Advertisement

Eliminating Steam Requirement of Aqueous Ammonia Capture Process by Lean Solution Flash and Vapor Recompression

  • Hoan Le Quoc Nguyen
  • David Shan-Hill WongEmail author
Original Research Paper
  • 95 Downloads

Abstract

Dilute aqueous ammonia (NH3) process is considered as one of the alternative post-combustion carbon dioxide capture (PCC) technologies. However, the energy consumption for solvent regeneration is quite high, about 0.15–0.25 MWh/ton CO2 captured as equivalent work consumption. Therefore, reducing this valuable energy duty is still the major technical challenge to extensive deployment of this PCC technology. In this work, the NH3-based carbon capture process was developed using the lean vapor recompression approach. A parametric study revealed that the optimum energy consumption occurs at the lean solvent characterized by NH3 concentration of 5.0 wt% and CO2 loading of 0.275 mol CO2/mol NH3, with the stripper and flash pressures operated at 10.50 bar and 4.17 bar, respectively. Operating under such conditions, the total work duty for a CO2 capture plant was substantially reduced to 0.087 MWh/ton CO2 captured. In this process, the need of reboiler is completely eliminated.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Aqueous ammonia Post-combustion carbon capture Energy saving Lean vapor recompression New stripper configuration 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the financial support from the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of China under Grant MOST 106-3113-E-007-002.

References

  1. Abu-Zahra MRM, Schneiders LHJ, Niederer JPM, Feron PHM, Versteeg GF (2007) CO2 capture from power plants: part I. A parametric study of the technical performance based on monoethanolamine. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 1(1):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahn CK, Lee HW, Chang YS, Han K, Kim JY, Rhee CH, Chun HD, Lee MW, Park JM (2011) Characterization of ammonia-based CO2 capture process using ion speciation. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 5(6):1606–1613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahn H, Luberti M, Liu Z, Brandani S (2013) Process configuration studies of the amine capture process for coal-fired power plants. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 16:29–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amponsah NY, Troldborg M, Kington B, Aalders I, Hough RL (2014) Greenhouse gas emissions from renewable energy sources: a review of lifecycle considerations. Renew Sust Energ Rev 39:461–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. AspenTech (2013) Rate-based model of the CO2 capture process by NH3 using Aspen plus. Aspen Technology, Inc., CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Billet R, Schultes M (1993) Predicting mass transfer in packed columns. Chem Eng Technol 16(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Budzianowski WM (2017) Assessment of thermodynamic efficiency of carbon dioxide separation in capture plants by using gas-liquid absorption. In: Budzianowski WM (ed) Energy efficient solvents for CO 2 capture by gas-liquid absorption: compounds, blends and advanced solvent systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chilton TH, Colburn AP (1934) Mass transfer (absorption) coefficients prediction from data on heat transfer and fluid friction. Ind Eng Chem 26(11):1183–1187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cousins A, Wardhaugh LT, Feron PHM (2011) Preliminary analysis of process flowsheet modifications for energy efficient CO2 capture from flue gases using chemical absorption. Chem Eng Res Des 89(8):1237–1251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Darde V, van Well WJM, Fosboel PL, Stenby EH, Thomsen K (2011) Experimental measurement and modeling of the rate of absorption of carbon dioxide by aqueous ammonia. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 5(5):1149–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Darde V, Maribo-Mogensen B, van Well WJM, Stenby EH, Thomsen K (2012) Process simulation of CO2 capture with aqueous ammonia using the extended UNIQUAC model. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 10:74–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DOE/NETL (2009), DOE/NETL’s carbon capture R&D program for existing coal-fired power plantGoogle Scholar
  13. Hanak DP, Biliyok C, Manovic V (2015) Rate-based model development, validation and analysis of chilled ammonia process as an alternative CO2 capture technology for coal-fired power plants. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 34:52–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanley B, Chen C-C (2012) New mass-transfer correlations for packed towers. AICHE J 58(1):132–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Houston G, Kemp A, Young D, Anderson S, D’Souza T, Rakich A (2007) The wholesale electricity market in Australia. A report to the Australian energy market commission. NERA Economic Consulting, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  16. Higgins SJ, Liu YA (2015) CO2 capture modeling, energy savings, and heat pump integration. Ind Eng Chem Res 54(9):2526–2553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. IPCC (2014), Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Pachauri, R.K. and Mayer, L. (Eds.)]. IPCC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  18. Jilvero H, Normann F, Andersson K, Johnsson F (2014) The rate of CO2 absorption in ammonia—implications on absorber design. Ind Eng Chem Res 53(16):6750–6758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jung J, Jeong YS, Lee U, Lim Y, Han C (2015) New configuration of the CO2 capture process using aqueous monoethanolamine for coal-fired power plants. Ind Eng Chem Res 54(15):3865–3878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim JY, Han K, Chun HD (2009) CO2 absorption with low concentration ammonia liquor. Energy Procedia 1(1):757–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kvamsdal HM, Haugen G, Svendsen HF, Tobiesen A, Mangalapally H, Hartono A, Mejdell T (2011) Modelling and simulation of the Esbjerg pilot plant using the Cesar 1 solvent. Energy Procedia 4:1644–1651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Le Moullec Y, Kanniche M (2011) Screening of flowsheet modifications for an efficient monoethanolamine (MEA) based post-combustion CO2 capture. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 5(4):727–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Le Moullec Y, Neveux T, Al Azki A, Chikukwa A, Hoff KA (2014) Process modifications for solvent-based post-combustion CO2 capture. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 31:96–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li K, Yu H, Feron P, Tade M, Wardhaugh L (2015a) Technical and energy performance of an advanced, aqueous ammonia-based CO2 capture technology for a 500-MW coal-fired power station. Environ Sci Technol 49(16):10243–10252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li K, Yu H, Qi G, Feron P, Tade M, Yu J, Wang S (2015b) Rate-based modeling of combined SO2 removal and NH3 recycling integrated with an aqueous NH3-based CO2 capture process. Appl Energy 148:66–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liang Z, Gao H, Rongwong W, Na Y (2015) Comparative studies of stripper overhead vapor integration-based configurations for post-combustion CO2 capture. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 34:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lin YJ, Wong DSH, Jang SS, Ou JJ (2012) Control strategies for flexible operation of a power plant with CO2 capture plant. AICHE J 58(9):2697–2704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu J, Gao H-C, Peng C-C, Wong DS-H, Jang S-S, Shen J-F (2015) Aspen plus rate-based modeling for reconciling laboratory scale and pilot scale CO2 absorption using aqueous ammonia. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 34:117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liu J, Wong DS-H, Jang S-S, Shen Y-T (2017) Energy-saving design for regeneration process in large-scale CO2 capture using aqueous ammonia. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 73:12–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nazaroff WW, Weschler CJ (2004) Cleaning products and air fresheners: exposure to primary and secondary air pollutants. Atmos Environ 38(18):2841–2865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Neveux T, Le Moullec Y, Corriou J, Favre E (2013) Energy performance of CO2 capture processes: interaction between process design and solvent. Chem Eng Trans 35:337–342Google Scholar
  32. Niu Z, Guo Y, Zeng Q, Lin W (2012) Experimental studies and rate-based process simulations of CO2 absorption with aqueous ammonia solutions. Ind Eng Chem Res 51(14):5309–5319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Oyenekan BA, Rochelle GT (2006) Energy performance of stripper configurations for CO2 capture by aqueous amines. Ind Eng Chem Res 45(8):2457–2464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pfaff I, Oexmann J, Kather A (2010) Optimised integration of post-combustion CO2 capture process in greenfield power plants. Energy 35(10):4030–4041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pinsent B, Pearson L, Roughton F (1956a) The kinetics of combination of carbon dioxide with hydroxide ions. Trans Faraday Soc 52:1512–1520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pinsent B, Pearson L, Roughton F (1956b) The kinetics of combination of carbon dioxide with ammonia. Trans Faraday Soc 52:1594–1598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Puxty G, Rowland R, Attalla M (2010) Comparison of the rate of CO2 absorption into aqueous ammonia and monoethanolamine. Chem Eng Sci 65(2):915–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rochelle GT (2009) Amine scrubbing for CO2 capture. Science 325:1652–1654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sharma M, Qadir A, Khalilpour R, Abbas A (2015) Modeling and analysis of process configurations for solvent-based post-combustion carbon capture. Asia Pac J Chem Eng 10(5):764–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stichlmair J, Bravo JL, Fair JR (1989) General model for prediction of pressure drop and capacity of countercurrent gas/liquid packed columns. Gas Sep Purif 3(1):19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Telikapalli V, Kozak F, Francois J, Sherrick B, Black J, Muraskin D, Cage M, Hammond M, Spitznogle G (2011) CCS with the Alstom chilled ammonia process development program–field pilot results. Energy Procedia 4:273–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Warudkar SS, Cox KR, Wong MS, Hirasaki GJ (2013) Influence of stripper operating parameters on the performance of amine absorption systems for post-combustion carbon capture: part I. high-pressure strippers. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 16(Supplement C):342–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yu, H. and Feron, P.H.M. (2016), 12 - Aqueous ammonia-based post-combustion CO2 capture, in Feron P. (Ed.) Absorption-based post-combustion capture of carbon dioxide, Woodhead publishing. p. 283–301Google Scholar
  44. Yu H, Morgan S, Allport A, Cottrell A, Do T, McGregor J, Wardhaugh L, Feron P (2011) Results from trialling aqueous NH3 based post-combustion capture in a pilot plant at Munmorah power station: absorption. Chem Eng Res Des 89(8):1204–1215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yu H, Qi G, Wang S, Morgan S, Allport A, Cottrell A, Do T, McGregor J, Wardhaugh L, Feron P (2012) Results from trialling aqueous ammonia-based post-combustion capture in a pilot plant at Munmorah Power Station: gas purity and solid precipitation in the stripper. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 10:15–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringNational Tsing Hua UniversityHsinchuTaiwan, Republic of China

Personalised recommendations