Uncertainty analysis in the techno-economic assessment of CO2 capture and storage technologies. Critical review and guidelines for use

Spek, Mijndert van der; Fout, Timothy; García, Mónica; Kuncheekanna, Vishalini Nair; Matuszewski, Michael; McCoy, Sean; Morgan, Josh; Nazir, Shareq Mohd; Ramírez, Andrea; Roussanaly, Simon; Rubin, Edward S.

doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103113

Cited by 60 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to understand how the LCOE and CAC for the CaL capture processes may be reduced in order to compete with MEA-based CO 2 capture, sensitivity analyses are carried out on 10 key parameters and are presented in Figures 4, 5 (Van Der Spek et al, 2020). The parameter range variation considered are ±50%, except for the project duration which varies between 10 and 40 years, and the plant utilization rate which varies between 65 and 90%, and the plant thermal efficiency with the CaL process which varies by ± 5 pts.…”

Section: Cost Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techno-Economic Analyses of the CaO/CaCO3 Post-Combustion CO2 Capture From NGCC Power Plants

Roussanaly

Jordal

et al. 2021

Front. Chem. Eng.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Calcium looping is a post-combustion technology that enables CO2 capture from the flue gases of industrial processes. While considerable studies have been performed at various levels from fundamental reaction kinetics to the overall plant efficiency, research work on techno-economic analyses of the calcium looping processes is quite limited, particularly for the Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC). Earlier work has shown that theoretically, a high thermal efficiency can be obtained when integrating calcium looping in the NGCC using advanced process configurations and a synthetic CaO sorbent. This paper presents an investigation of calcium looping capture for the NGCC through a techno-economic study. One simple and one advanced calcium looping processes for CO2 capture from NGCC are evaluated. Detailed sizing of non-conventional equipment such as the carbonator/calciner and the solid-solid heat exchanger are performed for cost analyses. The study shows that the CO2 avoided cost is 86–95 €/tCO2, avoided, which is considerably more expensive than the reference amine (MEA) capture system (49 €/tCO2, avoided). The calcium looping processes considered have thus been found not to be competitive with the reference MEA process for CO2 capture from NGCC with the inputs assumed in this work. Significant improvements would be required, for example, in terms of equipment capital cost, plant efficiency and sorbent annual cost in order to be make the calcium looping technology more attractive for capturing CO2 from NGCC plants.

show abstract

Section: Cost Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techno-Economic Analyses of the CaO/CaCO3 Post-Combustion CO2 Capture From NGCC Power Plants

Roussanaly

Jordal

et al. 2021

Front. Chem. Eng.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have also indicated these situations when relevant. Although a selection of TEA guidelines exist for CCUS in general (Rubin et al, 2013;van der Spek et al, 2019, van der Spek et al, 2020Zimmermann et al, 2020), a set of guidelines specifically directed towards adsorption processes have not yet been proposed to the best of our knowledge. As a result we hope this paper will be useful to newcomers to the field, and those with experience in other areas who have not had significant exposure to adsorption processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines for Techno-Economic Analysis of Adsorption Processes

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Techno-economic analyses (TEAs) of CO2 capture technologies have risen in popularity, due to growing interest in meeting CO2 emissions reduction targets. Adsorption processes are one of the technologies proposed for CO2 capture, and although difficult, standardization of TEAs for adsorption should be attempted. The reason is that TEAs are often referred to as input data to other forms of modeling, to guide policy, and to act as summaries for those unfamiliar with adsorption processes. Herein, we discuss the aspects that should be considered when conducting TEAs for CO2 adsorption processes, and we present the implications of choices made at the TEA stage and offer guidance on best practice. our aim is to make TEAs of adsorption processes widely accessible to the adsorption community, and more generally to communities engaged in the evaluation of CCS technologies.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the analysis can be extended to a one‐way or also n‐way series. [ 65 ] As for prior TRLs, qualitative descriptions of key input variables and identified R&D hotspots should be discussed. Furthermore, we recommend extending threshold analysis from TRL 3 and increasing the level of detail of the local sensitivity analysis from prior TRLs.…”

Section: Efferi Assessment Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Apples and Apples: A Shortcut Assessment Framework for Early‐Stage Carbon Capture and Utilization Technologies Based on Efficiency, Feasibility, and Risk

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is one of the largest current challenges to humankind, requiring a steep emissions reduction. One promising approach is using CO2 as a resource. Research and development of carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technologies have increased in recent years, putting early‐stage techno‐economic assessment (TEA) in a key role to derive recommendations systematically, to allocate resources efficiently, and overall to push commercialization successfully. Shortcut TEA assessment approaches that reduce assessment detail and effort compared with conventional, full‐scope studies have gained popularity in recent years but have been criticized as comparing apples with oranges. Several open methodological questions remain such as how to implement global assessment standards, how to reduce subjective judgments, and how to compare technologies at different maturities. Herein, a shortcut assessment framework for early‐stage CCU technologies is proposed, based on the perspectives of efficiency, feasibility, and risk (Efferi). The Efferi framework implements the Global CO2 Initiative's Guidelines, enables comparisons at different technology maturities, and systematically reduces subjective judgments. The Efferi framework provides a starting point for a more robust and easy assessment of early‐stage CCU technologies, leading to clearer go/no‐go recommendations at reduced assessment effort and enabling fairer, “apples to apples” comparisons.

show abstract

Uncertainty analysis in the techno-economic assessment of CO2 capture and storage technologies. Critical review and guidelines for use

Cited by 60 publications

References 42 publications

Techno-Economic Analyses of the CaO/CaCO3 Post-Combustion CO2 Capture From NGCC Power Plants

Techno-Economic Analyses of the CaO/CaCO3 Post-Combustion CO2 Capture From NGCC Power Plants

Guidelines for Techno-Economic Analysis of Adsorption Processes

Apples and Apples: A Shortcut Assessment Framework for Early‐Stage Carbon Capture and Utilization Technologies Based on Efficiency, Feasibility, and Risk

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About