Cutting the cost of carbon capture: a case for carbon capture and utilization

被引:30
|
作者
Joos, Lennart [1 ]
Huck, Johanna M. [2 ]
Van Speybroeck, Veronique [1 ]
Smit, Berend [2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ghent, Ctr Mol Modeling, B-9052 Zwijnaarde, Belgium
[2] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Chem & Biomol Engn, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[3] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Chem, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[4] EPFL, Lab Mol Simulat, Inst Sci & Ingn Chim, Rue Ind 17, CH-1950 Sion, Switzerland
基金
欧洲研究理事会; 欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
METAL-ORGANIC FRAMEWORKS; POROUS POLYMER NETWORKS; ZEOLITIC IMIDAZOLATE FRAMEWORKS; PRESSURE-SWING ADSORPTION; DIRECT AIR CAPTURE; DIOXIDE CAPTURE; CO2; CAPTURE; GAS-ADSORPTION; CU-BTC; MOLECULAR SIMULATION;
D O I
10.1039/c6fd00031b
中图分类号
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号
070304 ; 081704 ;
摘要
A significant part of the cost for carbon capture and storage ( CCS) is related to the compression of captured CO2 to its supercritical state, at 150 bar and typically 99% purity. These stringent conditions may however not always be necessary for specific cases of carbon capture and utilization ( CCU). In this manuscript, we investigate how much the parasitic energy of an adsorbent-based carbon capture process may be lowered by utilizing CO2 at 1 bar and adapting the final purity requirement for CO2 from 99% to 70% or 50%. We compare different CO2 sources: the flue gases of coal-fired or natural gas-fired power plants and ambient air. We evaluate the carbon capture performance of over 60 nanoporous materials and determine the influence of the initial and final CO2 purity on the parasitic energy of the carbon capture process. Moreover, we demonstrate the underlying principles of the parasitic energy minimization in more detail using the commercially available NaX zeolite. Finally, the calculated utilization cost of CO2 is compared with the reported prices for CO2 and published costs for CCS.
引用
收藏
页码:391 / 414
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Corrosion Issues of Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage
    Xiang, Yong
    [J]. MATERIALS PERFORMANCE, 2018, 57 (11) : 32 - 35
  • [42] Carbon capture: Storage vs. Utilization
    Moreaux, Michel
    Amigues, Jean-Pierre
    Meijden, Gerard van der
    Withagen, Cees
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2024, 125
  • [43] Research on carbon dioxide capture materials used for carbon dioxide capture, utilization, and storage technology: a review
    Dang H.
    Guan B.
    Chen J.
    Ma Z.
    Chen Y.
    Zhang J.
    Guo Z.
    Chen L.
    Hu J.
    Yi C.
    Yao S.
    Huang Z.
    [J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2024, 31 (23) : 33259 - 33302
  • [44] Carbon capture could be cost-effective
    Brainard, Jeffrey
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2018, 360 (6393) : 1050 - 1050
  • [45] Carbon capture retrofits and the cost of regulatory uncertainty
    Reinelt, Peter S.
    Keith, David W.
    [J]. ENERGY JOURNAL, 2007, 28 (04): : 101 - 127
  • [46] Model Development for Carbon Capture Cost Estimation
    Pieri, Tryfonas
    Angelis-Dimakis, Athanasios
    [J]. CLEAN TECHNOLOGIES, 2021, 3 (04): : 787 - 803
  • [47] Carbon dioxide capture, sequestration, and utilization models for carbon management and transformation
    Ravichandran, Mythili
    Kumar, Thipramalai Thangappan Ajith
    Dineshkumar, Ramar
    [J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2024, 31 (44) : 55895 - 55916
  • [48] The Case for Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies
    Hochman, Gal
    Appasamy, Vijay
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTS, 2024, 11 (03)
  • [49] The environmental opportunity cost of using renewable energy for carbon capture and utilization for methanol production
    Ravikumar, Dwarakanath
    Keoleian, Gregory
    Miller, Shelie
    [J]. APPLIED ENERGY, 2020, 279 (279)
  • [50] CARBON CAPTURE
    Meyer, Daryll
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, 2016, 314 (05) : 6 - 6