Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Catalyzed Carbonate Vs Amine Comparison

    Uploaded by

    Wayne Monnery
    23 views22 pages
    Amine vs Carbonate Solvents for CCS

    Original Title

    Catalyzed Carbonate vs Amine Comparison

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Amine vs Carbonate Solvents for CCS

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    23 views22 pages

    Catalyzed Carbonate Vs Amine Comparison

    Uploaded by

    Wayne Monnery
    Amine vs Carbonate Solvents for CCS

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 22
    Internationa Journal of Greenhouse Gaz Conca 88 (2019) 134155 ‘Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control | homepage: www-elsevier.comilocsteljgge ELSEVIER jour Comparison of life-cycle assessment between bio-catalyzed and promoted ® potassium carbonate processes and amine-based carbon capture technologies* Frangois Saunier’, Sylvie Fradette”, Ferrere Clerveaux”, Sylvain Lefebvre”, Eric Madore”, Gabriel Veilleux”, Cécile Bulle’, Richard Surprenant”” {en4t- ema Relee Cnr fre ie of Pros Pees an Si, $8 Ques May. Mana en pws ‘Up envoy, he ech Cy eptare fer both we and sequestration cles primarily onthe we of ceria] amine solvate sch as mance fee seoment (OIEA). However, these sltens require sghifent mounts of valuable, higheride process heat fr valent Bloated possum carbonate sen regeneration adsl (fom substatal operational std epvizonmental sues inelding degradation, (oXe Mictare cape ‘eorel emis ‘eloped and deployed new echaeogy to solve these challenges by employing a nortxs low-cost, stable salt ‘sesstvly lo fue gas contaminant, and coro). CO, Solutions Ine (CS) rece de- ork {olution a an absorpdon solution andthe carbone anydrate eye asa catalyt for eatbon managers. The cons ‘ests both fart CO, absorpon Kinetics and significant ceduced energy cots by allowing to we lowegeade cabo eaparetcoteey heat to eive che solton regeneration. This stay ams to analyze and compare the environmental profile of captreprceses such a8 CS, MEA and UNO MIS (a precitatng potassium carbonate separation process The fentext of the sedy s 00, capare fom the ve gas steam of a 550 MW coated pawe sation inthe mi ‘western USA. To afl the bjecsve, we performed an attributional ersdetoste LCA comparing te tres ‘Sytem. This dy was conducted scoring fo the reqsirements of 50 14040 & 14044 and reviewed by 30 ‘neependent panel which concoded that "Tne LCA requirements of S0 14040 and ISO 14044 have beer an~ ‘ered inthe best posse manner” Dala were ninly bared en proces snaton ofthe thes techoloyes. The impart atesment wes cari cout withthe Impact 2002+ methed. Tis method considers feur indicators a endpoint level (Climate change Huan heals Fzonntem quality end Rescuces) an skeen indenters at midpoint level or tance Aquatic “Asdifeaton or rane format). Results show that che CS carbon capture unt has signfeany lower potential impacts than the MEA and [UNO MKS unite The teste presents lower acres than the MEA aod the UNO MK3 reer forall midpoint fang endpoint indiestors. The opetetion stage, and more especlally I energy consumption, is the main oo ‘ebatr tothe environmental profile of ll hee systems. The CST system dfs rials fom the MEA and [UNO MIG sytem ican hot water instend of ent forte regeneration ep. Hot water ia waste far the wer plan, whereas team envumption rede the production af elecricy tthe powerplant which rege be eomgeneated ler In thie cy, tn conedered that here lees of lett proton wil fet ‘he regional marke a eich the power plat i located, and therefore the lat lett i pradeed By an sverae eletnlty gid mix coming from this reional market. (Other inpts donot conrbute nigifianly tothe environmental prole of the aytems at endpint level ‘Among them, chemial inputs are the tp catribulere. Heweves, the midpeint eategry where CSU technology Aierentises lf te mont rom other techoologies i when comparing the MEA Rempiatory Orzanier sare, whl ie 35 umes higher than CSL. The several senaiily analysis conducted typiealy do no alee the can. en is International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Contra Teebslogies, GHGT.14. 21" 25% October 2018, Melbourne, Astalia + corresponding autor. mall eres schard.surprenaGeodsoutons com (R. Suprenan Intp//do ong/10 1036/46 2019.05.08 Received 31 August 2018: Receive in revised frm 3 April 2029; Accepies @ May 2019 1750.5636/ 6 2019 Elsevier Lt. llrightsreserved 1. Introduetion {Conventional postcombustion technology forthe capture and pro Action of pure Co, for both utilization and sequestration has been imarily based on the use of chemical amine solvents such as mono ethanolamine (MEA), However, these solvents require significant amounts of valuable, high-grade process heat or steam fo solvent re teneration, This energy requirement creates aa inefficient proces with high operating costs, which creates a considerable hurdle limiting the ‘widespread market adoption of pos-combustion carbon capture tec nology. Additionally, conventional amine solvents suffer from sub stontal operational and environmental issves including degradation, the generation of heatstable salts and toxic sludges, toric aerosol ‘ensssons, sensitivity to flue gas contaminants, and corrosvity Thong Do et al. 2012). ‘Tae Cooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies (CO2CRC) has developed a novel solvent absorption process, UNO MKS (ANON, 2018) a a response to the challenges associated with the aminebased CO, capture technology. It is a precipitating potassium ‘carbonate technology engineered to capture CO, emissions. The high absorption performance is reached by adding an absonption promoter fo ‘the potassium carbonate aqueous solution. The main benefits of this process are its low regeneration energy, low volatility and environ. ‘mental impact and mult-impusity eapcure which produces valuable by products ‘UNO MK3 uses similar absorption and regeneration stages of @ conventional amine absorption process. However, unlike a standard Tiguid-based solvent system, a KHCO, (potassium biearbonate) pre pita is formed during absorption and subsequent cooling, The pre pita is then separated from the liquid phase for selective regenera tion of the bicarbonate specie. Its sal eystem does not require aliary ‘equipment used to manage atmospheric solvent emissions necessary (0 [MEA processes. However, it necessitates an ion exchange resin unit (0 ‘remove impurities (NO, and S04”) and regenerate the solvent. (CO, Solutions Ine. (CSI) has developed and deployed a process ‘techsology that captures CO, with a liquid absorbent system consisting ‘of a potassium carbonate salt and an enzyme in water to resolve the challenges associated with the amine-haced CO, capture technology. ‘The non-toxic absorbing solution is composed of low-cost en- Vironmentally-friendly commodity chemieals which do not form un desirable byproducts when coatacted with fe gas contaminants and do not generate aerosol emissions from the absorber. The enayme is & ‘arbonie anhydrase (CA) enhanced through directed evolution by the ‘company. The CA biocatalyst has in its active site zine fon, whieh ‘significantly accelerates the conversion of CO into its bicarbonate form (or vice versa), thus reducing the size of the Mue gas contacting ‘equipment. The CA offers one of the fastest reaction rates amongst ‘enzymes, which typically makes the reaction rate limited by difasion of the substrates ‘Te favorable vapor-iquid equilibrium of the carbonate/bicarbo- nate solution allows operating the stripping column under a partial vacuum, which lowers its operation temperature anywhere between 70°Cand 40°C, depending on the most economical vacuum equipment ‘configuration, In doing 20, allows sing unconventional heat sources ‘with matching temperatures, such at hot water, to regenerate the neat nlf Gren Gs Cra 98 (2019) 124-185 absorbing solution. This hot water could be taken from waste heat streams avallable within the power plant, for example from # waste ‘eat source that typically gets cooled bya sevice like cooling water or air Cike turbine cooling), or that gets emitted hot to the environment (lke stack emissions), This Towetemperature operation range and the availability of low-grade heat considerably reduce the operation costs of capture -atiner and Garimella (2011) estimate that inthe USA in 2007, 60% of energy inpst to power plants resulted in Industral Excess Heat (EID) above 30°C and this IEH had a weighted average temperature of 88°C. Data from ths reference show the excess heat potential represents 6.7% of the energy input above 100°C and 18.9% above 50°C in power plants Forman etal. (2016) estimate the IEH above 85°C from coal-fed powerplants represents 8.1% of the heat inptt, Hence ite reasonable fo assume that the excess heat will be available on-site at arate ne cessary to supply partially or entirely without additional energy sources the hest tothe reoiler. (St capture technology does not require many auxiliary units ne ‘essary to amine-based capture to manage emissions tothe atmosphere, mitigate solvent degradation, or manage toxic by-products, such as water wash tower, activated carbon fier, reclaimer and interstage ‘coolers on the absorber column, CSI capture differs from the UNO MKS process asi is operated in 2 on-precipitating mode, uses excess low-grade heat from the power plant to supply the energy othe reoiler uni, and uses a solvent bleed {e-control the level of contaminants under & defined threshold Hence CSI seems to have some environmental benefits when com: pared (o the alternative technologies. However, these benefits have sever been validated and quantified. A Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is reant to quantify the environmental performance of products, pro cesses or services It allows to quantitatively assess the potential en vironmental impacts of processes from cradle to grave, throughout the entire value chain (supply chain, wage, and disposal phases) of pro duct and services, LCA studies have been reported in scientific literature for solvent based CO, capture technologies using amines especially MEA, and in organic solvents, such as potassium carbonate fr the UNO MKS process Grant et al, 2014; Koornneef et al., 2008; Korre et al., 2010; Manuilova etal, 2014; Marx et al, 2011; (Mora et al, 2016; Singh cecal, 2011; Zhang etal, 2014). These two technologies differ fom CSI technology i diferent aspect suchas required services from the power plant, possible upgrading of fue gases contaminants and solvent de aradetion produets. One of the main differences between CSI teh ‘ology and MEA of UNO MKS technologies isthe use of hot water at '85°C instead of steam to drive the regeneration step. ‘To our knowledge, no LCA has heen conducted to compare the environmental profile of S's CO, eaptre process with MEA ang UNO [MKS technologies, hich isthe aim of the present paper. To meet this objective, the three technologies are compared by considering their retrofit application to a coaltired power station, More specifically, the objectives of the study are ‘To compare the environmental profile ofthe systems defined by the whole life-cycle of CO, capture processes; ‘#70 perform a contribution analysis and identify the critical Resources (meter, energy) elated FlovaPoce fEvculded FlowaiPracesses Emissions (od, hui, ‘g22003) ‘Waste Manageriett neat nlf Gren Gs Cra 98 (2019) 124-185 SYSTEM BOUNDARIES Supply maa T= Transpo ig. 1. Maun fe eyele tages included in system boundaries parameters hotspots of CSIs system; + To idencty aspects that may requite further inquires 2, Methodology 2.1. System function and functional unit. ‘Tae following function is used to study the systems: “Separation of, 60, from the flue ges stream of a coal-fired power station”. The func onal unit, i, the reference to which all input and output data are ‘normalized, is defined here as "Separation of 11 of CO, from the flue gas steam of a $50 MW coal-fired power statin inthe Midwestern USA in 2017" ‘The systems studied are: © St process Enzyme-accelerated potassium carbonate solvent tech nology. ‘MEA process; Amine solvent (MEA) technology. ' UNO MKS process; Separation technology based on & precipitating potassium carbonate solvent 2.2. System boundaries and general system description System boundaries dently the life-cycle stage, procestes and flows considered inthe LCA study and should include al auivities necessary to carry out the studied function and therefore relevant to the study objectives ig. 1 Mlustrates the studied system boundaries. The life-cycle stages

    You might also like