A comparison of different parameter correlation models and the validation of an MEA-based absorber model

Dynamic modelling, validation and analysis of post-combustion chemical absorption CO2 capture plant

“…However, it is not clear how fast/slow the process will move from one steady-state to another without dynamic validation of the models. Dynamic validation of the model of the integrated process has not been performed due to the challenging nature of running a CO 2 absorption pilot campaign in dynamic mode (Kvamsdal et al, 2011), which makes acquiring data for such an endeavour very difficult. Nevertheless, Faber et al (2011) were able to perform step response test at a 1 tonne CO 2 /h pilot plant and found that the overall system acts like a buffer for any perturbation at the absorber flue gas inlet.…”

Dynamic model validation of the post-combustion CO2 absorption process

“…A CO 2 absorber model, developed by Kvamsdal et al (2009), was validated against a dynamic data-set with 30 wt% MEA from a campaign carried out in the Validation Of Carbon Capture (VOCC) pilot plant at NTNU and SINTEF laboratories (Kvamsdal et al, 2011). The absorber model of Kvamsdal et al (2009) is the basis for an improved general column model used to represent both absorber and stripper columns in the present work.…”

Flexible operation of CSIRO's post-combustion CO2 capture pilot plant at the AGL Loy Yang power station

“…Based on previous dynamic modelling studies, important operational data that has been used in dynamic model validation includes: (i) temperature profiles of the absorber and stripper columns, (ii) measurements of liquid CO2 loading at various locations in the pilot plant (Kvamsdal et al, 2009;Lawal et al, 2009bLawal et al, , 2009aLawal et al, 2010;Lawal et al, 2012), (iii) change in CO2 captured % with time (Kvamsdal et al, 2010), (iv) CO2 concentration in the treated flue gas stream, and (v) reboiler heat duty (Biliyok et al, 2012). Thus, this paper presents these important pilot plant results for step-changes of the following operational parameters: flue gas flow, absorbent flow rate, and steam pressure.…”

“…These studies highlighted the need for reliable dynamic pilot plant results to become available. Some studies with access to transient pilot plant data have successfully conducted dynamic validations of dynamic PCC models (Kvamsdal et al, 2010;Biliyok et al, 2012). The transient pilot plant scenario used by Kvamsdal et al (2010) to validate a dynamic PCC model was one pilot plant run that demonstrated the effects of (i) changing liquid and gas flow rate, and (ii) changing CO2 content at the gas inlet.…”

“…Some studies with access to transient pilot plant data have successfully conducted dynamic validations of dynamic PCC models (Kvamsdal et al, 2010;Biliyok et al, 2012). The transient pilot plant scenario used by Kvamsdal et al (2010) to validate a dynamic PCC model was one pilot plant run that demonstrated the effects of (i) changing liquid and gas flow rate, and (ii) changing CO2 content at the gas inlet. In contrast, the dynamic model validation by Biliyok et al (2012) used the transient pilot plant data for increasing moisture in flue gas and absorber intercooling.…”