Advertisement

Complete Flowsheet and Economic Evaluation

  • Claudio Madeddu
  • Massimiliano Errico
  • Roberto Baratti
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Energy book series (BRIEFSENERGY)

Abstract

In this chapter, the design of the cross heat-exchanger, which interconnects the absorption and the stripping section, is examined in the first place. In this context, the stripper feed temperature is discussed in relation to its influence on the reboiler duty. Then, the flowsheet is completed with the design of the section dedicated to the recovery of the solvent lost in the absorber exhaust gas and the introduction of the auxiliary equipment. The last part of the chapter is dedicated to the overall economic evaluation of the plant. In particular, the capital and the operating costs are determined and their impact on the total annual costs is discussed.

References

  1. 1.
    Alie CF (2004) CO2 capture with MEA: integrating the absorption process and steam cycle of an existing coal-fired power plant. Dissertation, University of WaterlooGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    DuPart MS, Bacon TR, Edwards DJ (1993) Understanding corrosion in alkanolamine gas treating plants Part 1. Hydrocarbon Process 72:75–80Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    DuPart MS, Bacon TR, Edwards DJ (1993) Understanding corrosion in alkanolamine gas treating plants Part 1. Hydrocarbon Process 72:89–94Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Dow Chemical Company Material Safety Data Sheet. Monoethanolamine. MSDS#:1592 (Online). The Dow Chemical Company, Midland MI. 17/06/2003Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sinnott RK (2005) Coulson & Richardson’s chemical engineering, vol 6—Chemical engineering design. Elsevier Butterworth-HeinemannGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peters MS, Timmerhaus KD, West RE (2003) Plant design and economics for chemical engineers. McGraw-Hill Education, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beijing Jiaotong University and North China Electric Power University (2014) People’s Republic of China: study on carbon capture and storage in natural gas-based power plants. ADB Technical Consultant’s ReportGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Razi N, Svendsen HF, Bolland O (2013) Validation of mass transfer correlations for CO2 absorption with MEA using pilot data. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 19:478–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kakaç S, Liu H, Pramuanjaroenckij A (2012) Heat exchangers—selection, rating, and thermal design. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rév E, Emtir M, Szitkai Z et al (2001) Energy savings of integrated and couple distillation systems. Comput Chem Eng 25(1):119–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tobiesen FA, Haugen G, Hartono A (2018) A systematic procedure for process energy evaluation for post combustion CO2 capture: case study of two novel strong bi-carbonate forming solvents. Appl Energy 211:161–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Miguel Mercader F, Magneschi G, Fernander ES et al (2012) Integration between a demo size post-combustion CO2 capture and full size plant. An integral approach on energy penalty for different process options. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 11S:S102–S113Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jung J, Jeong YS, Lee U et al (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

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudio Madeddu
    • 1
  • Massimiliano Errico
    • 2
  • Roberto Baratti
    • 3
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica, Chimica e dei Materiali, Università di CagliariCagliariItaly
  2. 2.Department of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Environmental Technology, University of Southern DenmarkOdense MDenmark
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica, Chimica e dei MaterialiUniversità di CagliariCagliariItaly

Personalised recommendations