program objectives energy services bench-scale process … · integrate unit ops into continuous...

© 2015 General Electric Company - All rights reserved

1

• Develop a novel, CO2

capture solvent with:

• 90% Carbon capture efficiency

• 25% Increase in capacity vs MEA

• Less than 35% increase in Cost of Energy Services

Program Objectives

Program Objective: Develop novel solvent and process for post-combustion capture of CO2 from coal-fired power plants with 90%Capture efficiency, and less than 35% increase in cost of electricity

capture

BENCH-SCALE PROCESS FOR LOW-COST CARBON

DIOXIDE (CO2) CAPTURE USING A PHASE-

CHANGING ABSORBENT

DE-FE0013687

GE Global Research

Tiffany Westendorf

2016 NETL CO2 Capture Technology Project Review MeetingAugust 10, 2016


2

• Extensive screening of multiple solvents

• Absorbs CO2 very rapidly in the 40-50oC range

• High CO2 loading (>17% weight gain, >95% of theoretical value)

• Carbamate readily decarboxylates at higher temps

• Carbamate is solid new process configuration

2

3

5

Si

Me

Me

O Si

Me

Me

NH

H2N OH

O

Si

Me

Me

O Si

Me

Me

NH2H2N

CO2

-CO2

1

Si

Me

Me

O Si

Me

Me

NH

H3N O

OSi

Me

Me

O Si

Me

Me

NH

NH

O

O

O

O

Si

Me

Me

O Si

Me

Me

NH3H3N

4

intermolecular

H shift

intramolecular

H shift

GAP-0

GAP-0 carbamate salt

Chemistry of GAP-0 reaction with CO2


3

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

0 2 4 6 8

mas

s %

CO

2ab

sorb

ed

CO2 partial pressure (bar)

GAP-0/CO2 Reaction Isotherms

45 C

100 C

140 C

160 C

0.0020 0.0022 0.0024 0.0026 0.0028 0.0030 0.0032 0.0034-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

ln(P

(psia

))

1/T (K)

MEA (lit)

MEA (exp)

MEA (calc)

GAP-0 (exp)

GAP-0 (calc)

M'D'M' (exp)

M'D'M' (calc)

DAB-0 (exp)

DAB-0 (calc)

• Lower vapor pressure vs. MEA

• Higher heat of reaction vs. MEA

• Lower heat capacity vs. MEA

• >11% Dynamic CO2 capacity @ 6 bara

absorb

desorb

GAP-0 Properties


4

1 Make the solid(Spray absorption)

2 Move the solid(Pressurized solids transport)

3 Regenerate the solvent(CO2 desorption and solvent recycle)

1

2

3

Phase-Changing CO2 Capture System


5

Project Structure

Budget Period 1: Design and Build [2014]

Spray absorber, extruder, desorber

Preliminary Technical and Economic Assessment

Go/No-go: 90% CO2 Capture, <$50/tonne CO2

Budget Period 2: Unit Operations Testing [2015]

Optimize individual unit operations separately

Solvent manufacturability study and EH&S risk assessment

Update Technical and Economic Assessment

Go/No-go: 90% CO2 Capture, <$45/tonne CO2

Budget Period 3: Continuous System Operation [2016]

Integrate unit ops into continuous system, generate engineering data for scaleup

Final Technical and Economic Assessment

Goal: 90% CO2 Capture, <$40/tonne CO2

3-year, $3M Project$2.4M DOE share1/1/2014 – 12/31/2016


6

Absorber• Heat

management

• GAP-0 b-isomer• Atomizer fouling• Presence of water,

heat stable salts

Extruder• Energy efficiency

• Dynamic seal stability

Desorber• Thermal stability• Corrosion

Project• Solvent availability, cost• Expertise resources

Risk Assessment


7

Absorber experiments – dry flue gas

• Designed experiment:

– 2-16% CO2, 150-200slm

– 0.9 - 0.6 mol GAP-0:mol CO2

• 30-220mL/min GAP-0

Solids produced at all conditions

• Statistics support linear model

– Significant terms: GAP-0 : CO2 ratio, Gas flow

– For maximum conversion:

• lower gas flow (longer residence time)

• lower GAP-0 : CO2 ratio (more excess CO2)

79.3% 70.5%

88%

81.1%

73.9%

85.2%

92.8%

85.4%

71.3%

% CO2

Gas flow rate

GAP-0:CO280.2-81.9%

74.4%

60-97% GAP-0 conversion


8

Absorber experiments – humid flue gas

Dry – powder clings to dry windows

5vol% – solids impact wet windows

Dry – “cake flour”

6.5vol% – wet droplets impact wet windows

6.5vol% - “hair gel”(videos MVI_0155,

MVI_0162)

Mass balance: 1-3wt% water in rich phase

Expect higher water content at lower feed % CO2


9

CO2-rich Slurry is an opportunity…

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

% A

ctiv

e a

min

e r

eta

ine

d

Days of continuous exposure

Thermal Degradation - 55% carbamate loading

120C_55%C_ 0%W 140C_55%C_ 0%W

120C_55%C_ 10%W 140C_55%C_ 10%W

• Replace extruder with less costly rich transfer method

• More efficient RLHX with fluid than solids

• Water inhibits urea formation


10

Phase-Changing CO2 Capture Process Pivot

• Slurry handling / pump selection and integration• Desorber heat transfer performance (2 1 stage)• Cost impact of slurry

PIVOT:Dry Slurry


11

Slurry handling & absorber/pump integration

Viscosity measurement pump selection Pump integration w/ spray absorber


12

Continuous spray absorber operation

GAP-0 spray

50% CO2 capture

Absorber outlet Tdp

Absorber inlet Tdp = 39+/- 0.5°C

• Pump integration enables continuous operation

• CO2 capture % comparable to dry FG

16% CO2

0.6 GAP-0 : CO2

2% CO2

1.0 GAP-0 : CO2

16% CO2

1.0 GAP-0 : CO2


13

Desorber performance

• Batch desorber experiments consistent with equilibrium isotherms

• Stable desorber T during continuous operation with upgraded HX

Hot oil T ~140°C

Desorber T ~133°C

Continuous slurry feed


14

Economic analysis – 550MW net

• Replacement of all unit ops with carbon steel – inhibitors• Spray absorber optimized for slurry production• Enhanced desorption at low temperature – steam stripper

$66.4

$49.8 $48.9 $48.1$46.3

$45.3

$42

$47

$52

$57

$62

$67

$72

MEA Case 6H HeatIntegration

CarbonSteel

SteamStripper

SprayAbsorber

Co

st o

f C

O2

($

/to

nn

e)

Values based on 2011 dollars

Slurry

5wt% H2O

Scaled


15

Future Work

• Current Project

– Continuous System testing and optimization

– Develop scale-up strategy

– Prepare final TEA (target <$40/tonne CO2)

• Next Project: De-risk solvent management

– Advanced desorption/steam stripper

– Oxidative stability

• Scale-up Potential


16

Thank You

• NETL• David Lang, Lynn Brickett, Elaine Everitt

• GE GRC Project Team• Mike Bowman, Stanlee Buddle, Joel Caraher, Wei Chen, Mark Doherty,

Rachel Farnum, Mark Giammattei, Terri Grocela-Rocha, Dan Hancu, Barbara Miebach, Robert Perry, Gosia Rubinsztajn, Surinder Singh, Irina Spiry, Paul Wilson, Benjamin Wood

17DE-FE0013687

3/4/2016

Acknowledgement . The information, data, or work presented herein was funded in part by the Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E), U.S. Department of Energy, under Award Number DE-AR0000084 and DOE- NETL under Award Number DE-NT0005310.

Disclaimer. The information, data, or work presented herein was funded in part by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

program objectives energy services bench-scale process … · integrate unit ops into continuous...

Documents