• Save
A benchmarking methodology for CO2 capture processes
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

A benchmarking methodology for CO2 capture processes






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 2

http://www.linkedin.com 2



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    A benchmarking methodology for CO2 capture processes A benchmarking methodology for CO2 capture processes Presentation Transcript

    • Benchmarking Methodology for CO 2 Capture Processes using Minimum Capture Work Targets Rahul Anantharaman , Kristin Jordal and David Berstad SINTEF Energy Research [email_address] Novi Sad, Serbia 06.07.2011
    • Overview
      • Background and motivation
      • Systematic approach to benchmarking
      • Methodology
      • Analysis
      • Conclusions and further work
    • Benchmarking of processes
      • Practice of comparing the performance metrics of a process to others that are considered as industry standard.
      • Snapshot of performance of the process to understand where it is in relation to a particular standard process
      • Commonly used performance metrics in CO 2 capture processes:
        • Efficiency
        • Cost
    • CO 2 capture processes
      • All CO 2 capture processes require work
        • Directly by ancillary units such as compressors, pumps etc.
        • Indirectly by thermal energy requirements
        • This work leads to energy penalty of CO 2 capture associated with the process
      • Emphasis on: improving overall efficiency (or reducing energy penalty)
      • What overall process efficiency can be achieved?
    • Benchmarking of CO 2 capture processes Process A Process B Process C Process D Efficiency Future technnology development Scenario 1 Scenario 2
      • Efficiency tends to a maximum
      • Thermodynamic ideal efficiency
    • Process efficiencies Thermodynamic ” ideal” Technology limited Economics limited Efficiency Thermodynamic ” ideal” Technology limited Economics limited Efficiency penalty Max theoretical efficiency Min theoretical efficiency penalty
    • Systematic Approach
    • Minimum work targets
      • Target before design – key aspect of process synthesis methodologies like Pinch Technology
      • The methodology developed will
        • Provide ideal work targets (and thus efficiency penalties) for capture processes
        • Provide benchmark for comparison
        • Identify losses and provide recommendations where largest improvement potentials lie
      • It is worth noting that though the thermodynamic minimum will never be achieved, it provides a common and definite basis for comparison of different processes.
    • Methodology
      • Aim: To evaluate minimum theoretical work requirement for CO 2 capture processes without defining specifics of the unit operations involved.
        • Only process inputs and outputs specified
        • No detail process flowsheets
    • Methodology
      • Decompose overall process route into identifiable process steps/unit operations.
      • Calculate mass and energy balance for each step of the overall process.
      • Calculate the entropy or exergy balance for each unit operation.
      • Evaluate minimum energy requirement for the overall process.
    • Decomposing the overall process route
    • Analysis
      • The methodology will be used to develop minimum work targets for each of the three capture routes
        • Post-combustion capture
        • Pre-combustion capture
        • Oxy-combustion capture
      • Assumed
        • Gross power output from the plant is kept constant – 400 MW
        • Fuel: Methane
        • Pure products from separation processes
        • Complete separation
    • Post-combustion capture CH 4 +2O 2 +7.5N 2 -> CO 2 +0.28H 2 O(g)+1.72H 2 O(l)+7.5N 2 T carnot : 3911 ° C 400 MW -3.8 MW -4.0 MW
    • Pre-combustion capture CH 4 +2H 2 O -> CO 2 +4H 2 T carnot : 344 ° C -53.5 MW H 2 +0.5O 2 +1.9N 2 -> 0.06H 2 O(g)+0.94H 2 O(l)+1.9N 2 T carnot : 1546 ° C -2.7 MW -3.5 MW 400MW
    • Oxy-combustion capture -5.9 MW CH 4 +2O 2 + -> CO 2 +0.28H 2 O(g)+1.72H 2 O(l) T carnot : 3911 ° C 400 MW -0.8 MW -3.9 MW
    • Results
    • Variation of overall process efficiency with capture rate
    • Conclusions
      • Developing a systematic methodology for benchmarking CO 2 capture routes utilizing minimum work targets
      • The methodology
        • Provides ideal work targets (and thus efficiency penalties) for capture processes
        • Provides benchmark for comparison
        • Provide recommendations for where largest improvement potentials lie and hence guide further research
      • Further work
        • Extend the methodology by introducing technology limitations as irreversibilities
    • Acknowledgements
      • This publication has been produced with support from the BIGCCS Centre, performed under the Norwegian research program Centres for Environment-friendly Energy Research (FME) . The authors acknowledge the following industrial partners for their contributions: Aker Solutions, ConocoPhilips, Det Norske Veritas, Gassco, Hydro, Shell, Statkraft, Statoil, TOTAL, GDF SUEZ and the Research Council of Norway (193816/S60).