A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Techno-economic comparison of three technologies for precombustion CO2 capture from a lignite-fired IGCC
This paper compares the techno-economic performances of three technologies for CO2 capture from a lignite-based IGCC power plant located in the Czech Republic: (1) Physical absorption with a Rectisol-based process; (2) Polymeric CO2-selective membrane-based capture; (3) Low-temperature capture. The evaluations show that the IGCC plant with CO2 capture leads to costs of electricity between 91 and 120 €$MWh–1, depending on the capture technology employed, compared to 65 €$MWh–1 for the power plant without capture. This results in CO2 avoidance costs ranging from 42 to 84 €$tCO2,avoided –1 , mainly linked to the losses in net power output. From both energy and cost points of view, the low-temperature and Rectisol based CO2 capture processes are the most efficient capture technologies. Furthermore, partial CO2 capture appears as a good mean to ensure early implementation due to the limited increase in CO2 avoidance cost when considering partial capture. To go beyond the two specific CO2-selective membranes considered, a cost/membrane property map for CO2-selective membranes was developed. This map emphasise the need to develop high performance membrane to compete with solvent technology. Finally, the cost of the whole CCS chain was estimated at 54 €$tCO2,avoided –1 once pipeline transport and storage are taken into consideration. © Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 ; acceptedVersion
Techno-economic comparison of three technologies for precombustion CO2 capture from a lignite-fired IGCC
This paper compares the techno-economic performances of three technologies for CO2 capture from a lignite-based IGCC power plant located in the Czech Republic: (1) Physical absorption with a Rectisol-based process; (2) Polymeric CO2-selective membrane-based capture; (3) Low-temperature capture. The evaluations show that the IGCC plant with CO2 capture leads to costs of electricity between 91 and 120 €$MWh–1, depending on the capture technology employed, compared to 65 €$MWh–1 for the power plant without capture. This results in CO2 avoidance costs ranging from 42 to 84 €$tCO2,avoided –1 , mainly linked to the losses in net power output. From both energy and cost points of view, the low-temperature and Rectisol based CO2 capture processes are the most efficient capture technologies. Furthermore, partial CO2 capture appears as a good mean to ensure early implementation due to the limited increase in CO2 avoidance cost when considering partial capture. To go beyond the two specific CO2-selective membranes considered, a cost/membrane property map for CO2-selective membranes was developed. This map emphasise the need to develop high performance membrane to compete with solvent technology. Finally, the cost of the whole CCS chain was estimated at 54 €$tCO2,avoided –1 once pipeline transport and storage are taken into consideration. © Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019 ; acceptedVersion
Techno-economic comparison of three technologies for precombustion CO2 capture from a lignite-fired IGCC
Roussanaly, Simon (author) / Vitvarova, Monika (author) / Anantharaman, Rahul (author) / Berstad, David Olsson (author) / Hagen, Brede (author) / Jakobsen, Jana Poplsteinova (author) / Novotny, Vaclav (author) / Skaugen, Geir (author)
2019-01-01
cristin:1740997
17 ; Frontiers of Chemical Science and Engineering
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
DDC:
690
| DSpace@MIT | 2014