Paul H.M.

Feron
European CO
2
Capture and Storage Conference
Towards Zero Emission Power Plants
Brussels 13-15 April 2005
Progress in post-combustion
CO
2
capture
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 2
Presentation Overview
CO
2
capture technologies
Post-combustion capture: State of the art
Solvent technologies
Performances
Post-combustion capture: Advanced processes
Improved solvent technologies
Other processes
Link to Hypogen
Conclusions
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 3
What are challenges for CO
2
capture?
Capture of CO
2
can be done with technologies presently
available but:
Power generation costs will increase
More fossil fuel needed for same power generation
capacity
Increased reliance on fossil fuels on top of the existing
upward trend; increasing the supply security concerns
There is no experience with CO
2
capture at the power
plant scale
Therefore the following questions need to be addressed:
How to reduce the additional power consumption as a
result of the capture process?
How to reduce the costs of the capture?
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 4
Decarbonisation routes for power plants
air
separation
energy
conversion
air
fuel
N
2
CO
2
power O
2
fuel
conversion
CO
2
separation
air
fuel
power
flue gas
energy
conversion
H
2
air
CO
2
energy
conversion
CO
2
separation
air
fuel
power CO
2
flue gas
Post-combustion
Pre-combustion
Denitrogenation
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 5
CO
2
-capture classification
By process:
Post-combustion decarbonisation
(conventional power plants)
Pre-combustion decarbonisation
(new power plants)
Denitrogenation
(new power plants)
By technology platform/component:
Membranes
Absorption
Adsorption
Cryogenics
Carbon extraction
Biotechnology
Energy conversion
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 6
The CO
2
Capture toolkit: A portfolio approach
Combustion in
O
2
/CO
2
/H
2
O
atmosphere
Hydrogen combustion Novel power cycles
E-Conversion
Biomimetic
approaches
High pressure applications Algae production
Biomimetic approaches
Biotechnology
n.a. Direct decarbonisation n.a.
Carbon extraction
O
2
/N
2
absorbent New solvents
Contactors
Process design
New solvents
Contactors
Process design
Solvents
O
2
/N
2
adsorbents
High T adsorbents
Dolomite
Zirconates
Lime carbonation
Sorbents
Distillation for air
separation
CO
2
/H
2
separations Liquefaction
Cryogenic
O
2
-conducting
membranes
CO
2
/H
2
-separation: Ceramic,
polymeric, palladium,
membrane absorption
Membrane absorption,
polymeric, ceramic, FT, carbon
membranes
Membranes
Denitrogenation Pre-combustion
processes
Post-combustion
processes
Capture method
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 7
Leading technologies for CO
2
capture
(IEA GHG R&D programme - 2000)
Coal fired power stations
Base case: Pulverised coal fired power station
Post-combustion capture: 47 $/tonne CO
2
Pre-combustion capture: 54 $/tonne CO
2
Gas fired power stations
Base case: Natural gas fired combined cycle
Post-combustion capture: 32 $/tonne CO
2
Pre-combustion capture: 39 $/tonne CO
2
Conclusion: There is no clear winning CO
2
capture
technology
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 8
Solvent process flow sheet
Absorber Regenerator
Heat exchanger
Condenser
Flue gas out
Flue gas in
Reboiler
Cooler
CO
2
out
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 9
State of the art post-combustion CO
2
-capture
State of the art = Amine based absorption processes:
Fluor Daniel Econamine FG
SM
30% MEA solution incorporating additives to control corrosion and
(oxidative and thermal) degradation
> 20 commercial plants in sizes between 0.2 and 15 tonnes CO
2
/h
ABB-Lummus
15-20% MEA solution
4 commercial plants in size between 6 and 32 tonnes CO
2
/h
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
KS-1 sterically hindered amines
1 commercial plant: 9 tonne CO
2
/h
CANSOLV
Mixture of amines no commercial plant
Praxair
Mixture of amines no commercial plant
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 10
Advantages post-combustion capture
Add-on to existing power plants and plant concepts
Capture technologies available, i.e. solvent
technologies, which are proven on a smaller scale
Similarities with cogeneration plant lead to proven
methods for integration
Flexibility in switching between capture no capture
Learning by doing will lead to cost reductions similar
to experience with SO
2
capture process development
Learning by searching will lead to better solvents and
processes
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 11
Energy requirements for post-combustion
CO
2
capture using solvent processes
Thermal energy
Regeneration of solvents; Extracted from steam cycle in power plant:
Sum of solvent heating, desorption enthalpy and reflux ratio
Impact on energy requirements determined by solvent properties,
process design and integration into power plant
Electricity
Flue gas fans:
Higher CO
2
-content in flue gas reduces specific power
consumption
Solvent pumps, cooling water pumps:
Higher CO
2
-loading of solvent reduces specific power
consumption
CO
2
compressor:
Specific power consumption determined by pressure ratio
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 12
Thermal energy requirement for solvent
processes
Specific thermal energy requirement
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 50 100 150 200
Cyclic loading [tonne CO
2
/1000 m
3
solvent]
R
e
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

e
n
e
r
g
y


[
G
J
/
t
o
n
n
e

C
O
2
]
Hc
R=0.4
R=0.8
R=1.2
5 M MEA
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 13
Post-combustion capture process performances:
Past, present and future
0.196 kWh/kg CO
2
0.306 kWh/kg CO
2
0.446 kWh/kg CO
2
Total
0.103 kWh/kg CO
2
0.108 kWh/kg CO
2
0.114 kWh/kg CO
2
CO
2
compressor
0.010 kWh/kg CO
2
0.020 kWh/kg CO
2
0.040 kWh/kg CO
2
Power for capture
0.083 kWh/kg CO
2
(0.15)
0.178 kWh/kg CO
2
(0.20)
0.292 kWh/kg CO
2
(0.25)
Power equivalent
(Factor used)
2.0 GJ/tonne CO
2
3.2 GJ/tonne CO
2
4.2 GJ/tonne CO
2
Thermal energy
2015 2005 1995 Year
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 14
Post-combustion capture in a coal fired power plant
(Emission factor: 0.1 tonne CO
2
/GJ)
82 kg CO
2
/MWh 103 kg CO
2
/MWh 141 kg CO
2
/MWh Emission with
90% capture
43.6 % 35.1 % 25.5 % Plant efficiency
with 90% capture
0.196 kWh/kg CO
2
0.306 kWh/kg CO
2
0.446 kWh/kg CO
2
Power loss due to
capture
720 kg CO
2
/MWh 800 kg CO
2
/MWh 900 kg CO
2
/MWh Base plant
emission
50 % 45 % 40 % Base plant
efficiency
2015 2005 1995 Year
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 15
Development of capture technology hand in hand
with generation efficiency improvements
CO
2
Emmision vs generation efficiency
coal fired power plant
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
0,25 0,35 0,45 0,55 0,65 0,75
Efficiency [-]
C
O
2
-
e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s

[
k
g
/
k
W
h
]
No capture
Max. efficiency
With capture
2015
1995
2005
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 16
Issues for post-combustion CO
2
-capture
Solvent technologies are leading option but:
Power cost increases >50%
Generation efficiency decreases by 15 25%
Solvent process break-throughs required
Energy consumption
Reaction rates
Contactor improvements
Liquid capacities
Chemical stability/corrosion
Desorption process improvements
Hence cost reductions
Integration with power plant
Heat integration with other process plant, particularly in relation to
desorption process
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 17
CASTOR
CASTOR
CO
CO
2 2
, from Capture to Storage
, from Capture to Storage
a European Integrated Project
a European Integrated Project
(IFP
(IFP

Project Coordinator)
Project Coordinator)
Castor
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 18
Consortium participants
R&D
IFP (FR)
TNO (NL)
SINTEF (NO)
NTNU (NO)
BGS (UK)
BGR (DE)
BRGM (FR)
GEUS (DK)
IMPERIAL (UK)
OGS (IT)
TWENTE U. (NL)
STUTTGARTT U. (DE)
Oil & Gas
STATOIL (NO)
GDF (FR)
REPSOL (SP)
ENITecnologie (IT)
ROHOEL (AT)
Power Companies
VATTENFALL (SE)
ELSAM (DK)
ENERGI E2 (DK)
RWE (DE)
PPC (GR)
POWERGEN (UK)
Manufacturers
ALSTOM POWER (FR)
MITSUI BABCOCK (UK)
SIEMENS (DE)
BASF (DE)
GVS (IT)
Co-ordinator: IFP
Chair of the Executive Board: Statoil
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 19
CASTOR main components
SP1 Strategy for CO
2
Reduction
WP1.1 Development of CO
2
reduction strategies
WP1.2 Geological storage
options for CO
2
reduction
strategy
SP2 CO
2
Post-Combustion
Capture
WP2.1 Evaluation, optimisation
& integration of post-combustion
capture processes
WP2.2 Solvent development
WP2.3 Development of membrane
based solvent processes
WP2.4 Advanced processes
WP2.5 Process validation in
pilot plant
SP3 CO
2
storage
performance
& risk assessment
studies
WP3.1 Field case "Casablanca"
WP3.2 Field case "Lindach"
WP3.3 Field case "K13b"
WP3.4 Field case "Snohvit"
WP3.5 Preventive & corrective
actions
WP3.6 Criteria for site
selection and
site management
Budget: 0,9 NC
Budget: 10,3 NC
Budget: 3,8 NC
Management
Dissemination
WP0.1 Project Management
WP0.2 Dissemination & Training
Budget: 0,75 NC
20
Current costs
contribution
Cost
contribution by
advanced
process
Effected by
Investment costs
Absorber 25 % 10 15% Compact contactor
Simplified cost-optimised contactors
Membrane contactors
Rest of equipment
(desorber, heat
exchangers)
25 % 10 15 % Halving of solvent flow rate
Optimised operational conditions for
advanced solvents
Total investment 50 % 20 30 %
Operational costs
Thermal energy 25% 10 15 % Halving of energy consumption through use of
advanced solvents (novel chemicals, additives
with low vaporisation enthalpy)
Integration of heat exchanger in desorber
Rest (cooling,
electricity,
chemicals)
25% 10 15 % Halving of solvent flow rate
Optimised operational conditions for
advanced process technologies and solvents
Solvent stability improvements
Total operation 50 % 20 30 %
Total costs 100% 40 60 %
Estimate of contributions to the capture costs
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 21
CASTOR SP2 Work package structure
WP 2.1: Evaluation, Optimisation and Integration of post-combustion capture
WP 2.5: Pilot plant validation with real flue gases
WP 2.2:
New solvent
development
WP 2.3:
Membrane
contactor
development
WP 2.4:
Advanced
process
development
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 22
European post-combustion test facility
Capacity: 1 t/h CO
2
capture
5.000 Nm
3
/h fluegas
(coal combustion)
In operation early 2006
4. marts 2004 2
Esbjergvrket
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 23
CO
2
Membrane Gas Absorption can reduce
investment costs
CO
2
, present in the flue gas, is selectively absorbed into a
proprietary absorption liquid through a porous membrane
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 24
DECAB process flow diagram
Absorber
Flue gas in
Flue gas out
Reboiler
Heat exchanger
Cooler
Stripper
with
integrated
heat
exchanger
Condenser
60
o
C
Slurry
80
o
C
90
o
C
70
o
C 40
o
C
Liquid
120
o
C
CO
2
out
90
o
C
CO
2
CO
2
Precipitation the absorber will result in high loading of the
solvent and hence reduction of costs
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 25
Other CO
2
separation technologies
Adsorption processes
Sorbent development (selectivity, high temperature)
Scale-up (circulating fluidised bed, rotating wheels)
Membrane processes
Membrane development (selectivity, high temperature)
Scale-up (using modularity)
Cooling processes
Anti-sublimation process (CO
2
available at high pressure)
Scale-up (available process equipment)
Process suitability will benefit from increased CO
2
concentration:
Use of flue gas recirculation and oxygen enrichment
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 26
HICLON (High CO
2
/Low N
2
-capture process)
Air
Enriched
air
N
2
Exhaust gas
Flue
gas
Recycle
O
2
enrichment
Fuel
CO
2
Power
Energy conversion CO
2
separation
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 27
Linking post-combustion capture to
production of hydrogen and electricity
(Hypogen concept)
Current lowest cost hydrogen production based on fossil
fuels (gas, coal)
First step is fuel conversion, producing mixture of mainly
hydrogen and carbon monoxide
Next step is separation into hydrogen rich stream and
carbon monoxide rich stream using e.g. polymeric
membranes
Hydrogen supplied to end-users; Carbon monoxide as
fuel gas to gas turbine;
Post-combustion capture from high CO
2
content flue
gases
14 April 2005 Progress in post-combustion CO2 capture 28
Conclusions
At present there is no best technology for CO
2
capture, but there are several options
Post-combustion capture presents the approach with
least impact on power generation processes
Potential for improvement by doing and searching
is large
CASTOR IP is aimed at achieving this potential
Post-combustion capture is also applicable in a power
generation system with co-production of hydrogen.