CO2 capture

There are essentially three approaches to reducing emissions associated with coal combustion

Burn

coal: In theory this can be accomplished by substituting other fuels for coal. In practice

this is very difficult because coal is abundant and relating inexpensive despite concern about climate change. Reliance on coal has been increasing worldwide because there has not been a viable alternative to fill the role plays in the worlds energy system.

Improve efficiency of coal fired power plants: This is real opportunity for efficiency improvements. However if these option were aggressively pursued at best this effort would only reduce emissions from coal by 10-20%,while being a positive step it is insufficient for developing near zero emission coal fired power plant which may be required by future carbon policy.

Capture and storage of CO2: CO2 capture and storage is the only pathway that can allow the
world to continue to enjoy the benefits of using coal while drastically reducing the emissions associated with coal combustion. At a minimum CCS be a bridging strategy to provide time for alternative to coal to be developed. We will on application to coal fired power plants because they constitute by far, the largest source of CO2 emission CCS. At a coal fired power plant, CO2 is component of the flue gas. The total pressure of the flue gas in 1 atom and CO2 concentration typically 10-15%. The process of transforming this low pressure, low concentration of CO2 into a relatively pure CO2 is compressed to 100 atm or more. The idea of separating and capturing CO2 from the flue gas of power plant did not originate out of concern about climate change. Rather it gained attention as a possible inexpensive source of CO2 especially for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operations where CO2 is injected into oil reservoirs to increase the mobility of the oil and thereby the productivity of the reservoir.

Methods of CO2 capture:

There are three methods of the CO2 capture are as follows:

1. Post combustion CO2 capture 2. Oxygen fired combustion 3. Pre combustion capture

1. Post combustion CO2 capture: Post combustion CO2 capture of CO2 flue gases uses chemical
absorption methods that can be installed at existing power plant but the impact on O & M and capital costs would be significant. For a coal fired power plant the size and capital cost of the absorber would be comparable to a existing SO2 scrubber; but approximately -1/3 of the total steam produced by plant would be consumed in chemical absorber ;thus reducing the plant capacity by approximately 25-35%. This option allows continued use of existing coal fired power plants and would likely be the first option implemented. This technology is currently in use on a smaller scale in other applications.

2. Oxygen fired combustion: which produces a 90%CO2 exhaust stream is less mature multi
pollutant control but the tech be comparable to post combustion capture specially, O2 separation plant would consume about 23-37% of total plant output and cost about the same as the absorber. This option is most appropriate for new plant project and would become only when new

plant development becomes more desirable than retro fitting existing was fired plants.

3. Pre Combustion Capture: which involves capturing CO2 from syngas generated in coal
gasifire; is potentially expensive than post combustion capture. It is considered a promising long term option but the required technology is still being developed. Power plant that use pre combustion capture are also act reactive because they are based on a combustion cycle design which is inherently more efficient than the Rankin cycle only that traditional was plants use. In addition since hydrogen production is a potential option, pre combustion capture is also compactable with a hydrogen economy.

CURRENT STATUS OF Post Combustion Capture

To date all the commercial post combustion CO2 capture plants use chemical absorption process with MEA solvents. MEA was developed over 70years ago as a general, non selective solvent to remove acid gases such as CO2 and H2S from natural gas steam. The process was modified to incorporate inhibitors that reduces solvent degradation and equipment corrosion when applied to co2 capture from flue gas concern about degradation and corrosion also kept the solvent strength relatively low ( typically 20-30% amines by weight of water) resulting in relatively large equipment sizes and solvent regeneration costs.

Current status of co2 capture technology is depends upon the following points. a) Costs of capture b) Potential for reducing the parasitic energy costs c) Commercial vendors 1. Kerr McGee 2. Row chemical

There other vendors also offer commercial amine processes 1. MHI in Japan 2. HTC purenergy 3. Aker clean carbon in Norway 4. Consolv

ABSORPTION
In absorption flue gas is contacted with a liquid absorbent that has been selected because co2 dissolves in it more readily than N2. The process is takes place in tall column known as scrubber in which turbulent flow promotes rapid co2 transfer from gas to liquid.

To recover the co2 the loaded solvent is pumped to a stripper in which it is exposed to

co2 free gas

typically steam heating of the solvent causes desorption of co2. The stripped liquid is pumped back to the scrubber while the steam/co2 mixture is would to condense the steam leaving high purity co2 suitable for compassion and after transportation to an appropriate sequestration.

The capital costs of scrubbing decreases as the rates of co2 absorbers and stripper with correspondingly shorter gas exposure times are required when co2 transfer rates are higher operating cost is also decrease when scrubber and stripper are smaller.

Types of absorbents
There are two absorbent which involves in absorption techniques in co2 capture

1. Amines

2. Ammonia

Amines: 1. Water soluble org.chemicals that contain reactive N2 atoms in co2 capture- separation
works horse amine is MEA. 2. Many other amines and especially in recent years amine blends such as MEA+MDEA have also been utilized. 3. Amines react rapidly, selectively and reversibly with co2 and are relatively non volatile and inexpensive however they are corrosive and so require more expensive material of constant. 4. In addition they do gradually volatilize and they degrade especially in presence of o2 and so2 both of which phenomenon the timely injection of fresh solution.

Ammonia: 1. Ammonia based solutions offers possibilities for developing absorption processes based on
corrosive and more stable solvents. At the same time NH4 is a toxic gas prevention of NH4 slip to the atm is a necessity. 2. The co2 update per kg of NH3 is estimated to be 3 times that per kg of MEA. 3. NH3 based system operates efficiently at lower temperature than those required for conventional MEA based scrubbing. 4. The lower temp also minimizes NH3 volatility and the potential for its slippage. 5. Dissolved NH3 reach with co2 to from ammonium bicarbonate, however at the very low absorber temp of 0-10C in the child ammonia process. 6. Because of the reversibility of reaction at lower temp than amine based solvent, low quality

waste heat availability at power plants may be more thoroughly exploited to release capture co2 in the stripper of NH3 based system.

ADSORPTION
A) Physical sorbents:

1. CO2 may be recovered from flue gas with a variety of nonreactive sorbent including carbonaceous material and crystalline material known as zeolites. 2. High porosities endow activated c and with CO2 capture capacities of 10-15% by wt

zeolite material in other hard offer CO2/N2 selectivity 5-10 times greater than the carbonaceous materials. However their CO2 capacities are 2-3 times lower. 3. To be competitive with liquid solvents, solid sorbents must be sensitive to steam and

offer substantially greater capacities and selectivity for CO2 than currently available physical sorbent.

B) Chemical sorbents:

1. When heated to 850C CaCO3 releases CO2 and there by transform to CaO which recombines with CO2 at 550C. These reactions have a long history of service in industrial processes. 2. Lime stone is also widely employed to capture flue gas SO2. However it loses capacity overtime and especially if developed to capture both CO2 and SO2 requires frequent replacement. 3. CaO/CaCO3 system non remains all reactive because of its high CO2 capture capacity

and long track record further more it offer possibilities for power plant configuration thata) Maximize the benefits of feeding otherwise prohibitively expensive O2 rather than air b) Exploit the availability of high level heat c) Improve energy efficiency by generating steam from heat released in the carbonation reaction.