Pilot-scale CO <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si195.svg" display="inline" id="d1e530"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> capture in a cement plant with CESAR1: Comparative analysis of specific reboiler duty across advanced process configurations
Isaac Appelquist Løge, Can Demir, Sai Hema Bhavya Vinjarapu, Randi Neerup, Ebbe Hauge Jensen, Jens Kristian Jørsboe, Maria Dimitriadi, Halil Halilov, Carsten Fritzner Frøstrup, Istvan Gyorbiro, Nomiki Kottaki, Asams Nelliparambil Jayan, Søren Holdt Jensen, Jakob Lindkvist Karlsson, Philip Loldrup Fosbøl
Abstract
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) from hard-to-abate sources is essential to mitigate the impacts of climate change. The CESAR1 solvent is considered the new benchmark solvent; however, its performance is limited in a wide range of advanced process configurations in pilot-scale studies. The scarcity of reliable pilot data from realistic setups retards the rapid advancement of CO 2 capture technology, as it hinders the accurate modeling and design of full-scale plants. In this work, we assess the applicability of the CESAR1 solvent for CO 2 capture in the cement industry at pilot scale, utilizing various advanced process configurations. Here, we present the specific reboiler duty of the CESAR1 solvent utilized in base-case configuration, absorber intercooling, stripper cold feed, variable stripper pressures, and lean vapor compression. All results are presented from verified steady states, including rigorous uncertainty analysis. In the base-case configuration, the plant operates with a specific reboiler duty of 3.39 GJ/t CO 2 . The lowest specific reboiler duty for stripper cold feed, absorber intercooling, variable stripper pressures, and lean vapor compression were 3.35 GJ/t CO 2 , 3.10 GJ/t CO 2 , 2.53 GJ/t CO 2 , and 2.03 GJ/t CO 2 . • CESAR1 solvent with advanced process configurations tested in cement CO 2 capture. • Configurations include intercooling, cold feed, lean vapor compression and changing stripper pressure. • SRD under base case conditions was 3.39 GJ/tCO 2 • Absorber intercooling reduced SRD to 3.10 GJ/tCO 2 • Lean vapor compression achieved the lowest SRD at 2.03 GJ/tCO 2 .