Exergetic and Economic Evaluation of CO2 Liquefaction Processes

Abstract

The transport of CO2, as a part of the carbon capture and storage chain, has received increased attention in the last decade. This paper aims to evaluate the most promising CO2 liquefaction processes that can be used for port-to-port and port–offshore CO2 ship transportation. The energetic, exergetic, and economic analyses are applied. The liquefaction pressure has been set to 15 bar (liquefaction temperature −30 °C), which corresponds to the design of the existing CO2 carriers. The three-stage vapor-compression process has been selected among closed systems (with propane-R290, ammonia-R717, and R134a as the working fluid) and the precooled Linde–Hampson process—as the open system (with R717). The three-stage vapor-compression process R290 shows the lowest energy consumption, and the CO2 liquefaction cost 21.3 USD/tCO2. Although the power consumption of precooled Linde–Hampson process is 3.1% higher than the vapor-compression process with R209, the lowest total capital expenditures are notable. The CO2 liquefaction cost of precooled Linde–Hampson process is 21.13 USD/tCO2. The exergetic efficiency of the three-stage vapor-compression process with R290 is 66.6%, while the precooled Linde–Hampson process is 64.8%.

Emerging concepts in intermediate carbon dioxide emplacement to support carbon dioxide removal

“…Upfront compression requirements for sorbent transportation technologies at the scale of a refuelling station must be compared with relevant scale systems for liquified CO 2 or supercritical pipeline CO 2 , as the behaviour of CO 2 varies substantially from ideal in these ranges. 35,87,88 Whether liquid carriers outcompete sorbents or solid carriers on a carbon emission or energy intensity basis will need to be assessed through life-cycle assessment that determines impacts from CO 2 transportation and from H 2 transportation.…”

Scoping carbon dioxide removal options for Germany–What is their potential contribution to Net-Zero CO2?

“…Environmental parameters are required to be controlled by a long-term monitoring program along the whole storage life-cycle, and energy and economic parameters depend on the location, size and site specific characterization of the storage project. Depending on the regional conditions and the technical parameters of the project, the resulting additional expenses for CO 2 conditioning and storage are indicated in the literature within cost bandwidths (Chen and Morosuk, 2021;Smith et al, 2021).…”

Utilization of Cold Energy of LNG for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Liquefaction in Amine-Based SMR

“…In this study, the energy loss is set to zero because adiabatic conditions are assumed (see Assumptions section). The thermodynamic assessment of the liquefaction systems (or equipment) can be performed using the exergy efficiency ε . ,, The exergy efficiency ε of equipment K is defined as the ratio of exergy produced ( Ẋ P ) to the amount of exergy expended ( Ẋ F ) and can be represented as shown in eq . Ẋ F = Ẋ P + Ẋ D + Ẋ L ε K = Ẋ normalP , K Ẋ normalF , K where Ẋ F,K is the fuel exergy of equipment K and Ẋ P,K denotes the product exergy of equipment K . The exergy efficiency of a component characterizes the performance of that component from a thermodynamic point of view.…”