Abstract
Typical carbon capture plants include CO2 separation and compression steps. CO2 separation from diluted flue gases may be achieved by using gas-liquid absorption. This process requires work input for e.g. separating CO2 from flue gases and regenerating the CO2 loaded solvent. Hence, CO2 capture plants involving gas-liquid absorption consume a remarkable part of power and thermal energy generated by power plants. By increasing the thermodynamic efficiency of capture plants one can increase the produced power and save fossil fuels. Therefore, this study provides a quantitative assessment of the thermodynamic efficiency of CO2 separation in capture plants. To this aim the minimum work required for CO2 separation and actual work input in realistic carbon capture plants are estimated. The results reveal that for the state-of-the-art MEA solvent the thermodynamic efficiency of the capture plant is about 16%, for state-of-the-art advanced solvent based capture process (ASBCP) is about 25%, while given the progress in developing ASBCPs in near future it may reach about 30%. Additional measures to reduce the energy requirement of the capture plant such as heat pumps are also discussed. This all means that CO2 separation by gas-liquid absorption is still a relatively inefficient process and remarkable potential for further improvements with step change innovations in gas-liquid absorption exist and may be beneficially used for optimising CO2 capture plants.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Abbreviations
- ASBCP:
-
Advanced solvent based capture process
- E :
-
Energy, J
- G :
-
Gibbs free energy, J
- MEA:
-
Monoethanolamine
- n :
-
Molar flow rate, kmol/s
- NGCC:
-
Natural gas combined cycle
- p i :
-
Partial pressure of the i-th gas, Pa
- p :
-
Total pressure, Pa
- PC:
-
Pulverised coal
- PCC:
-
Postcombustion capture
- Q :
-
Heat, J
- R :
-
Ideal gas constant = 8.314 J/(mol K)
- T :
-
Absolute temperature, K
- T REF :
-
Reference temperature = 293.15 K
- T SOURCE :
-
Source temperature = 393.15 K
- W :
-
Work, J
- W act :
-
Actual work, J
- W min :
-
Minimum work of separation, J
- \(y_{i}^{{{\text{CO}}_{2} }}\) :
-
Mole fraction of CO2 in the gas mixture i, –
- \(y_{i}^{{{\text{i}} - {\text{CO}}_{2} }}\) :
-
Mole fraction of non-CO2 remainder, −
- η :
-
Thermodynamic efficiency, –
- η turbine :
-
Turbine efficiency = 90%
- A:
-
Stream A
- B:
-
Stream B
- C:
-
Stream C
- i:
-
Index
- sep:
-
Separation
- TOTAL:
-
Total
References
Calbry-Muzyka S, Edwards CF (2014) Thermodynamic benchmarking of CO2 capture systems: exergy analysis methodology for adsorption processes. Energy Procedia 63:1–17
Rochedo PRR, Szklo A (2013) Designing learning curves for carbon capture based on chemical absorption according to the minimum work of separation. Appl Energy 108:383–391
Budzianowski WM (2016) Explorative analysis of advanced solvent processes for energy efficient carbon dioxide capture by gas-liquid absorption. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 49:108–120
Budzianowski WM (2015) Single solvents, solvent blends, and advanced solvent systems in CO2 capture by absorption: a review. Int J Glob Warming 7(2):184–225
Gaskell D. (1995) Introduction to the thermodynamics of materials. Taylor & Francis. Washington D.C
House KZ, Harvey CF, Aziz MJ, Schrag DP (2009) The energy penalty of post-combustion CO2 capture & storage and its implications for retrofitting the U.S. installed base. Energy Environ Sci 2:193–205
Budzianowski WM (2012) Negative carbon intensity of renewable energy technologies involving biomass or carbon dioxide as inputs. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(9):6507–6521
Budzianowski WM (2012) Value-added carbon management technologies for low CO2 intensive carbon-based energy vectors. Energy 41(1):280–297
Budzianowski WM (2012) Benefits of biogas upgrading to biomethane by high-pressure reactive solvent scrubbing. Biofuels, Bioprod Biorefin 6(1):12–20
Svendsen HF, Hessen ET, Mejdell T (2011) Carbon dioxide capture by absorption, challenges and possibilities. Chem Eng J 171(3):718–724
Zhang G, Yang Y, Xu G, Zhang K, Zhang D (2015) CO2 capture by chemical absorption in coal-fired power plants: energy-saving mechanism, proposed methods, and performance analysis. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 39:449–462
Yu J, Wang S (2015) Modeling analysis of energy requirement in aqueous ammonia based CO2 capture process. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 43:33–45
Geuzebroek FH, Schneiders LHJM, Kraaijveld GJC, Feron PHM (2004) Exergy analysis of alkanolamine-based CO2 removal unit with AspenPlus. Energy 29(9–10):1241–1248
Skorek-Osikowska A, Kotowicz J, Janusz-Szymańska K (2012) Comparison of the energy intensity of the selected CO2-capture methods applied in the ultra-supercritical coal power plants. Energy Fuels 26(11):6509–6517
Arias AM, Mores PL, Scenna NJ, Mussati SF (2016) Optimal design and sensitivity analysis of post-combustion CO2 capture process by chemical absorption with amines. J Clean Prod 115:315–331
Budzianowski WM, Wylock CE, Marciniak PA (2017) Power requirements of biogas upgrading by water scrubbing and biomethane compression: comparative analysis of various plant configurations. Energy Convers Manag. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.03.018
Razi N, Svendsen HF, Bolland O (2013) Cost and energy sensitivity analysis of absorber design in CO2 capture with MEA. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 19:331–339
Avci A, Karagoz I (2009) A novel explicit equation for friction factor in smooth and rough pipes. ASME J Fluids Eng 131:061203
Lin Y, Rochelle GT (2016) Approaching a reversible stripping process for CO2 capture. Chem Eng J 283:1033–1043
Kim H, Lee KS (2016) Design guidance for an energy-thrift absorption process for carbon capture: analysis of thermal energy consumption for a conventional process configuration. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 47:291–302
Alhajaj A, Mac Dowell N, Shah N (2016) A techno-economic analysis of post-combustion CO2 capture and compression applied to a combined cycle gas turbine: Part I. A parametric study of the key technical performance indicators. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 44:26–41
House KZ, Baclig AC, Ranjan M, van Nierop EA, Wilcox J, Herzog HJ (2011) Economic and energetic analysis of capturing CO2 from ambient air. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(51):20428–20433
Wilcox J. Carbon capture. 2012. Springer, New York
Wołowicz M, Milewski J, Futyma K, Bujalski W (2014) Boosting the efficiency of an 800 MW-class power plant through utilization of low temperature heat of flue gases. Appl Mech Mater 483:315–321
Higgins SJ, Liu YA (2015) CO2 capture modeling, energy savings, and heat pump integration. Ind Eng Chem Res 54(9):2526–2553
Wang M, Joel AS, Ramshaw C, Eimer D, Musa NM (2015) Process intensification for post-combustion CO2 capture with chemical absorption: a critical review. Appl Energy 158:275–291
Acknowledgments
This study has been supported by the members of the Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development (RESD) Group (Poland) under the project RESD-RDG03/2016 which is gratefully acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Budzianowski, W.M. (2017). Assessment of Thermodynamic Efficiency of Carbon Dioxide Separation in Capture Plants by Using Gas–Liquid Absorption. In: Budzianowski, W. (eds) Energy Efficient Solvents for CO2 Capture by Gas-Liquid Absorption. Green Energy and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47262-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47262-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-47261-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-47262-1
eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)