2020
DOI: 10.3389/fenrg.2020.00165
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparative Assessment of Emerging Solvents and Adsorbents for Mitigating CO2 Emissions From the Industrial Sector by Using Molecular Modeling Tools

Abstract: The possibilities offered by molecular modeling tools to obtain relevant data at process conditions, while also gaining molecular insights on the techniques used for CO 2 capture and separation, are presented here using selected case studies. Two different technologies, absorption with amine-based systems and adsorption on porous materials, were explored, using the molecular-based equation of state, soft-Statistical Associating Fluid Theory (SAFT), and Grand Canonical Monte Carlo simulations, respectively. The… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

4
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 127 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This agrees with similar work by Alkhatib et al 17 Wanderley et al 18 maintain that energy costs associated with vaporization (and energy duties overall) can certainly be reduced by using nonaqueous cosolvents. 18 However, there are certain drawbacks associated with the use of nonaqueous carbon capture fluids: Reduced heat transfer will likely necessitate more expensive heat exchangers, 18 and CO 2 removal is more inefficient for nonaqueous water alternatives, 16,17,19 although this may not always be the case. 16,18 Mathias et al 20 point out that process intensification and process integration may be able to compensate for the disadvantages of nonaqueous systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This agrees with similar work by Alkhatib et al 17 Wanderley et al 18 maintain that energy costs associated with vaporization (and energy duties overall) can certainly be reduced by using nonaqueous cosolvents. 18 However, there are certain drawbacks associated with the use of nonaqueous carbon capture fluids: Reduced heat transfer will likely necessitate more expensive heat exchangers, 18 and CO 2 removal is more inefficient for nonaqueous water alternatives, 16,17,19 although this may not always be the case. 16,18 Mathias et al 20 point out that process intensification and process integration may be able to compensate for the disadvantages of nonaqueous systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These models have rigorous physical basis from statistical mechanics, enabling them to accurately capture the effect of intermolecular interactions (i.e., dispersive, associating, polar) on macrolevel phenomena. This is an added edge over conventional EoSs, that are incapable of explicitly modeling polar interactions governing the behavior of third and fourth generation refrigerants and other green substances of polar nature. The adoption of SAFT-based models as a central pillar for screening tools has been steadily growing, holding the promise of similar success when applied to screening alternative eco-friendly refrigerants as drop-in replacements under the same operating conditions and technical criteria. This is fueled by the demonstrated success of our group in accurately modeling the holistic thermodynamic behavior of third and fourth generation refrigerants. On another front, the physical basis of SAFT-based models can enable the extraction of microlevel tendencies linked with observable physicochemical properties and technical performance.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MOFs with high porosity, open metal uncoordinated sites and good thermal stability have demonstrated excellent qualities for CO 2 /N 2 separations (Yazaydin et al, 2009 ; Zhang et al, 2010 ; Sumida et al, 2011 ; Yu et al, 2017 ) and are emerging as promising candidates for CO 2 separation at industrial conditions. For instance, the M-MOF-74 family (with M being the divalent metal used), also known as M 2 (dobdc) or CPO27-M, presents one of the highest found CO 2 adsorption capacities at low to moderate CO 2 partial pressures, relevant at the required conditions for CO 2 capture from flue gas (Britt et al, 2008 ; Caskey et al, 2008 ; Dietzel et al, 2009 ; Yazaydin et al, 2009 ; Valenzano et al, 2010 ; Alonso et al, 2018 ; Bahamon et al, 2020 ). However, in some cases, because CO 2 typically adsorbs via weak physisorption interactions, most of these synthesized structures cannot satisfy industrial requirements.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%