
for vaporization for blended MEA:MDEA (1:1) solution. Also, CO2
regeneration was improved signicantly by Agars group with specic blended amines such as dipropylamine (DPA) and improved
PCC processes such as a combined improvement for the capture
process and power generation process (Feron, 2010; Zhang et al.,
2012). These measures still have not achieved regeneration energy
of acceptable or theoretical levels (Aroonwilas and Veawab, 2007;
Feron, 2010; Idem et al., 2006; Sakwattanapong et al., 2005; Zhang
et al., 2012). In the case of process conguration optimization, a
number of novel approaches have emerged since 2005 (Aroonwilas
and Veawab, 2007; Gao et al., 2014; Gelowitz et al., 2013a; Rochelle,
2009). These are all aimed at utilizing as much of the external
energy input as possible.
Since high heat duty could also be due to adoption of a design
approach that may lead to inadequate plant size, either in terms of
column height or column diameter or both or the size of parking
element relative to the diameter of the column, attention should
be focused on design assumptions, even of a conventional plant.
In general, most designers focus on the height of column and the
size of packing element relative to column diameter. Very little

attention seems to be directed to the right or effective diameter
of column. The reason appears to be that a ooding percentage
of between 60 and 70% seems to be the acceptable norm to most
designers. However, based on our internal experimental work, it
appears that an appropriate ooding percentage also depends on
the type of solvent used and the CO2 concentration in the inlet gas
stream (University of Regina (UofR) Consortium, 2010). A ooding
percentage less than 50% could be the appropriate value to use for
design. The inappropriate ooding percentage specication may be
the reason why a large number of pilot plant studies do not achieve
the designed heat duty. As such, the observed heat duties relative to
the designed heat duties that should be obtained from the solvent
used are generally not reported. In general, in most of the studies, the capacity of the columns (especially, the absorber column)
is smaller than necessary thereby making it inadequate to achieve
the desired or designed absorber efciency for the designed heat
duty. The implication of inadequate column size is that either the
absorber efciency or heat duty or both will be compromised.
7.2. Novel approaches and future trends
As mentioned previously, signicant progress has been made in
reducing heat duty based on solvent improvement or process optimization or both. However, these measures have still not achieved
regeneration energy that is close to the theoretical level. Heat duty
consists of three parts; namely, chemical energy for CO2 stripping from the amine, sensible heat, and heat of vaporization of
water/amine. Recently, another approach has been reported (Idem
et al., 2011) that has signicantly reduced heat duty. This approach
is based on the use of a solid alkaline catalyst to act as packing in
the absorber and a solid acid catalyst to act as packing in the stripper (Shi et al., 2014). This approach of using a solid acid catalyst
in the stripper has achieved a breakthrough of performing solvent
regeneration at a temperature less than the boiling point of water.
This obviates the need to use steam for solvent regeneration. The
implication is that the heat of evaporation, which constitutes a very
large fraction of the heat of regeneration, is eliminated. According
to Idem et al. (2011), the alkaline catalyst in the absorber accelerates the rate of CO2 absorption in the amine solvent. Thus, the
catalytic amine scrubbing process reduces both the heat duty and
plant size. This catalytic amine-based CO2 capture approach can be
used together with an energy efcient solvent (Shi et al., 2014) as
well as an optimized process conguration. The catalytic approach
could therefore be regarded as the third generation of aminebased post-combustion CO2 capture technology.
Another novel approach in post combustion CO2 capture is
based on the use of enzymes called carbonic anhydrase (Chu, 2009;
Tripp et al., 2001). According to Tashian (1989), carbonic anhydrase is a fast enzyme that can catalyze the hydration of CO2 into
bicarbonate ions and proton at turnover numbers that approach
106 /s. Chu (2009) and Savile and Lalonde (2011) have demonstrated
the potential for enzymatic acceleration of carbon dioxide capture
from combustion ue gas. However, Savile and Lalonde (2011) have
indicated that available carbonic anhydrases are inadequate for
the harsh environment of the post combustion CO2 capture process. In their review, Savile and Lalonde (2011) summarized recent
approaches to improve carbonic anhydrase as well as the processes
that employ the enzyme with the objective of exploiting carbonic
anhydrase as an extremely fast biocatalyst to their maximum the
benets. According to Savile and Lalonde (2011), these approaches
include using thermophilic organisms as the source of CAs, application of protein engineering to produce thermo-tolerant enzymes,
immobilizing the enzyme to stabilize and conne to cooler regions,
and modication of the CO2 capture process such that the thermoand solvent-stress on the enzyme are minimized. Extensive work is
being carried out by a number of groups aimed at perfecting some

of these approaches.
Both these heat duty reduction approaches employ catalysts in
order to accelerate both the absorption of CO2 into the solvent and
desorption of CO2 from the solvent. The use of catalyst thus appears
to be the new trend in amine-based post-combustion CO2 capture process. The application of catalysis in any process is usually
intended to accelerate the rate as well as decrease the activation
energy of the process, the latter of which could result in the use
of a lower process operating temperature. Both approaches are
expected to see extensive research and development work all the
way to demonstration plants in order to perfect the respective processes, and to generate reliable data for design of a commercial
plant. Thus, future trends could see signicantly smaller vessels
and heat duties for post-combustion CO2 capture from combustion
ues using amine-based solvents. These would result in signicantly lowering the cost for post-combustion CO2 capture.
Another approach that could be used to reduce heat duty is
in the use of alternative solvent-based post combustion CO2 capture processes such as amino acid salt, chilled ammonia process
(CAP), phase change solvents, biphasic solvents (for low temperature regeneration), and ionic liquids. All these processes work at
the bench scale, and both CAP and amino acid salts have been tested
at large pilot plant scales. These processes are expected to still do
extensive research and development work all the way to demonstration plants in order to perfect the respective processes, and to
generate reliable data for design of a commercial plant.
8. Conclusions
In this review paper, we have seen the widespread deployment
of pilot and demonstration plants. We have also seen the birth of
a commercial size CO2 capture plant. The research and development work being carried out in these plants have enabled the use
of real conditions and to study their effects on the CO2 capture process. The lessons learned from the pilot and demonstration plants
have been very benecial and have contributed to the continuous
improvement of the amine-based CO2 capture technology. Most
of the lessons are related to emissions, heat duty, plant size, new
solvents, and solvent management. Because the amine-based CO2
capture in power plant is a relatively new industry, measurement
standards involving sampling and analysis of the off-gas, as well as
analysis of the solvent system in use were not in place prior to the
IPCC report. Therefore, the emergence of the demonstration plants
has thrown light on the need for these standards. We have started
to see methods evolving that would allow some sort of standards
to evolve. Specically, sampling techniques are being introduced
aimed at reliably obtaining representative samples from the off-gas
of an amine based CO2 capture plant. Techniques are also evolving
aimed at analysing the obtained samples qualitatively and quantitatively.
The other area that has seen tremendous progress is the heat
duty for solvent regeneration. A number of approaches have been
suggested. Currently, these approaches have focused on the development of energy efcient solvents and process optimization.
Based on these approaches, the heat duty has been brought down
from about 5.01.8 GJ/ton CO2 produced. On this issue, it has been
noticed that even though the solvent used in conjunction with the
process optimization method employed is capable of providing an
acceptable heat duty (i.e., close to 1.8 GJ/ton CO2 produced), the
actual heat duty obtained in pilot and demonstration plants, in most
cases, is higher than expected. It is suggested that more attention be
given to the assumption made in the design, especially as it relates
to the ooding percentage.
23
Catalysis in amine-based post combustion CO2 capture has

become a new trend which may possibly pave the future direction for amine-based post combustion CO2 capture. Solid mineral
catalysts are used in the approach suggested by Idem et al. (2011)
whereas a biocatalyst is employed in the approach by Chu (2009).
The use of catalyst thus appears to be the new trend in amine-based
post-combustion CO2 capture process. The application of catalysis
in any process is usually intended to accelerate the rate as well as
decrease the activation energy of the process, the latter of which
could result in the use of a lower process operating temperature.
Both approaches are expected to see extensive research and development work all the way to demonstration plants in order to perfect
the respective processes, and to generate reliable data for design
of a commercial plant. Thus, future trends could see signicantly
smaller vessels and heat duties for post-combustion CO2 capture
from combustion ues using amine-based solvents. These would
result in signicantly lowering the cost for post-combustion CO2
capture. More activity at pilot plant and large demonstration scale
plants on the use of amino acid salts, chilled ammonia process
(CAP), phase change solvents, biphasic solvents and ionic liquids
are expected, which may help enhance the performance of these
alternative post combustion capture processes.
References
Abu-Zahra, M.R.M., Abbas, Z., Singh, P., Feron, P., 2013. Carbon dioxide
post-combustion capture: solvent technologies overview, status and future
directions. In: A chapter in an Energy Book Series 1 titled Materials and
Processes for Energy: Communicating Current Research and Technological
Developments. Formatex Research Center, Badajoz, Spain.
Aker, Aker Clean Carbon, 2015. <https://akersolutions.com/Global/PandC/
Energy%20and%20Environmental%20images/Environmental/AkerCleanCarbon.
pdf/>.
Aronu, U.E., Ciftja, A.F., Kim, I., Hartono, A., 2013. Understanding precipitation in
amino acid salt systems at process conditions. Energy Proc. 37, 233240.
Aroonwilas, A., Veawab, A., 2007. Integration of CO2 capture unit using single- and
blended-amines into supercritical coal-red power plants: implications for
emission and energy management. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 1, 143150.
Aas, N., da Silva, E., 2015. Emission measurements at Dongs pilot plant for CO2
capture in Esbjerg: EU Project CESAR. Statoil and SINTEF. IEAGHG Document.
Azzi, M., Tibbett, A., Halliburton, B., Element, A., Artanto, Y., Meuleman, E., Feron,
P., 2014. Assessing Atmospheric Emissions from Amine-based CO2
Post-combustion Capture Processes and their Impacts on the Environment A
Case Study: Volume 1 Measurement of Emissions from a
Monoethanolamine-Based Post-Combustion CO2Capture Pilot Plant. A report
prepared by CSIRO for Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute (Global CCS
Institute).
Barchas, R., Davis, R., 1992. The KerrMcGee/ABB lummus crest technology for the
recovery of CO2 from stack gases. Energy Convers. Manage. 33, 333340.
BD3, SASKPOWER CCS, 2015. <http://saskpowerccs.com/tour/>.
Bougie, F., Iliuta, M.C., 2014. Stability of aqueous amine solutions to thermal and
oxidative degradation in the absence and the presence of CO2 . Int. J.
Greenhouse Gas Control 29, 1621.
Bouillon, P.A., Lemaire, E., Mangiaracina, A., Tabasso, C., 2010. First results of the
2.25 ton/h post-combustion CO2 capture pilot plant of ENEL at the Brindisi coal
power plant with MEA from 20 to 40 wt% and HiCapt+TM process. In: Paper
Presented at 1st Post Combustion Capture Conference, UAE, May 17.
Brigman, N., Shah, M.I., Falk-Pedersen, O., Cents, T., Smith, V., De Cazenove, T.,
Morken, A.K., Hvidsten, O.A., Chhaganlal, M., Feste, J.K., Lombardo, G., Bade,
O.M., Knudsen, J., Subramoney, S.C., Fosts, B.F., de Koeijer, G., Hamborg, E.,
2014. Results of amine plant operations from 30 wt% and 40 wt% aqueous MEA
testing at the CO2 technology centre Mongstad. Energy Proc. 63, 60126022.
Cansolv, 2014. Shell Cansolvs CO2 Capture Technology: Achievement from First
Commercial Plant. GHGT-12, October, 9th, Austin, Texas, USA.
Cansolv, 2015. The CANSOLV CO2 Capture System, <http://www.shell.com/global/
products-services/solutions-for-businesses/globalsolutions/shell-cansolv/
shell-cansolv-solutions/co2-capture.html/>.
Chapel, D., Ernest, J., Mariz, C., 1999. Recovery of CO2 from Flue gases: commercial
trends, paper No. 340. In: The Canadian Society of Chemical Engineers annual
meeting, October 46, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Chu, S., 2009. Carbon capture and sequestration. Science 325, 1599.
CSIRO, 2013. Post Combustion Capture, in Pilot-scale Achievements. CSIRO.
da Silva, E.F., Hoff, K.A., Booth, A., 2013. Emissions from CO2 capture plants; an
overview. Energy Proc. 37, 784790.
de Koeijer, G., Enge, Y., Sanden, K., Graff, O.F., Falk-Pedersen, O., Amundsen, T.,
Over, S., 2011. CO2 Technology Centre Mongstad-Design, functionality and
emissions of the amine plant. Energy Proc. 4, 12071213.
24
De Vroey, S., Huynh, H., Lepaumier, H., Absil, P., Thielens, M.-L., 2013. Corrosion
investigations in 2-ethanolamine based post-combustion CO2 capture pilot
plants. Energy Proc. 37, 20472057.
Dugas, E.R., 2006. Pilot plant study of carbon dioxide capture by aqueous
monoethanolamine, MSc Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, MSc Thesis,
University of Texas at Austin, USA, 2006. (The Rochelle lab, the University of
Texas at Austin, CO2 capture, <http://www.che.utexas.edu/rochelle group/
Pubs/Dugas DOE 2006.pdf/>.
Einbu, A., Ciftja, A.F., Grimstvedt, A., Zakeri, A., Svendsen, H.F., 2012. Online
analysis of amine concentration and CO2 loading in MEA solutions by ATR-FTIR
spectroscopy. Energy Proc. 23, 5563.
Elgarni, M., Aboudheir, A., 2011. Design of commercial post combustion CO2
capture plant using pilot plant scale-up approach. In: Paper Presented at 1st
Post Combustion Capture Conference, UAE, May 17.
Elmoudir, W., Fairchild, J., Aboudheir, A., 2014. HTC solvent reclaimer system at
searles valley minerals facility in Trona, California. In: 12th International
Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-12), Austin,
Texas, U.S. October.
Eswaran, S., Wu, S., Kikkawa, H., Heberle, A., 2011. Recent development of Hitachis
advanced amine-based post-combustion CO2 capture technology. Paper
Presented at Power-Gen.
Falk-Pedersen, O., Cents, T., Smith, V, Morken, A.K., Shah, M.I., Bade, O., Knudsen, J.,
Subramoney, S.C., Fosts, B., de Keoijer, G., Hamborg, E.S., 2014. Results of
amine plant operations from 30 wt% and 40 wt% aqueous MEA testing at the
CO2 Technology Centre Mongstad. In: 12th International Conference on
Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT -12), Austin, Texas, U.S October.
Feron, P.H.M., 2010. Exploring the potential for improvement of the energy
performance of coal red power plants with post-combustion capture of
carbon dioxide. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 4, 152160.
Feron, P., Hooper, B., Attalla, M., Dave, N., Kentish, S., Stevens, G., Wardhaugh, L.,
Webley, P., 2009. Research Opportunities in Post Combustion CO2Capture.
CSIRO, CO2CRC. Ferrybridge, post-combustion project, <http://www.zeroco2
no/projects/sse-2013-ferrybridge-post-combustion-project/>.
Fitzgerald, F.D., Hume, S.A., McGough, G., Damen, K., 2014a. Ferrybridge
CCPilot100+ operating experience and nal test results. Energy Proc. 63,
62396251.
Fitzgerald, F.D., Hume, S.A., McGough, G., Damen, K., 2014b. Ferrybridge
CCPilot100+ operating experience and nal test results. In: 12th International
Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-12), Austin,
Texas, U.S. October.
Fujita, K., Muraoka, D., Ogawa, T., Kitamura, H., Suzuki, K., Saito, S., 2013.
Evaluation of amine emissions from the post-combustion CO2 capture pilot
plant. Energy Proc. 37, 727734.
Gao, H., Zhou, L., Liang, Z., Idem, R.O., Fu, K., Sema, T., Tontiwachwuthikul, P., 2014.
Comparative studies of heat duty and total equivalent work of a new heat
pump distillation with split ow process, conventional split ow process, and
conventional baseline process for CO2 capture using monoethanolamine. Int. J.
Gelowitz, D., Idem, R., Tontiwachwuthikul, P., 2013. Method and absorbent
composition for recovering a gaseous component from a gas stream. US
Patents. US 8388737 B2.
Gelowitz, D., Supap, T., Abdulaziz, N., Sema, T., Shi, H., Wattanaphan, P., Idem, R.,
Tontiwachwuthikul, P., 2013. Post-combustion CO2 capture: benets and
future trends in pilot plant studies in Recent Progress and New Developments
in Post-Combustion Carbon Capture Technology with Reactive Solvents (Eds.
Tontiwachwuthikul, P. and Idem, R.). Future Science, London, United Kingdom.
Gorset, O., Nygaard Knudsen, J., Morten Bade, O., Askestad, I., 2014a. Results from
testing of aker solutions advanced amine solvents at CO2 technology centre
Mongstad. Energy Proc. 63, 62676280.
Gorset, O., Knudsen, J.N., Bade, O.M., Askestad, I., Woodhouse, S., Hamborg, E.S.,
2014b. Results from testing of aker solutions advanced amine solvents at CO2
technology centre Mongstad. In: 12th International Conference on Greenhouse
Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-12), Austin, Texas, U.S. October.
Hamborg, E., Smith, V., Cents, T., Brigman, N., Falk- Pedersen, O., De Cazenovea, T.,
Chhaganlal, M., Feste, J.K., Ullestad, O., Ulvatn, H., Gorset, O., Askestad, I., Gram,
L.K., Fosts, B.F., Shah, M.I., Maxson, A., Thimsen, D., 2014a. Results from MEA
testing at the CO2 technology centre Mongstad. Part II: verication of baseline
results. Energy Proc. 63, 59946011.
Hamborg, E.S., Smith, V., Cents, T., Falk-Pedersen, O., Fosts, B., Shah, M.I., Gorset,
O., Askestad, I., Gram, L.R., Maxson, A., Thimsen, D., 2014b. Results from MEA
testing at the CO2 technology centre Mongstad. Part II: verication of baseline
results. In: 12th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control
Technologies (GHGT-12), Austin, Texas, U.S. October.
Herzog, H., Meldon, J., Hatton, A., 2009. Advanced post-combustion CO2 capture.
Clean Air Task Force.
Hook, R.J., 1997. An investigation of some sterically hindered amines as potential
carbon dioxide scrubbing compounds. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 36, 17791790.
HTC Purenergy, Product Offering Purenergy CCS Capture SystemTM , 2015.
<http://www.htcenergy.com/co2CaptureBusiness/ccs1000 htm/>.
Idem, R., Shi, H., Gelowitz, D., Tontiwachwuthikul, P., 2011. Catalytic method and
apparatus for separating a gas component from an incoming gas stream. WO
Patent 2011/12013821.
Idem, R., Wilson, M., Tontiwachwuthikul, P., Chakma, A., Veawab, A., Aroonwilas,
A., Gelowitz, D., 2006. Pilot plant studies of the CO2 capture performance of
aqueous MEA and mixed MEA/MDEA solvents at the University of Regina CO2
capture technology development plant and the Boundary Dam CO2 capture
demonstration. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45, 24142420.
Imai, N., Mitchell, R., 2008. MHIs Experience in Post Combustion CO2 Capture: An
Effective Means to Counter Anthropogenic Global Warming. In: Forum, S.R.E.
(Ed.). Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd., Oslo, Norway.
IPCC, 2005. IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage, A Special
Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
<http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srccs/srccs wholereport.pdf/>.
Journal, C.C., 2009. Alstom and Dow open CO2 Capture Pilot Plant.
Khakharia, P., 2015. Aerosol-based emission, solvent degradation, and corrosion in
post combustion CO2 Capture. In: M. Sc. Thesis. Delft University of Technology,
The Netherlands.
Khakharia, P., Kvamsdal, H.M., da Silva, E.F., Vlugt, T.J.H., Goetheer, E., 2014a. Field
study of a Brownian Demister unit to reduce aerosol based emission from a
post combustion CO2 capture plant. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 28, 5764.
Khakharia, P., Mertens, J., Vlugt, T.J.H., Goetheer, E., 2014b. Predicting aerosol based
emissions in a post combustion CO2 capture process using an aspen plus
model. Energy Proc. 63, 911925.
Khakharia, P., Mertens, J., Huizinga, A., De Vroey, S., Sanchez, E.F., Srinivasan, S.,
Vlugt, T.J.H., Goetheer, E., 2015. Online Corrosion Monitoring in a
Postcombustion CO2 capture pilot plant and its relation to solvent degradation
and ammonia emissions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Web Publication Date: 20 Apr
2015.
Khalilpour, R., Abbas, A., 2011. HEN optimization for efcient retrotting of
coal-red power plants with post-combustion carbon capture. Int. J.
Kikkawa, H., et al. 2010. Hitachis Carbon Dioxide Scrubbing Technology with New
Absorbent for Coal-red Power Plants. HITACHI.
Kittel, J., Idem, R., Gelowitz, D., Tontiwachwuthikul, P., Parrain, G., Bonneau, A.,
2009. Corrosion in MEA units for CO2 capture pilot plant studies. Energy Proc.
1, 791797.
Knudsen, J.N., 2015. SOLVit phase 3 solvents from Laboratory to Industrial
Deployment. In: Paper presented at CLIMIT SUMMIT, February 2425.
Kozak, F., Telikapalli, V., Hiwale, R., Bollinger, R., 2011. CCS Project: CHilled
ammonia process at the AEP mountaineer plant. In: Paper Present at Co-Gen
Conference & Exhibition, August 1719, Ohio, USA.
Liang, Z., Rongwong, W., Liu, H., Fu, K., Gao, H., Fan, C., Zhang, R., Sema, T., Henni, A.,
Sumon, K., Nath, D., Gelowitz, G., Srisang, W., Saiwan, C., Benamor, A., Al-Marri,
M., Shi, H., Supap, T., Chan, C., Zhou, Q., Abu-Zahra, M., Wilson, M., Idem, R.,
Tontiwachwuthikul, P., 2015. Recent progress and new developments in
post-combustion carbon-capture technology with reactive solvents, IJGGC, In
Press, 2015.
Lombardo, G., Agarwal, R., Askander, J., 2014. Chilled ammonia process at
technology center mongstad-rst Results. Energy Proc. 51, 3139.
London, I.C., 2012 Students Take Control of Four Storey Carbon Capture Pilot Plant
in the Heart of a University Campus. London, UK.
Luo, X., Knudsen, J.N., de Montigny, D., Sanpasertparnich, T., Idem, R., Gelowitz, D.,
Notz, R., Hoch, S., Hasse, H., Lemaire, E., Alix, P., Tobiesen, F.A., Juliussen, O.,
Kpcke, M., Svendsen, H.F., 2009. Comparison and validation of simulation
codes against sixteen sets of data from four different pilot plants. Energy Proc.
1, 12491256.
Majchrowicz, M.E., (Wim), Brilman D.W.F, Groeneveld, M.J., 2009. Precipitation
regime for selected amino acid salts for CO2 capture from ue gases. Energy 1,
979984.
Matts, D., 2012. Aberthaw Carbon Capture Pilot Scale Demonstration, NPower.
Journal, C.C., 2009. Alstom and Dow open CO2 Capture Pilot Plant.
Maxson, A., Thimsen, D., Smith, V., Cents, T., Falk-Pedersen, O., Gorset, O.,
Hamborg, E.S., 2014. Results from MEA testing at the CO2 Technology Centre
Mongstad. Part I: post-combustion CO2 capture testing methodology. In: 12th
International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-12),
Austin, Texas, U.S. October.
Mertens, J., Knudsen, J., Thielens, M.-L., Andersen, J., 2012. On-line monitoring and
controlling emissions in amine post combustion carbon capture: a eld test.
Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 6, 211.
Mertens, J., Lepaumier, H., Desagher, D., Thielens, M.-L., 2013. Understanding
ethanolamine (MEA) and ammonia emissions from amine based post
combustion carbon capture: Lessons learned from eld tests. Int. J. Greenhouse
Gas Control 13, 7277.
Mimura, T., Nojo, T., Iijima, M., Yoshiyama, T., Tanaka, H., 2003. Recent
developments in ue gas CO2 recovery technology. Greenhouse Gas Control
Technologies, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Greenhouse
Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-6), 14 Oct. 2002, Kyoto, Japan, J. Gale and Y.
Kaya (Eds.), Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, UK.
Mimura, T., Satsumi, S., Iijima, M., Mitsuoka, S., 1999. Development on energy
saving technology for ue gas carbon dioxide recovery by the chemical
absorption method and steam system in power plant. In: Riemer, B. (Ed.),
Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. Elsevier Science Ltd., United Kingdom,
pp. 7176.
MIT, 2013. Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in E.ON
Karlshamn Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project.
MIT, 2013. Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in Berger Project
Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project.
MIT, 2013. Carbon Capture & Sequestration Technologies @ MIT, in Plant Barry Fact
Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project.
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. 2012. MHI, KM CDR Process, in R and D, Pilot
Plant and Engineering Head Quarters.

Monea, M., 2014. Boundary Dam The Future is Here. GHGT-12, October, 7th,
Austin, Texas, USA, http://www.ghgt.info/docs/GHGT12/Presentations/IEA GHG CONFERENCE no video.pdf/>
Mongstad, CO2 Technology Centre Monstad, 2015. http://www.tcmda.com/en
Morken, A.K., Nenseter, B., Pedersen, S., Chhaganlal, M., Feste, J.K., Tyborgnes, R.B.,
Ullestad, ., Ulvatn, H., Zhu, L., Mikoviny, T., Wisthaler, A., Cents, T., Bade, .M.,
Knudsen, J., de Koeijer, G., Falk-Pedersen, ., Hamborg, E.S., 2014a. Emission
results of amine plant operations from MEA testing at the CO2 Technology
Centre Mongstad. Energy Proc. 63, 60236038.
Morken, A.K., Ullestad , Feste, J.K., Tyborgnes, R.B., Ibsen, M.W., Nenseter, B.,
Cents, T., Zhu, L., Mikoviny, T., Wisthaler, A., Bade, O., Knudsen, J., Hamborg,
E.S., 2014b. Emission results of amine plant operations from MEA testing at the
CO2 Technology Centre Mongstad. In: 12th International Conference on
Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-12), Austin, Texas, U.S. October.
Moser, P., Schmidt, S., Uerlings, R., Sieder, G., Titz, J.-T., Hahn, A., Stoffregen, T.,
2011. Material testing for future commercial post-combustion capture
plants-results of the testing programme conducted at the Niederaussem pilot
plant. Energy Proc. 4, 13171322.
Nielsen, P.T., Li, L., Rochelle, G.T., 2013. Piperazine degradation in pilot plants.
Energy Proc. 37, 19121923.
NIOSH, 1994. Aminoethanol Compounds II: Method 3509., Manual of Analytical
Methods (NMAM), 4th ed.
PCCCS, 2015. Large demonstration post-combustion carbon capture and storage
(PCCCS), https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/index pilots html.
Pouryouse, F., 2015. Development of on-line analytical technique for
determination of composition of CO2 -loaded formulated amine solvents based
on the liquid thermophysical properties for a post-combustion CO2 capture
process. In: PhD Thesis. University of Regina, Canada.
Pouryouse, F., Idem, R.O., 2008. New analytical technique for carbon dioxide
absorption solvents. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47, 12681276.
Rabensteiner, M., Ringer, G., Koller, M., Gronald, G., Unterberger, S., Hochenauer, C.,
2014. INvestigation of the suitability of aqueous sodium glycinate as a solvent
for post combustion carbon dioxide capture on the basis of pilot plant studies
and screening Methods. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 29, 115.
Rey, A., Gouedard, C., Ledirac, N., Cohen, M., Dugay, J., Vial, J., Pichon, V., Bertomeu,
L., Picq, D., Bontemps, D., Chopin, F., Carrette, P.L., 2013. Amine degradation in
CO2 capture. 2. New degradation products of MEA. Pyrazine and
alkylpyrazines: analysis, mechanism of formation and toxicity. Int. J. Greenh.
Gas Control 19, 576583.
Rochelle, G.T., 2009. Amine scrubbing for CO2 capture. Science 325, 16521654.
Rochelle, G.T., Chen, E., Dombrowski, K., Sexton, A., Lani, B., 2014. Pilot plant
testing of piperazine (PZ) with high T regeneration. In: Paper presented at
GHGT12, Austin, Texaz, USA, October 59.
Sanchez-Fernandez, E., Heffernan, K., van der Ham, L., Linders, M.J.G., Goetheer,
E.L.V., Vlugt, T.J.H., 2014. PRecipitating amino acid solvents for CO2 capture.
Opportunities to reduce costs in post combustion capture. Energy Proc. 63,
727738.
Sakwattanapong, R., Aroonwilas, A., Veawab, A., 2005. Behavior of reboiler heat
duty for CO2 capture plants using regenerable single and blended
alkanolamines. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44, 44654473.
Sander, M.T., Mariz, C.L., 1992. The Fluor Daniel econamine FG process: Past
experience and present day focus. Energy Convers. Manage. 33, 341348.
Savile, C.K., Lalonde, J.J., 2011. Biotechnology for the acceleration of carbon dioxide
capture and sequestration. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 22, 818823.
Schneider, R., Schramm, H., 2011. Environmentally Friendly and Economic Carbon
Capture from Power Plant Flue Gases: The SIEMENS PostCap Technology. Paper
presented at The 1st Post Combustion Capture Conference. United Arab
Emirates. May 17-19.
Shi, H.C., Naami, A., Idem, R., Tontiwachwuthikul, P., 2014. Catalytic and non
catalytic solvent regeneration during absorption-based CO2 capture with
single and blended reactive amine solvents. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 26,
3950.
Siemens. 2011. Siemens Carbon Capture Technology. Siemens Energy Sector.
SINTEF. 2013. CO2 Capture Laboratory, in Industrial scale: Develop Capture
Chemicals of tomorrow. SINTEF.
SINTEF Materials and Chemicals, 2012. SINTEF Report: H&ETQP Amine1Call-Off 2:
Verify Manual Sampling Procedures.
25
Stanwell. 2012. Post-Combustion Capture Pilot Plant. Stanwell.

Stoffregen, T., Rigby, S., Jovanovic, S., Krishnamurthy. K. 2014. Pilot plant
demonstration of an advanced amine-based post-combustion capture
technology for CO2 capture from power plant ue gases Paper presented at
GHGT12, Austin, Texax, USA October 5-9.
Suzuki, K. 2012. Toshibas Activity in Clean Coal and Carbon Capture Technology for
Thermal Power Plants. PEC Clean Fossil Energy Technical and Policy Seminar.
Tashian, R.E., 1989. The carbonic anhydrases: Widening perspectives on their
evolution, expression and function. Bioessays 10, 186192.
Telikapalli, V., Kozak, F., Leandri, J.F., Sherrick, B., Black, J., Muraskin, D., Cage, M.,
Hammond, M., Spitznogle, G. 2011. CCS with the Alstom Chilled Ammonia
Process Development Program Field Pilot Results. Energy Procedia. 4,
273281.
Tripp, B.C., Smith, K., Ferry, J.G., 2001. Carbonic Anhydrase: New Insights for an
Ancient Enzyme. Journal of Biological Chemistry 276, 4861548618.
University of Regina (UofR) Consortium, Final Report, 2010.
USEPA, 2015a. Method 1: Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources. US
Environmental Protection Agency USA.
USEPA, 2015b. Method 2: Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric
Flow Rate (Type S Pitot Tube). US Environmental Protection Agency. USA.
USEPA, 2015c. Method 3: Gas Analysis for the Determination of Dry Molecular
Weight. US Environmental Protection Agency. USA.
USEPA, 2015d. Method 4: Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases. US
Environmental Protection Agency. USA.
USEPA, 2015e. Method 5: Determination of Particulate Matter Emissions from
Stationary Sources. US Environmental Protection Agency. USA.
USEPA, 2015f. Method 6: Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions from
USEPA, 2015g. Method 7: Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from
USEPA, 2015h. Method 8: Determination of Sulfuric Acid and Sulfur Dioxide
Emissions from Stationary Sources. US Environmental Protection Agency. USA.
van der Ham, L.V., van Eckeveld, A.C., Goetheer, E.L.V., 2014. Online monitoring of
Dissolved CO2 and MEA concentrations: effect of solvent degradation on
predictive accuracy. Energy Proc. 63, 12231228.
van Eckeveld, A.C., van der Ham, L.V., Geers, L.F.G., van den Broeke, L.J.P., Boersma,
B.J., Goetheer, E.L.V., 2014. Online monitoring of the solvent and absorbed acid
gas concentration in a CO2 capture process using monoethanolamine. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 53, 55155523.
Vevelstad, S.J., Grimstvedt, A., Einbu, A., Knuutila, H., da Silva, E.F., Svendsen, H.F.,
2013a. Oxidative degradation of amines using a closed batch system. Int. J.
Vevelstad, S.J., Grimstvedt, A., Elnan, J., da Silva, E.F., Svendsen, H.F., 2013b.
Oxidative degradation of 2-ethanolamine: the effect of oxygen concentration
and temperature on product formation. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 18,
88100.
Vevelstad, S.J., Grimstvedt, A., Knuutila, H., da Silva, E.F., Svendsen, H.F., 2014.
Inuence of experimental setup on amine degradation. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas
Control 28, 156167.
Wang, M., Lawal, A., Stephenson, P., Sidders, J., 2011. Post-combustion CO2 capture
with chemical absorption: a state-of-the-art review. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 89,
16091624.
Wardhaugh, L. 2010. CSIRO Post-Combustion Capture Research Latest
developments and the next steps in NSW. CSIRO.
Wauschkuhn, A., Unterberger, S., 2011. Post combustion capture R&D as part of a
utilitys strategy for CCS. In: Paper Presented at 1st Post Combustion Capture
Conference, UAE, May 17.
Wu, S., Bergins, C., Kikkawa, H., Kobayashi, H., Kawasaki, T., 2010. Technology
options for clean coal power generation with CO2 capture. In: Paper presented
at XXI World Energy Congress, WorldEnergy: Montreal, Canada.
Yu, H., Morgan, S., Allport, A., Cottrell, A., Do, T., McGregor, J., Feron, P., 2011.
Results from trialling aqueous ammonia based post combustion capture in a
pilot plant at Munmorah. Energy Proc. 4, 12941302.
Zhang, J., Qiao, Y., Agar, D.W., 2012. Intensication of low temperature
thermomorphic biphasic amine solvent regeneration for CO2 capture. Chem.
Eng. Res. Des. 90, 743749.

Practical Experience in Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Using Reactive Solvents in Large Pilot and Demonstration Plants

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Practical Experience in Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Using Reactive Solvents in Large Pilot and Demonstration Plants

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

Practical experience in post-combustion CO2 capture using reactive

Corresponding author. Fax: +1 306 585 4855.

R. Idem et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625

then to pilot plant and demonstration plant studies to a full blown

R. Idem et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625

3.2.2. University of Regina CO2 capture technology development

3.2.3. Boundary dam (BD) eld demonstration plant

C2P3 University of Texas

MEA and 2 variants of PZ-Promoted K2 CO3

Wang et al. (2011)

MEA and MEA/MDEA

Wang et al. (2011)

Wang et al. (2011)

30 Wt% MEA, CASTOR-1 and CASTOR-2,

Wang et al. (2011)

Wang et al. (2011) and Mitsubishi Heavy

MHI-KEPCP Kansai power

and other solvents

KM-CDR Process with KS-1 solvent

Wang et al. (2011) and Mitsubishi Heavy

Proprietary advance amine technology

Amino acid salt

Stanwell (2012) and CSIRO (2013)

Amine based solvents

CSIRO (2013) and Wardhaugh (2010)

CSIRO (2013); and Wardhaugh (2010)

Amine based solvents including MEA

CSIRO (2013) and Wardhaugh (2010)

Wauschkuhn and Unterberger (2011))

Amine based Toshiba solvent

MEA and Proprietary solvents including H3

R. Idem et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625

Kikkawa et al. (2010)

Babcock-Hitachi Kure Research

Amine solvents developed by Hitachi

Feron et al. (2009) and Eswaran et al. (2011)

Amine acid salt

Feron et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009)

UCARSOLTM FGC 3000 (DOW solvent) using

2004-Currently not operational

Herzog et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009)

Feron et al. (2009)

MEA solvent, RS-2 solvent

Elgarni and Aboudheir (2011)

Proprietary ECO2 solvent

R. Idem et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625

Korean Institute of Energy

R. Idem et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 40 (2015) 625

Pleasant Prairie, Alstom, WI, USA

Alstom amine & chilled ammonia

Large demonstration PCCC projects operating

Natural Gas Processing

Plant Barry, Southern

KEPCO wet amine