Assessment ofHybrid Membrane – Low TemperatureProcess for Post-Combustion CaptureX. P. Zhang, T. GundersenNorwegian Univer...
Presentation Outline►Background►Gas membrane separation process evaluation►Hybrid Membrane – Low Temperature process►Resul...
3Challenges of CCS► Energy: Energy penalty (Electricity, steam……)► Economy: Cost increase (Investment, operational cost…)►...
CO2 capture technologies4J. D. Figueroa, T. Fout, S. Plasynski, H. McIlvried and R. D. Srivastava, Int J Greenh Gas Contro...
MEA-based capture systemCO2 capture ratio: ~90%, CO2 purity > 95%, Lean solvent: MEA 28.3%(wt)Absorption temp.: 35-50oC., ...
6Two-stage gas membrane captureprocessEnergy demands:Q1 (Sensible) + Q2 (Reaction) + Q3 (Stripping) + W1 (Compressors) + W...
7Chemical solvent based and MembranesystemsLimitations of chemical solvent based system► Degradation: results in high mate...
8Tech. DataMembrane modelwith PRO/II®Techno-Economic assessment modelsCost Models 22( +0.2 )CC(US $ / ton CO )=fluegas COV...
Parametric study - membrane process9Capture ratio 90%, CO2 purity 90% (mol); CR 90% and XCO2 90%(mol)1-stage with Turboexp...
Inverse relationship of Area~Power10N2CO2W1 W2W3Total power= W1 + W2 – W3P1 P2P1 P0Trade-off between energy consumption an...
11Two-stage gas membrane captureprocess
Influence of parameters on capture cost12EnergyAreaCost2-stage capture, CO2 purity: 95% (mol); capture ratio: 90%CO2/N2 se...
Influence of capture ratio13Optimal capture ratio range: 65~70% (50 $ /m2 membrane)75~80% (100 $ /m2 membrane
Motivation for Hybrid Membrane –Low Temperature Process► Polymeric membranes function ideally as a bulk separation medium►...
Process Block Diagram15Membrane – LT interface
USC Coal Fired Power Plant16European Benchmarking Task Force – Reference case► Power plant: Net electricity 754 MWe (witho...
Membrane section PFD17
Low Temperature section PFD18
Energy requirement - Membrane19CO2/N2 selectivity: 70, CO2 permeance: 5 Nm3/m2·bar·hr
Energy Requirement – LT process20
Hybrid processOverall performance21
Hybrid processOverall performance22
Comparing performance of processes23
Comparing performance of processes24CO2/N2 selectivity: 80CO2 permeance: 5 Nm3/m2.bar.hrMembrane properties8% improvement ...
Comparing performance of processes25CO2/N2 selectivity: 200CO2 permeance: 1 Nm3/m2.bar.hrMembrane propertiesEnergy penalty...
Conclusions► Membrane method has weak advantages over MEA process for CO2 capturedue to relatively lower capture cost. Ho...
AcknowledgementsThis publication has been produced with support from the BIGCCSCentre, performed under the Norwegian resea...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Hybrid membrane - low temperature process for post combustion capture

1,483 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,483
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
23
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • .
  • Hybrid membrane - low temperature process for post combustion capture

    1. 1. Assessment ofHybrid Membrane – Low TemperatureProcess for Post-Combustion CaptureX. P. Zhang, T. GundersenNorwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, NorwayR. Anantharaman, D. BerstadSINTEF Energy Research, Trondheim, Norway
    2. 2. Presentation Outline►Background►Gas membrane separation process evaluation►Hybrid Membrane – Low Temperature process►Results and discussion►Conclusion2
    3. 3. 3Challenges of CCS► Energy: Energy penalty (Electricity, steam……)► Economy: Cost increase (Investment, operational cost…)► Environment: Additional impact (MEA degradation…)► Industries: Understand the status of energy/mass efficiency, economicperformance and environmental impacts;► Researchers: Provide information to develop new or retrofit old CCS technologies,new material synthesis, process design……► Decision-makers: Provide a roadmap for the commercialization of CCSIntegration & assessment of CCS ChainMotivation
    4. 4. CO2 capture technologies4J. D. Figueroa, T. Fout, S. Plasynski, H. McIlvried and R. D. Srivastava, Int J Greenh Gas Control, 2008, 2, 9-20.2010 2015 2020Post-combustion captureMEA-based systemEconamine FG+KS-1Cansolv process……Chilled ammonia1.Ready for DemonstrationMembraneCarbonate-based sorbentsIonic liquidsEnzyme-based systems……2. Emerging technologiesDOE & NETL
    5. 5. MEA-based capture systemCO2 capture ratio: ~90%, CO2 purity > 95%, Lean solvent: MEA 28.3%(wt)Absorption temp.: 35-50oC., Stripper temp.: 100-120oCEnergy demands:Q1 (Sensible) + Q2 (Reaction) + Q3 (Stripping) + W1 (Blower) + W2 (Pumps)Advanced solvent methods aim to reduce all or parts of these energies
    6. 6. 6Two-stage gas membrane captureprocessEnergy demands:Q1 (Sensible) + Q2 (Reaction) + Q3 (Stripping) + W1 (Compressors) + W2 (Pumps)
    7. 7. 7Chemical solvent based and MembranesystemsLimitations of chemical solvent based system► Degradation: results in high material costs and high disposal costs;► Additional environmental pollution caused, emissions of NH3, MEA;► High energy consumption, extraction of LP steam from turbine;► Auxiliary retrofitting measures or costs in power plantsHussain, A.; Hagg, M. B. Journal of Membrane Science 2010, 359, (1-2), 140-148.Zhao, L.; Riensche, E.; Blum, L.; Stolten, D. Journal of Membrane Science 2010, 359, (1-2), 160-172.Some viewpoints on membranes► Less environmental impact, and small footprint;► Lower energy requirement (no steam load, but significant shaftwork requirement);► Ease of scale up, both for grassroot power plants and retrofitting of existing ones► Suitable when high purity gas streams are not vital
    8. 8. 8Tech. DataMembrane modelwith PRO/II®Techno-Economic assessment modelsCost Models 22( +0.2 )CC(US $ / ton CO )=fluegas COVOM TPIm x CR VOM: Annual variable operating & maintenance costTPI: Total plant investmentCR: Capture ratioMembraneModelsFlow structureInputOperational parameters:PressureTemperatureFlow rateGas CompositionMembrane parameters:Membrane areaSelectivityPermeanceOutputCapture ratioCO2 purityGas volumesGas compositionsParameter optimizationFick’s lawHagen-Poiselle eq.
    9. 9. Parametric study - membrane process9Capture ratio 90%, CO2 purity 90% (mol); CR 90% and XCO2 90%(mol)1-stage with Turboexpander; Excluding CO2 compression; PPermeate 0.05 bar, CO2/N2Selectivity: 150 – 250, CO2 permeance value: 1 - 5 Nm3/m2•bar•hr.Increasing selectivity will decrease energy consumption and increase area,thus permeance & selectivity should be optimized due to an inverse relationship0.00.40.81.21.62.02.42.80.50.70.91.11.31.51.71.9150 170 190 210 230 250 270E1E2E3E4E5A1A2A3A4A5CO2/N2 SelectivityMembranearea (106m2)Specific energyconsumption (MJe/ t CO2)Specific equivalent enery consumed with MEAA BPer-1Per-5
    10. 10. Inverse relationship of Area~Power10N2CO2W1 W2W3Total power= W1 + W2 – W3P1 P2P1 P0Trade-off between energy consumption and area
    11. 11. 11Two-stage gas membrane captureprocess
    12. 12. Influence of parameters on capture cost12EnergyAreaCost2-stage capture, CO2 purity: 95% (mol); capture ratio: 90%CO2/N2 selectivity: 70~90
    13. 13. Influence of capture ratio13Optimal capture ratio range: 65~70% (50 $ /m2 membrane)75~80% (100 $ /m2 membrane
    14. 14. Motivation for Hybrid Membrane –Low Temperature Process► Polymeric membranes function ideally as a bulk separation medium► With CO2/N2 selectivities of 50-100 single stage membrane process is notfeasible to attain required CO2 purity (95%) and degree of separation (90%)► Driving force is partial pressure difference across the membrane and hencesignificant compression work required for separation Increases exponentially with purity and degree of separation► Low temperature processes have been the standard for CO2 purification inoxy-combustion cases Efficient process to attain high purity CO2 when feed stream has CO2 concentration14
    15. 15. Process Block Diagram15Membrane – LT interface
    16. 16. USC Coal Fired Power Plant16European Benchmarking Task Force – Reference case► Power plant: Net electricity 754 MWe (without capture)► Flue gas flowrate: 596.4 Nm3/s (781.8 kg/s)► Flue gas composition: CO2 13.73%, N2 72.86%, O2 3.65%, H2O 9.73% (mol)
    17. 17. Membrane section PFD17
    18. 18. Low Temperature section PFD18
    19. 19. Energy requirement - Membrane19CO2/N2 selectivity: 70, CO2 permeance: 5 Nm3/m2·bar·hr
    20. 20. Energy Requirement – LT process20
    21. 21. Hybrid processOverall performance21
    22. 22. Hybrid processOverall performance22
    23. 23. Comparing performance of processes23
    24. 24. Comparing performance of processes24CO2/N2 selectivity: 80CO2 permeance: 5 Nm3/m2.bar.hrMembrane properties8% improvement over 2-satge Membrane process
    25. 25. Comparing performance of processes25CO2/N2 selectivity: 200CO2 permeance: 1 Nm3/m2.bar.hrMembrane propertiesEnergy penalty nearly the same as MEA case
    26. 26. Conclusions► Membrane method has weak advantages over MEA process for CO2 capturedue to relatively lower capture cost. However, membrane processes have larger energy consumption► Membrane – Low Temperature hybrid process have lower energy penaltythan 2-stage membrane process for high CO2 capture ratios. 8% lower energy penalty at 90% capture► 2-stage membrane process perform better than the hybrid process at captureratios below ~80%.► MEA capture process performs better than the hybrid and membraneprocesses at 90% capture ratio.► New membranes optimized for these processes are expected reduce cost andenergy consumption.► Further work: Develop cost models for the low temperature process tooptimize overall process design.26
    27. 27. AcknowledgementsThis publication has been produced with support from the BIGCCSCentre, performed under the Norwegian research program Centres forEnvironment-friendly Energy Research (FME). The authors acknowledgethe following partners for their contributions: Aker Solutions,ConocoPhillips, Gassco, Shell, Statoil, TOTAL, GDF SUEZ and theResearch Council of Norway (193816/S60).

    ×