A review of research facilities, pilot and commercial plants for solvent-based post-combustion CO2 capture: Packed bed, phase-change and rotating processes

CO2 solubility in aqueous N‐methylcyclohexylamine (MCA) and N‐cyclohexyl‐1,3‐propanediamine (CHAP) solutions

“…Among such solvents, mixtures such as 2‐amino‐2‐methyl‐1‐propanol (AMP) and piperazine (PZ), methyldiethanolamine (MDEA) and PZ, or the proprietary solvent KS‐1 appear to be promising as they indicated potential for regeneration energy around 3.0 GJ/ton of CO 2 captured, compared to the approximately 4.0 GJ/ton of CO 2 captured with the 30 wt.% MEA 5,6 . While these reductions have been attained in standard absorption/desorption flowsheets, solvents such as PZ exhibited reductions down to approximately 2.0 GJ/ton CO 2 in flowsheets that included internal energy recovery equipment 2 …”

“…These include solid sorbents, membranes, and new liquid absorbents 1 . Among such technologies, absorption/desorption processes have received significant attention, with several efforts observed worldwide regarding the scaling‐up of capture plants 2 . The major limitation of such processes is the reboiler duty required for solvent regeneration, which poses significant energy penalties in the CO 2 emitting plants.…”

“…The major limitation of such processes is the reboiler duty required for solvent regeneration, which poses significant energy penalties in the CO 2 emitting plants. To reduce the energy costs of absorption/desorption systems, it is imperative to search for solvents that can decrease the heat duty in the order of 2.0 GJ/ton of CO 2 captured or below 2 …”

Fully-integrated electrochemical system that captures CO2from flue gas to produce value-added chemicals at ambient conditions

“…23,24 Liquid absorption by amine-based sorbents such as monoethanolamine (MEA) is one of the few technologies that has witnessed large-scale implementation by retrofitting to industrial plants emitting CO 2 directly into the atmosphere. 25 However, due to strong MEA-CO 2 binding, high temperatures are required to release the CO 2 and recycle the MEA sorbent. This contributes to the additional energy penalty to make MEA absorption a continuous process.…”

Process Intensification of CO2 Desorption

“…78 In conclusion, the use of an RPB for CO 2 desorption is promising, but the number of studies is still limited compared to the use of RPB for CO 2 absorption. 56 The consumption of electricity to drive the rotor of the RPB, in addition to the steam consumption for CO 2 desorption, may result in increased OPEX. The challenges get compounded because of the high flow rates in an RPB; the short gas−liquid contact times cause the low regeneration efficiency, which for sure needs further research and development.…”