See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282937269

Packing characterization: Absorber economic analysis

Article  in  International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control · November 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.07.027

CITATIONS READS

7 3,788

3 authors:

Chao Wang Frank Seibert

Fractionationa Research Inc. University of Texas at Austin
10 PUBLICATIONS   93 CITATIONS    65 PUBLICATIONS   1,307 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Gary Rochelle
University of Texas at Austin
341 PUBLICATIONS   18,034 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Process Engineer View project

Solvent development for CO2 capture View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Chao Wang on 18 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijggc

Packing characterization: Absorber economic analysis

Chao Wang a,b , A. Frank Seibert b , Gary T. Rochelle a,∗
a
Texas Carbon Management Program, McKetta Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, 200 East Dean Keeton Street,
C0400, Austin, TX 78712-1589, United States
b
Separations Research Program, Pickle Research Campus, The University of Texas at Austin, 10100 Burnet Road, Austin, TX 78758, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, an economic analysis of the absorber for a 250 MW coal-fired power plant was conducted.
Received 12 March 2015 The purpose of the research is to determine the optimal design and operating conditions for the amine
Received in revised form 22 July 2015 scrubbing post-combustion absorber. The Energy Cost (Energy) and the Annualized Capital Cost (CAPEX)
Accepted 24 July 2015
for the absorber were calculated to determine the total processing cost as a function of the gas superficial
velocity (uG ). To calculate the CAPEX and energy, the mass transfer properties and hydraulic data for
Keywords:
these packings were obtained from previous experimental measurements. The minimum total cost for
Post-combustion absorber
each packing was compared to find the lowest total cost and optimum packing.
Economic analysis
Energy cost
The total cost decreases with uG at first (CAPEX dominant) and then increases (Energy dominant).
Capital cost The minimum total cost represents a trade-off between CAPEX and Energy, and it is achieved at the
Optimum operating velocity intersection of the CAPEX region and the energy region.
Optimum design The optimum operating velocity is between 50 and 80% flood for all packings, which deviates from the
experience with distillation column design, usually optimized at 70–90% flood. The lowest total absorber
cost from this study is given by packing 200X-H with a value of $4.04/ton CO2 removed.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Greenhouse gas (GHG) generated by human activities is believed
to be the major cause of global warming. CO2 is the most important
human-caused GHG. Amine scrubbing for CO2 capture from coal-
fired power plants is the one of the most effective ways to mitigate
CO2 emissions (Rochelle, 2009).
The majority of post-combustion technologies currently utilize a
simple absorber/stripper configuration. Optimization work for the
stripper side has been done by Lin and Rochelle (2014). The opti-
mized lean loading is around 0.22 CO2 /mol alkali to give a minimum
total equivalent work of 30.4 kJ/mol CO2 . The optimization work for
the absorber side is needed.
Other researchers have characterized and optimized packing to
achieve low pressure drop and high mass transfer efficiency for the
absorber (Tsai, 2010; Razi et al., 2013; Zhang and Rochelle, 2014).
However, most previous work uses mass transfer models devel-
oped in distillation systems, which are not appropriate for CO2
absorption with amine. The earlier work also lacks thermodynamic
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gtr@che.utexas.edu (G.T. Rochelle).
and kinetic data for high performance solvents such as 8 m piper-
azine (PZ).
The objective of this work is to optimize post-combustion
absorber performance with consistent packing mass transfer cor-
relations and comprehensive PZ thermodynamic and kinetic data.
Absorber total cost changes with uG /uG,flood and packing geometries
are explored to determine the optimum fraction flood and packing.
2. Case study and methodology
The base case system is a 250 MW coal-fired power plant with
90% CO2 removal from flue gas containing 12 mol % CO2 . The
solvent used is 8 m (8 mol/kg water) PZ because it has high reac-
tion rate, high capacity, low volatility, and low degradation rate
(Freeman et al., 2011). According to the stripper optimization (Lin
and Rochelle, 2014), the total equivalent work of the regeneration
process reaches a minimum at lean loading of 0.22 mol CO2 /mol
alkali. Considering the solubility of the solvent, the lean and rich
loadings are set at 0.3 and 0.4 mol CO2 /mol alkali in this analysis.
The absorber operating temperature was controlled around 40 ◦ C to
give a low equilibrium CO2 partial pressure which will yield a large
driving force for the absorber (Dugas, 2009). The kinetic properties
at the lean and rich loading were from Dugas (2009), and the phys-
ical properties were from Freeman et al., 2011. These data were

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.07.027
1750-5836/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 C. Wang et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131 125

Table 1
Nomenclature Base case, 250 MW coal-fired power plant.

Parameters Value Units

A column cross section area, m2
Gas flow rate 354 m3 /s
ae effective mass transfer area, m2 /m3
Liquid flow rate 1.58 m3 /s
aP packing physical area, m2 /m3 Absorber temperature 313 K
C experimental constant used in effective area corre- Inlet CO2 12 Mol %
lation Lean loading 0.3 mol CO2 /mol alk
CCO2 ,G , CCO2 ,L CO2 concentration in the gas phase, in the liq- Rich loading 0.4 mol CO2 /mol alk

uid phase, respectively

CCO2 ,in , CCO2 ,out CO2 concentration at the inlet, at the outlet,
2.1. Packing cost estimation
respectively
CS standard gas superficial velocity, m/s
The structured packings were made of stainless steel. The pack-
CAPEX capital costs, $
ing purchase costs as a function of surface area were estimated
d shell thickness, m
based on quotes from a single packing vendor. Since most of the
Energy energy costs, $
metal structured packings have similar geometry, a general cost
FP packing factor, m−1
equation can represent them. Eq. (1) is a representation of the
G gas flow rate, m3 /s
packing cost as a function of specific area, aP (m2 /m3 ):
Gm gas flow rate in mass unit, kg/s
HT,L liquid total head, m Packing purchased cost ($)
HTU height of transfer units, m  203.05

KOG overall mass transfer coefficient, m/s = Required Packing surface area ∗ 7.31 + (1)
aP
k2 second-order reaction rate constant, m3 /(kmol s)
kG gas film mass transfer coefficient, m/s
kL liquid film mass transfer coefficient, m/s Eqs. (2)–(6) show the calculations for the required packing sur-
L Liquid flow rate, m3 /s face area (Kister, 1992; McCabe et al., 1993; Perry and Green, 2007).
Lm Liquid flow rate in mass unit, kg/s All terms in these equations are defined in the nomenclature sec-
M mixing point density, pts/m3 tion. The required packing surface area equals the packed volume
N equipment work rate, kW (Z*A) multiplied by the total surface area per volume (aP ). The
NTU number of transfer units packed height is given by Eq. (2):
P Pressure drop, Pa  
uG CCO2 ,in
Q volumetric flow rate, m3 /s Z = HTU ∗ NTU = ∗ ln (2)
KOG ae CCO2 ,out
S column side length, m
uG gas superficial velocity, m/s The required packing surface area is:
uL liquid superficial velocity, m/s
Zpack absorber packed height, m uG ∗ NTU ∗ A ∗ aP
Z ∗ A ∗ aP = (3)
ZWW water wash height, m KOG ae
ZT column total height, m where A is the column cross section area, A = G/uG ; NTU is the num-
 surface tension, N/m ber of transfer units required to obtain 90% removal. NTU can be
L liquid density, kg/m3 calculated by:
 packing corrugation angle, deg
 equipment efficiency, % CO2,in − CO∗2,in
NTU = 1.2 ∗ ln (4)
˛ installed cost factor CO2,out − CO∗2,out
ˇ annualized cost factor
Since the equilibrium concentration of CO2 is negligible com-
$E Electricity price, $/MWh
pared to the CO2 concentration in the gas phase, Eq. (4) can be
simplified as:
CO2,in
NTU = 1.2 ∗ ln = 2.76 (5)
used in the overall mass transfer coefficient calculation (Eq. (6)). In CO2,out
this work, the VLE data of 8 m PZ from Xu were used to calculate
The overall mass transfer coefficient KOG is given by Eq. (6):
the slope of equilibrium curve (CCO2 ,G /CCO2 ,L ) in Eq. (6) (Xu and
 
Rochelle, 2011). 1 1 HCO2 1 CCO2 ,G
The Annualized Capital Cost (CAPEX) and Energy Cost (Energy) = +  + (6)
KOG kG k2 [Am]DCO2 kL CCO2 ,L
for the absorber were calculated to determine the total cost. The
equations to calculate the CAPEX and Energy are shown in the fol- In previous work, the effective area (ae ), liquid film mass trans-
lowing paragraphs. The gas superficial velocity (uG ) was set as the fer coefficient (kL ), and gas film mass transfer coefficient (kG ) have
independent variable. All other variables, such as the column side been measured and the following correlations have been developed
length (S), the liquid superficial velocity (uL ), the column height based on the experiment data (Tsai et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2012;
(Z), the pump work, and blower work, were dependent on uG . The Wang et al., 2013):
column side length (S) was the square root of column cross section
area (A), since a square column was used for the absorber. Thus, kL = 3.08E − 3 ∗ u0.72
L M 0.42 a−1.15
P
(7)
the total cost and minimum cost were determined as a function 0.22 −0.36
of uG . Eight structured packings were analyzed in this work, and kG = 1.08E − 2 ∗ u0.55
G M aP (8)
the minimum total cost for each packing was estimated. Finally,   Q 4/3 0.116
the optimum operating condition and packing for this case was ae  L 1
=C∗ g 1/3 ∗ (9)
determined. The base-case specifications are given in Table 1. aP  A aP
126 C. Wang et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131

Table 2 Table 3
Heights for different column sections. Equipment purchase cost estimation equations.

Sections Value Unit Items Equations

CCO ,in
Packing
uG
∗ ln C 2 Column shell cost Stainless steel = 575*[Shell weight
KOG ae
uG C
CO2 ,out
(lb)]0.609
Water wash kG ae
∗ ln C in Carbon steel = 276.1*[Shell weight
out
Sump uL ∗ thold-up (lb)]0.6016
Inlet/outlet duct 4.57 m Packing cost ($/m3 ) = 7.31aP + 203.05
Distributor 1.83 m Distributor 15,355*[Column side length (m)]0.1764
Miscellaneous 1.83 m Distributor support (beams) 5/6*Distributor purchased cost
Chimney tray collector 15,350*[Column side length (m)]0.1281
Packing support grid 12,019*[Column side length (m)]0.1792
where kL , kG are the liquid film and gas film mass transfer Platforms/handrails 985.33*[Column side length
(m)] + 759.33
coefficients, m/s; uL , uG are the liquid and gas phase superficial
Connections/manholes 870*[Column height (m)]
velocities, m/s; M is the mixing point density, points/m3 ; aP is the Ladders 111.55*[(Column height (m))]
packing surface area, m2 /m3 . C is the experimental constant used
in the effective area correlation, specific for each packing. The value
of C for each packing is given in Table 6. Table 4
Parameters used in cash flow analysis.

2.2. Column cost estimation Parameter Percentage (%)

The purchase cost for the absorber column is divided into three
parts: shell, internals, and auxiliary. The cost for the column shell
was estimated from its weight. In this study, the majority of the col-
umn shell is specified as carbon steel with a 3/8 in. shell thickness.
A¼ in. stainless steel (SS316) layer was clad on the inner side of the
column to minimize corrosion. The shell thickness was based on a
design by Tsai (2010). The carbon steel and stainless steel shell costs
were calculated by Eqs. (10) and (11) from Peters and Timmerhaus
(1991). The shell weight was calculated according to Eq. (12). The
costs were converted to current dollars (2014) by applying the infla-
tion index (Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 2014). For reference, the
index values in 1990 and 2014 are listed as 130.7 and 237.3, so
the costs from Peters and Timmerhaus (1991) were converted to
current prices by dividing by a factor 0.55 (130.7/237.3 = 0.55).
Carbon steel cost($) = 276.1 ∗ (Shell weight)0.6016 (10)
0.609
Stainless steel cost($) = 575 ∗ (Shell weight) (11)
Shell weight = Steel density ∗ ZT ∗ S ∗ d (12)
Return on investment 10
Income tax 3.5
Maintenance 2
Depreciation 4.5
2.4. Annualized equipment cost
The equipment costs were converted to an annualized basis
($/yr) using Eq. (13). The costs were then converted to $/ton CO2
removed by Eq. (14). In this work, the amount of CO2 removed
is 2.06E+06 tons/year. The installation factor (˛) scales the pur-
chased equipment cost to the total investment and was set at 5
based on several analysis methods and reports (Frailie, 2014). The
annualizing factor (ˇ) was set at 20% based on a cash flow analysis
considering the rate of return, taxes, maintenance, and depreci-
ation (assuming a 5-year MACRS depreciation schedule, a 10-year
project life, and a 2-year construction period). The percentages used
for cash flow analysis are listed in Table 4:

where ZT is the total height of the column, m; S is the column side Annualized CAPEX = Equipment Cost ∗ ˛ ∗ ˇ (13)
length, m; d is the shell thickness, m.
Annualized Costs
The column was assumed to be square because of the low con- Costs per ton CO2 removed = (14)
struction cost and ease of installation. The column side length was ton of CO2 removed per year
calculated based on the column cross section area. The total height
of the column was the sum of the packed height, the water wash 2.5. Energy cost
height, the sump height, and the auxiliary heights (inlet and outlet
ducts, distributor, miscellaneous heights). The packed height for The costs for the blower and pump were calculated to arrive
the water wash unit was calculated using Eq. (2), where the gas at the energy cost. The blower work cost was calculated using Eq.
film mass transfer coefficient (kG ) was used since the mass trans- (15). The electricity price was specified as $61.4/MWh, which is
fer is gas phase-controlled. The goal is to achieve 98% removal in the 2013 national average price according to data from US Energy
the water wash unit. Table 2 lists the heights for different column Information Administration (EIA, 2013). The blower work rate was
sections. calculated by Eq. (16):

2.3. Capital cost calculation and annualization CBlower = NBlower ($/MWh) t (15)

The costs for auxiliaries (cladding, distributor, connections, lad- PT G

NBlower = (16)
ders, platforms and handrails, etc.) were calculated. Equations 106 
used to calculate capital costs are shown in Table 3. The costs for
column shell, platforms/handrails, connections/manholes, and lad- where G is the gas flow rate, m3 /s; PT is the total pressure drop,
ders were derived from a design book by Peters and Timmerhaus Pa.
(1991), and were converted to current prices by applying the infla- Table 5 lists the pressure drop for each section of the system. For
tion index (Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 2014). The costs for the SO2 polisher, the design pressure drop is 1.25 kPa (5 in. water) to
packing, distributor, distributor support, chimney tray collector, achieve 98% removal (Bartocci, 2014). For the Direct Contact Cooler
and packing support grid were based on packing and device vendors (DCC), a typical design is to use a 5–10 in. water pressure drop (Rao,
(Sulzer Chemtech, 2014). 2012).
 C. Wang et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131 127

Table 5 where Cpump , Cblower is the equipment cost for the pump and
Pressure drop for each section.
blower, respectively, $; CTrimeric is the cost from Trimeric case study,
Section P $; SL , SG , and SP are the liquid flow scale factor, gas flow scale factor,
SO2 polisher 1250 Pa and pressure drop scale factor, respectively.
Direct contact cooler
1250 Pa

Absorber ZPack ∗ P
3. Case study results
PZ

Water wash ZWW ∗ Z

The Annualized Capital Cost (CAPEX) results for 250Y are given
in Fig. 1. The column height will increase as gas superficial veloc-
Table 6 ity increases while column side length will decrease. The mass
Packing factor and effective area constant for each packing.
transfer properties (ae , kG , kL ) will increase with gas velocity. Thus,
FP (ft−1 ) C (used in Eq. (9)) the required packing surface area will decrease, which results in a
MP250Y 20.1 1.49 reduced packing cost. The column body cost will also decrease as
MP250X 7.9 1.36 gas velocity increases.
RSP250Y 16.8 1.56 The Energy Cost (Energy) results for 250Y are given in Fig. 2.
GT-PAKTM 350Z 12.1 1.39
The pump cost increases with gas velocity mainly due to the
MP125Y 10.1 1.42
GT-PAKTM 350Y 32.4 1.27
increased column height. There are two factors influencing the
GT-PAKTM 500Y 38.6 1.10 blower cost: the packed height and the pressure drop. The packed
RSP200X 14.4 1.70 height increases linearly with gas velocity while the pressure drop
MP2X 6.8 1.38 increases with gas velocity squared. Compared with the pump cost,
the blower cost is much higher and dominates the operating cost.
P/Z for each packing is calculated from the GPDC correlation:
3.1. Total cost analysis and discussion
P
0.6609
3.8617 Z
CP = 0.7206 Fig. 3 shows the total cost for 250Y. The Energy increases expo-
(0.6609/0.7206) 0.2898
[1 + 6.3763(P/Z) ∗ FLV ] nentially with gas velocity, while CAPEX decreases. At low gas
(−0.6819)
velocity, the benefits from the reduced CAPEX compensate for
× [1 − exp(−0.9093 ∗ FLV )] (17) the expenses from the increased Energy. Therefore, the total cost
decreases in this CAPEX dominant region. As gas velocity increases,

CP = CS FP0.5 L0.05 (18) 6 40

 G
0.5
CS = uG (19) 35
L − G 5
$10.5E6/yr
Annualized CAPEX, ($/tonne CO 2)

 L    0.5 Column height

Sidelength or Height , m
30
m G
FLV = ∗ (20) 4
25
Gm L
where L is the kinetic viscosity of liquid phase (cSt); uG is the super- 3
$6.19E6/yr Packing cost
20
ficial gas velocity (m/s); G and L are the gas and liquid density
15
(kg/m3 ); Lm and Gm are the mass flow rate of liquid and gas flows 2
(kg/s); FP is the packing factor (m−1 ). Column side length 10
Column body cost
The packing factor (FP ) could be obtained either from the pack- 1
$2.06E6/yr 5
ing vendor or from back calculation based on the measurements. In
this work, the packing factor is back calculated from the pressure 0 0
drop measurements using Eqs. (17)–(20). The calculated packing 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
factor (FP ) is then used in pressure drop calculation for the absorber. Gas velocity/ (m/s)
The calculated packing factor (FP ) is listed in Table 6.
The pump work cost was calculated from similar assumptions. Fig. 1. Annualized Capital Cost results for 250Y.
The pump rate of work was calculated by Eq. (21):
40
Ne QL gHT,L 250MW
NP = = (21) $6.4E+6 12mol% CO2
  $2.91/tonne CO2
35

Column height
where QL is the liquid flow rate, m3 /s; HT,L is the liquid total head, 30
m.
Energy cost/($/yr)

25
The blower equipment cost and pump equipment cost were also $1.6E+6
Height , m

calculated based on the collaborative report between Rochelle and Blower cost 20
Trimeric Corporation (Rochelle et al., 2005). Eqs. (22) and (23) show
the equipment cost estimate for the pump and the blower. The gas Pump cost 15

flow scale factor was set at 0.6, the pressure drop scale factor was $4.0E+5
$1.94/tonne CO2 Packed height 10
set at 0.5, and the liquid flow scale factor was set at 0.33 (Peters
and Timmerhaus, 1991): 5
 L
SL
$1.0E+5 0
Cpump = CTrimeric (22)
LTrimeric 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
 G
SG  P
SP Gas velocity/ (m/s)
Cblower = CTrimeric (23)
GTrimeric PTrimeric Fig. 2. Energy cost for 250Y.
128 C. Wang et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131

12 20
500Y
$3.2E+7
10 Energy
$1.6E+7 CAPEX dominant Energy costs dominant CAPEX dominant dominant 16

Opmum uG=1.76 m/s 68% of flood Opmum uG=1.49 m/s 80% flood
8 $2.4E+7

Annualized cost/($/yr)

$/tonne CO2
$/tonne CO2
Annualized cost/($/yr)

$1.2E+7 12
Total cost
6
$1.6E+7
$8.0E+6 Total cost 8
Annualized CAPEX 4
Annualized CAPEX
$4.0E+6 $8.0E+6 4
2
Energy costs Energy

$0.0E+0 0 $0.0E+0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Gas velocity/ (m/s) Gas velocity/ (m/s)

Fig. 3. Total cost results for 250Y. Fig. 5. Total cost results for high surface area packing (500Y).

Table 7 12
Optimum case results for 250Y. $2.0E+7

CAPEX dominant Energy dominant

Item Value Unit 10
$1.6E+7
uG 1.76 m/s Opmum uG=2.41 m/s 54% of flood
uL 25.1 m/h 8
Annualized cost/($/yr)

$/tonne CO2
flood 68 %
$1.2E+7
Total column height 30.7 m
Column side length 14.2 m Total cost 6

Annualized 7.28 Million $/yr

3.53 $/ton CO2 $8.0E+6
CAPEX 4
Energy 2.30 Million $/yr
Annualized CAPEX
1.12 $/ton CO2
Total cost ($/yr) 9.58 Million $/yr $4.0E+6 2
Energy
Total cost ($/ton CO2 ) 4.64 $/ton CO2

$0.0E+0 0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
the slope of the Energy curve becomes larger and the slope of the
Gas velocity/ (m/s)
CAPEX curve becomes smaller. The CAPEX benefits cannot make
up the Energy expenses, resulting in the ascending total cost curve Fig. 6. Total cost results for low surface area packing (200X).
in the Energy dominant region. The lowest total cost represents a
trade-off between CAPEX and Energy. The optimum gas superficial
32
velocity for this packing is 1.76 m/s (68% flood).
Table 7 summarizes the results at the minimum cost for 250Y, 3.2E+7

Cost per tonne CO2/ ($/tonne CO2)

and Fig. 4 shows the composition of total cost at the optimum Opmal uG decreases as aP increases/θ
Annualized Total cost/($/yr)

case, where the column total height is 30.7 m and the side length is decreases
CAPEX region shrinks 16
14.2 m. The optimum condition of 68% flood for the absorber design 200X
2.0E+7
is different from the normal distillation column design (usually
70–90% of flood). From the cost analysis, the packing cost accounts
500Y
for 48.2% of the total cost and column cost accounts for 27.8%. The 350Y
8
total CAPEX comprises 76% of the total cost and the Energy is 24%,
primarily from the blower cost. The optimum total for this packing 1.2E+7
250Y
is $4.64/ton CO2 .
The economic analysis was done for all packings. Different pack-
ings show different optimum gas velocities. For high surface area 8.0E+6 4

packing (500Y), the optimum gas velocity is lower because of the 0 1 2 3 4

Gas velocity/ (m/s)

Fig. 7. Total cost comparison between packings with different area.

5%

19% Packing low capacity of the packing and the high pressure drop (Fig. 5). For
low surface area packing (200X) the optimum gas velocity is higher
Column
48% because of the low pressure drop (Fig. 6).
Blower A comprehensive comparison of the total cost is given in Fig. 7.
Pump As surface area increases from 200 to 500 m2 /m3 , the optimum
gas velocity decreases from 2.41 to 1.49 m/s due to the decrease
28%
of packing capacity (a single arrow line in Fig. 7 shows this ten-
dency). Fig. 8 shows that the optimum operating region is between
50% and 80% flood for all packings. Similar results were found by
Fig. 4. Total Cost distribution for the optimum case (250Y). Razi for a CO2 absorber with MEA, where the optimum total cost
 C. Wang et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131 129

24 Another important finding in this work is that the total cost

is minimized at a packing surface area of 200–250 m2 /m3 and a
500Y
corrugation angle of 60◦ as shown in Fig. 9. For packings with the
Cost per tonne CO2, ($/tonne CO2)

350Y Opmal same surface area, a higher corrugation angle provides lower pres-
operang region: sure drop and the same effective area, at a lower total cost. Hybrid
12
50%-80% of flood
250Y
packing has lower optimum total costs than Y packing (45o ) and X
packing (60o ) because of the higher effective area. In this work all
350Z the packing costs are calculated based on the same equation (Eq.
125Y
250X (2)). However, in practice there may be differences in the pack-
6 200X
ing costs between types or from different vendors. Therefore care
250Y-H should be taken in using these results to select a specific packing.
200X-H
The economic analysis for all packings at the optimum gas veloc-
ity is given in Table 8. The optimum velocity is between 50% and
3 80% of flooding velocity for all packings, and it will increase as pack-
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
ing surface area increases. The optimum total cost ranges from
uG/uG,flood $8.34E+06 to $1.2E+07 per year ($4.04–$5.83 per ton CO2 ). The
impact of the packing design on overall absorber cost is 30.7%. The
Fig. 8. Optimizing gas velocity for all packings.
lowest total costs are with 200 and 250 m2 /m3 surface area and
60-degree corrugation angle.

was found to be at 74% of flooding velocity (Razi et al., 2013). Dis-

tinction among curves is also shown in Fig. 8, but the difference 3.2. Sensitivity analysis
does not appear to be especially high.
One of the most important findings in this work is that the The sensitivity of the total annual cost will be affected by
optimum operating gas velocity for amine scrubbing CO2 absorber two factors. One is the conversion factor of equipment cost to
(50–80% flood) is lower than normal distillation design which is installed plant cost and to annualized cost (˛*ˇ), which will deter-
usually between 70 and 90% flood (McCabe et al., 1993; Kister, mine the annualized CAPEX. The other is the electricity price ($E),
1992; Perry and Green, 2007). In CO2 capture by amine scrub- which will influence the Energy cost. In this study, a cost sensi-
bing the overall mass transfer is determined by the effective mass tivity analysis with respect to these factors was performed for the
transfer area (ae ), and ae is not a strong function of velocity 250 MW CO2 capture plant. A range of 4–7 was considered for ˛,
(ae ∼ uL 0.16 ). However, for distillation columns, the mass trans- and a range of 10–30% for ˇ. For the electricity price, a range of
fer is usually determined by the volumetric overall mass transfer $42.9/MWh–$112/MWh was considered based on the electricity
coefficient (KOG *ae ), and KOG *ae is a strong function of velocity prices of 48 continental states in the US for the year 2013 (EIA,
(KOG *ae ∼ uG 0.7 ). Thus, in CO2 capture, operating at higher gas and 2013). The ranges of sensitivity analysis factors are listed in Table 9.
liquid velocities (70–90% flood) does not enhance mass transfer but The effect of annualizing factor (˛*ˇ) on optimum percent of
increases the gas-side pressure drop. flood (uG /uG,flood ) for packing 250Y is shown in Fig. 10. The base

500Y
1.2E+7 5.8

Cost per tonne CO2/ ($/tonne CO2)

Opmum Total Cost, $/yr

350Y

125Y
1.0E+7 4.9
250Y
200X 250X 350Z

250Y-H
200X-H
8.0E+6 3.9
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
aP, m2/m3
Fig. 9. Optimum total cost changes with packing.
130 C. Wang et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131

Table 8
Economic analysis for a 250 MWe coal-fired power plant.

Packing Optimum uG Flood Column height Side length Total annualized cost

m/s % m m $/yr $/ton CO2 removed

125Y 1.90 52 43.5 13.7 1.00E+06 4.84

200X 2.41 54 39.5 12.1 9.36E+06 4.53
200X-H 1.89 62 30.9 13.9 8.34E+06 4.04
250Y 1.76 68 31.0 14.0 9.60E+06 4.64
250X 2.39 58 37.1 12.0 9.34E+06 4.52
250Y-H 1.87 66 30.8 13.4 8.80E+06 4.26
350Y 1.55 76 26.5 15.8 1.06E+07 5.12
350Z 2.20 66 32.3 12.3 9.48E+06 4.59
500Y 1.49 80 26.1 15.4 1.20E+07 5.83

Table 9
Ranges of sensitivity analysis factors.

Factors Installed cost factor (˛) Annualized cost factor (ˇ) Electricity price ($E)

Ranges 3 10% $42.9/MWh

4 20% $61.4/MWh
5 30% $112/MWh
6
7

80% 74%

75% 72%

70%
uG,opt/uG,flood
uG,opt/uG,flood

70%
65%
68%
60%
66%
55%
CAPEX region expands, pushes
64% Energy region expands, pushes
50% uG,opt/uG,flood to higher values
uG,opt/uG,flood to lower values
45% 62%

40% 60%
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

αβ $E, $/MWh
Fig. 11. Effect of electricity price on uG,opt /uG,flood (250Y).
Fig. 10. Effect of annualizing factor on uG,opt /uG,flood (250Y).

95%
500Y
case is at ˛ = 5 and ˇ = 20% (˛ˇ = 1). At the lowest annualizing factor
85%
(˛ˇ = 0.3), the optimum uG /uG,flood is the lowest. As annualizing fac-
tor increases, the CAPEX dominant region expands and thus pushes 75%
the optimum percent of flood to higher values. At the greatest annu-
uG,opmal/uG,flood ,%

alizing factor (˛ˇ = 2.1), the optimum uG /uG,flood is the highest (76% 65%
of flood). The influence of annualizing factor is strong at low values 250Y

and diminishes as ˛ˇ increases. 55%

The effect of electricity price ($E) on optimum uG /uG,flood for
250Y is shown in Fig. 11. The base case is at $E = $61.4/MWh, which 45%
250X
is the industrial electricity price in Texas. The lowest case is at
35%
$E = $42.9/MWh, which is the price in the state of Washington. The
highest case is at $E = $112/MWh, which is the price considering
25%
carbon capture costs (adding another $50/MWh to the base case).
2 4 8 16 32
Unlike annualizing factor, as electricity price increases, the Energy
dominant region expands and pushes the optimum flood to lower αβ/$E, kWh/$
values.
Fig. 12. Effect of ˛ˇ/$E on uG,opt /uG,flood .
The total sensitivity analysis considers the combination of these
two factors, which is ˛ˇ/$E, on optimum uG /uG,flood and annualized
total cost. Fig. 12 shows the influence of ˛ˇ/$E on three selected
packings with different surface area and corrugation angle (250X, total cost increases as the annualizing factor (˛ˇ) increases, and
250Y, 500Y). For all packings, the optimum operating percent of as the electricity price ($E) increases. Thus, the total cost reaches
flood increases as ˛ˇ/$E increases. Fig. 13 shows the influence of minimum at the lowest ˛ˇ value (0.3) and the lowest $E value
˛ˇ/$E on annualized total cost for these three packings. Generally, ($42.9/MWh).

2.0E+7
1.5E+7
Annualized Total cost, $/yr
1.0E+7
5.0E+6
250X
0.0E+0
2 4
Fig. 13. Effect of ˛ˇ/$E on Annualized Total Cost.
4. Conclusions
An economic analysis of the absorber was conducted for
a 250 MW coal-fired power plant. CAPEX decreases when uG
increases because the mass transfer properties (ae , kG , kL ) increase
with gas velocity. The Energy cost increases with gas velocity
squared because of gas pressure drop. Total cost decreases with
gas velocity at first and then increases.
The optimum operating condition (uG,opt /uG,flood ) is between 50
and 80% flood for all packings, which is different from the normal
distillation column design (usually 70–90% flood).
As packing surface area increases from 200 to 500 m2 /m3 , the
optimum gas velocity decreases from 2.4 to 1.5 m/s.
Sensitivity analysis shows that increasing the ratio of the
annualizing factor to the electricity price (˛ˇ/$E) will push the
uG,opt /uG,flood to higher values.
The optimum total cost decreases with packing surface area at
first and then increases. The optimum total annualized cost for
the absorber varies from $4.04 to $5.83 per ton CO2 for the pack-
ings studied in this work. The lowest total costs are with 200 and
250 m2 /m3 surface area and 60-degree corrugation angle.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the
Texas Carbon Management Program and Process Science & Tech-
nology Center in the preparation of this work.
View publication stats
C. Wang et al. / International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 42 (2015) 124–131 131
One author of this publication consults for Southern Com-
pany and for Neumann Systems Group on the development of
500Y
amine scrubbing technology. The terms of this arrangement have
been reviewed and approved by the University of Texas at Austin
in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research. The
250Y
authors have financial interests in intellectual property owned
by the University of Texas that includes ideas reported in this
paper.
References
Bartocci, A.C., 2014. High Efficiency SO2 Scrubber Design to Reduce Caustic
Assumption. Paper #35, Technical Report. Envitech, Inc.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014. CPI Detailed Report (Complete Text and Tables).
8 16 32 Dugas, R.E., (Ph.D. dissertation) 2009. Carbon Dioxide Absorption, Desorption and
Diffusion in Aqueous Piperazine and Monoethanolamine. The University of
αβ/$E, kWh/$ Texas at Austin.
EIA, 2013. Electric Power Monthly Report. U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Frailie, P.T., (Ph.D. dissertation) 2014. Modeling of Carbon Dioxide
Absorption/Stripping by Aqueous Methyldiethanolamine/Piperazine. The
University of Texas at Austin.
Freeman, S.A., et al., 2011. Density and viscosity of aqueous (piperazine + carbon
dioxide) solutions. J. Chem. Eng. Data 56, 574–581.
Kister, H.Z., 1992. Distillation Design. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Lin, Y.J., Rochelle, G.T., 2014. Optimization of advanced flash stripper for CO2
capture using piperazine. Energy Procedia 63, 1504–1513.
McCabe, W.L., Smith, J.C., Harriott, P., 1993. Unit Operations of Chemical
Engineering, fifth ed. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Perry, R.H., Green, D.W., 2007. Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Hand Book, eighth ed.
McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Peters, M.S., Timmerhaus, K.D., 1991. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical
Engineers. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Rao, A.D., 2012. Combined Cycle Systems for Near-Zero Emission Power
Generation. WoodHead Publishing.
Razi, N., Svendsen, H.F., Bolland, O., 2013. Cost and energy sensitivity analysis of
absorber design in CO2 capture with MEA. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 19,
331–339.
Rochelle, G.T., Fisher, K.S., Beitler, C., Rueter, C., Searcy, K., Jassim, M., 2005.
Integrating MEA Regeneration with CO2 Compression and Peaking to Reduce
CO2 Capture Costs. Final Report for Trimeric Corp. (Subcontract of DOE
Contract DE-FG02-04ER84111).
Rochelle, G.T., 2009. Amine scrubbing for CO2 capture. Science 325, 1652–1654.
Sulzer Chemtech USA, Inc., Tulsa, OK, 2014. Packing and Supplies Cost Estimation.
Tsai, R.E., Seibert, A.F., Eldridge, R.B., Rochelle, G.T., 2011. A dimensionless model
for predicting the mass-transfer area of structured packing. AIChE J. 57,
1173–1184.
Tsai, R.E., (Ph.D. dissertation) 2010. Mass Transfer Area of Structured Packing. The
University of Texas at Austin.
Wang, C., Perry, M., Rochelle, G.T., Seibert, A.F., 2012. Packing characterization:
mass transfer properties. Energy Procedia 23, 23–32.
Wang, C., Perry, M., Seibert, A.F., Rochelle, G.T., 2013. Characterization of novel
structured packing for CO2 capture. Energy Procedia 37, 2145–2153.
Xu, Q., Rochelle, G.T., 2011. Total pressure and CO2 solubility at high temperature
in aqueous amines. Energy Procedia 4, 117–124.
Zhang, Y., Rochelle, G.T., 2014. Absorber performance with high CO2 . Energy
Procedia 63, 1329–1338.