Solid Sorbent CO2 Capture Technology Evaluation and Demonstration at Norcem's Cement Plant in Brevik, Norway

Nelson, Thomas O.; Coleman, Luke; Mobley, Paul; Kataria, Atish; Tanthana, Jak; Lesemann, Markus; Bjerge, Liv-Margrethe

doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.686

Cited by 25 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, despite its positive effect on sorption (Tailor et al , 2014), the high price of polyethyleneimine means that its use is not economically feasible. In addition, stable sulfate salts are formed when polyethyleneimine is used due to the high affinity of SO 2 for amino groups (Nelson et al , 2014), which may explain the lower sorption capacity observed after the first sorption cycle.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of binders for the pelletization of fly ash zeolites on sulfur dioxide sorption properties

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fly ash zeolites are economically and ecologically attractive alternatives to synthetic and natural zeolites. Their use as sulfur dioxide sorbents is one of the possible applications of these materials. During the process of fly ash zeolite synthesis, a light powder is formed, which is not acceptable in practical applications due to technical problems, such as a marked drop in pressure, diffusion limits, hydraulic resistance, clogging in the packed beds and the possibility of losing a bed. It is therefore necessary to perform a pelletization process. Thickening of the material during pelletization influences sorption capacity negatively due to diffusing limitations, while the lack of an additional binder may result in a material of low mechanical durability. In this study, pressure pelletization experiments with fly ash zeolite were performed. Binders were selected on the basis of economic considerations as well as their potential to exert a positive influence on the sorption properties of the produced pellets. Cyclic sorption experiments were conducted (on sulfur dioxide) in which one zeolite powder sample was subjected to pelletization without a binder and another sample was subjected to the process with selected binders added. The results of the experiments were then analysed to ascertain the influence of the pelletization process on sulfur dioxide sorption capacity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of binders for the pelletization of fly ash zeolites on sulfur dioxide sorption properties

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The aim of this experimental evaluation was to define the process operational window and requirement. The following major operational conditions and specifications were obtained experimentally by RTI and used as the basis for this solid sorbent evaluation (Nelson et al, 2014a(Nelson et al, , 2014b(Nelson et al, , 2014cNelson, 2013):…”

Section: Pei-based Solid Sorbent Process Simulation and Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benchmarking of a novel solid sorbent CO2 capture process for NGCC power generation

Nasr¹,

Nelson

Kataria

et al. 2015

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe successful deployment of any technology depends on many important factors. One of the critical ones that affect the success of post combustion CO 2 capture technologies is the ability to reduce the increase in cost of electricity associated with retrofitting the capture unit to electricity generating power plants.High capture costs associated with conventional MEA solvent processes has opened an opportunity for the emergence of many competing technologies aimed at reducing the cost of capture. This paper presents the technical and economic benchmarking of a polyethyleneimine (PEI)-based solid sorbent CO 2 capture process as compared to the conventional MEA solvent process, with both technologies applied to a natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plant.The results of this evaluation indicate that the PEI-based sorbent process requires approximately 25% less regeneration steam than the conventional MEA process primarily due to avoiding the energy demand required for heat of vaporization of water in the MEA process. The PEI solid sorbent based process results in approximately 6.3 power plant efficiency point reduction as opposed to an 8 efficiency points for the MEA based process. The design of the fluidized-bed absorption and regeneration reactors in the novel solid sorbent process result in significant reductions in capital costs (21% reduction compared to MEA). The economic evaluation shows that the PEI-based solid sorbent process offers attractive reductions in the cost of electricity and the CO 2 capture cost. The estimated cost of electricity, after adding the CO 2 capture process, is found to be 85 and 81.7 $/kWh for the MEA-based and PEI based process, respectively. Moreover, the cost of CO 2 avoided for both process is estimated to be 69.8 and 62 $/ton CO 2 for the MEA and PEI process, respectively.

show abstract

“…CCS applied to cement production has gained further interest after testing at the Norcem Brevik plant in Norway, which has been selected as one of the two potential sites for CO 2 capture in the in the Norwegian full-scale CCS project. On-site pilot testing included three CO 2 capture technologies: amine absorption, amine-impregnated adsorption and fixed-site carrier membranes [4][5][6][7]. Presently, a front-end engineering design (FEED)-study for the Norcem Brevik plant is being carried out to prepare for a final investment decision by the Norwegian Parliament in 2020/2021 [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Technologies for CO2 Capture from Cement Production—Part 2: Cost Analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an assessment of the cost performance of CO2 capture technologies when retrofitted to a cement plant: MEA-based absorption, oxyfuel, chilled ammonia-based absorption (Chilled Ammonia Process), membrane-assisted CO2 liquefaction, and calcium looping. While the technical basis for this study is presented in Part 1 of this paper series, this work presents a comprehensive techno-economic analysis of these CO2 capture technologies based on a capital and operating costs evaluation for retrofit in a cement plant. The cost of the cement plant product, clinker, is shown to increase with 49 to 92% compared to the cost of clinker without capture. The cost of CO2 avoided is between 42 €/tCO2 (for the oxyfuel-based capture process) and 84 €/tCO2 (for the membrane-based assisted liquefaction capture process), while the reference MEA-based absorption capture technology has a cost of 80 €/tCO2. Notably, the cost figures depend strongly on factors such as steam source, electricity mix, electricity price, fuel price and plant-specific characteristics. Hence, this confirms the conclusion of the technical evaluation in Part 1 that for final selection of CO2 capture technology at a specific plant, a plant-specific techno-economic evaluation should be performed, also considering more practical considerations.

show abstract

Solid Sorbent CO2 Capture Technology Evaluation and Demonstration at Norcem's Cement Plant in Brevik, Norway

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

The influence of binders for the pelletization of fly ash zeolites on sulfur dioxide sorption properties

The influence of binders for the pelletization of fly ash zeolites on sulfur dioxide sorption properties

Benchmarking of a novel solid sorbent CO2 capture process for NGCC power generation

Comparison of Technologies for CO2 Capture from Cement Production—Part 2: Cost Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About