Establishing a pilot plant facility for post combustion carbon dioxide capture studies

ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is seen as one of the main contributors to global warming. The use of fossil fuels for power production leads to large quantities of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere. The released CO2 can, however, be captured by retrofitting capture units downstream from the power plant called Post Combustion Carbon Dioxide Capturing. Post combustion CO2 capture can involve the reactive absorption of CO2 from the power plant flue gas steam. Reactive solvents, such as monoethanolamine (MEA), are used for capturing the CO2 and the solvent is regenerated in a desorber unit where the addition of heat drives the reverse reaction, releasing the captured CO2. However, the large energy requirement for solvent regeneration reduces the viability of employing CO2 capture on an industrial scale. This study focused on establishing a facility for CO2 capture studies – the main aim being the construction and validation of the results produced by the pilot plant facility. A secondary aim of this study was developing an Aspen Plus® Simulation method that would simplify simulating the complex CO2 capture process. Results from the simulation were to be compared to that of the pilot plant experiments. A pilot plant facility with a closed gas system, allowing gas recycling from both the absorber and the stripping columns, was set up. The absorber column (internal diameter = 0.2 m) was set up to allow one to obtain information regarding gas- and liquid temperatures and compositions at various column heights. Online gas analysers are used for analysing the gas composition at various locations in the absorber column. The pilot plant was initially commissioned with 20 weight % MEA in aqueous solution; however the main validation experiments were conducted with 30 weight % MEA in aqueous solution. 30 weight % MEA (aq) is generally used as the reference solvent for pilot plant studies. Pilot plant results with regards to the carbon dioxide concentration profiles for the absorber column as well as the regeneration energy requirement and capture rates compared well to literature data. The Aspen Plus® simulation was also set up and validated using published pilot plant data. The comparison of the pilot plant results from this study, to the results from the Aspen Plus® Simulation, showed good agreement between the two. The Aspen Plus® Simulation could further be used to validate pilot plant data that has been gathered outside the range of reported CO2 capture efficiencies. The Aspen Plus®model was evaluated at liquid-to-gas ratios of 1.7 and regeneration energies matching the pilot plant results. It was found that the model under predicts the capture efficiency of CO2 with an average of 4.0%. The model was corrected for this error at liquid-to-gas ratios of 2 and the fit of the model to pilot plant results improved considerably (R2-value = 0.965). Pilot plant repeatability was investigated with both 20 weight %- and 30 weight % MEA in aqueous solution. Temperature- and gas concentration profiles from the absorber column showed good repeatability. The maximum deviation of the regeneration energy and the capture efficiency from the calculation means were ±0.72% and ±1.40% respectively. The aims of this study have been met by establishing, and validating the results of a pilot plant facility for carbon dioxide capture studies. It has been shown that the pilot plant produces repeatable results. Results from the Aspen Plus® Simulation were validated and also match results from the established pilot plant setup. The simulation may prove to provide valuable information regarding the optimal operating conditions for the pilot plant and may aid in performing a full parametric study on the CO2 capture process.