Development of Mixed-Salt Technology for CO 2 Capture from Coal Power Plants

Transcription

1 3 rd Post Combustion Capture Conference (PCCC3) Development of Mixed-Salt Technology for CO 2 Capture from Coal Power Plants Indira S. Jayaweera Sr. Staff Scientist and CO 2 Program Leader SRI International September 8-11, 2015 Regina Canada 1

2 SRI legacy of world-changing innovations.com.gov.org First telerobotic surgical system New drug for lymphoma First assigned domain names R First computer mouse Ultrasound for medical diagnostics First ARPANET and internetworking nodes U.S. Dept. of Education 2010 technology plan Treatment for drug-resistant malaria Emmy Awards for HDTV and more Created Siri (acquired by Apple) Copyright 2015 SRI International 2

3 Technology Background

4 Our Early Experience in Solvent-BasedTechnology Development from Proof-of-Concept to Pilot-Scale Ammonia technology development started in 2004 EPRI, NEXANT STATOIL & ALSTOM SRI work with multiple clients! Post Combustion CO 2 Capture Small llbench Scale Large Bench Scale 4 Pilot Scale (0.25 MWth) ) (For ALSTOM) 4

5 Mixed-Salt Process Details Key benefits: - Reduced ammonia emissions - Enhanced efficiency - Reduced reboiler duty - Reduced d CO 2 compression energy A SIGNIFICANT PARASITIC POWER REDUCTION COMPARED TO MEA! How it works: Selected composition of potassium carbonate and ammonium salts Overall llheat of reaction 35t to 60kJ/ kj/mol l(tunable) Absorber operation at o C at 1 atm with wt.% mixture of salts Regenerator operation at o C at atm Produce high-pressure CO 2 stream High CO 2 cycling capacity No Solids CO 2 Lean CO 2 Rich K 2 CO 3 NH 3 xco 2 H 2 O system K 2 CO 3 NH 3 yco 2 H2O system 5

6 Published Data Showing Favorable Kinetics for CO 2 Absorption in Ammonia Solutions 2 p CO sorption Rate (mmol/s m 2 2 Abs kpa) Wetted wall column data Puxty et al., 2010 (6 M ammonia, 5 C) Dave et al., 2009 ( 7 M ammonia, 5 C) CSIRO, 2012 ( 5 M MEA, 40 C) CO 2 Loading (CO 2 /NH 3 Molar Ratio) Comparison of CO 2 absorption rates for MEA and ammonia Sources: Dave et al., (2009). Energy Procedia 1(1): Puxty et al., (2010). Chemical Engineering Science 65: CSIRO Report (2012). EP Absorber side: Enhanced kinetics Pseudo first-order rate constants for CO 2 absorption in NH 3, MEA, and MDEA Solvent k app /10 3 s 1 NH 3 at 5 C 0.3 NH 3 at 10 C 0.7 NH 3 at 20 C 1.4 NH 3 at 25 C 2.1 MEA at 25 C 6 MDEA at 25 C 0.58 Concentration = 1.0 kmol m 3 Source: Derks and Versteeg (2009). Energy Procedia 1: SRI small-bench scale data 6

7 Mixed-Salt has a Low Energy Requirement for CO 2 Stripping High purity CO 2 stream 20 bar CO 2 /H 2 O < 0.02 Estimated regenerator heat requirement for mixed-salt system with 0.2 to 0.6 cyclic CO 2 loading. Comparison with neat K 2 CO 3 and MEA is shown. Mixed-salt process requires minimal energy for water stripping Sources: MEA data: CSIRO report (2012), EP K 2 CO 3 data: GHGT-11; Schoon and Van Straelen (2011), TCCS-6 Mixed-salt data; SRI modeling Regenerator side: Reduced water evaporation 7

8 Mixed-Salt Requires Less Energy for CO 2 Compression Amines kwh/t t-co No. of compression stages Mixed-Salt Desorber Pressure (bar) Electricity output penalty of compression to 100 bar as a function of desorber pressure Source: Luquiaud and Gibbins., Chem Eng Res Des (2011) CO 2 Compression: High-pressure CO 2 release 8

9 Mixed-Salt Process Flow Diagram >99% CO 2 Cleaner Exhaust HX5 K 2 CO 3 rich Salt mixture HX4 + NH 3 rich Salt mixture HX2 + HX1 REG HX3 Flue Gas AB + Absorber + + Regenerator 9

10 DOE Project Overview (Large-Bench Scale Testing) Contract No. DE-FE

11 Project Goals, Team, Duration and Budget Project Duration:30 months Component Testing Demonstrate the absorber and regenerator processes individually with high efficiency, low NH 3 emissions, and reduced water use compared to state-of-the-art ammonia-based technologies Demonstrate the complete CO 2 capture system Integrate the absorber and the regenerator Optimize system operation, and collect data to perform the detailed techno-economic analysis of CO2-capture process integration to a full-scale power plan Conduct the process economic analysis and EH&S analysis Project Budget :~ $2.29 M Current Project Team: NETL (Funding Agency and project overseas), SRI International, IHI Corporation, OLI Systems, Stanford University, Dr. Eli Gal, Dr. Kaj Thomsen, and POLIMI The overall project objective is to demonstrate that mixed-salt technology can capture CO 2 at 90% efficiency and regenerate (95% CO 2 purity) at a cost of $40/tonne to meet the DOE program goals. 11

12 Absorber and Regenerator Systems

13 Absorber Installation Structured packing 20-ft Process control& monitoring Column Installation Installed absorber towers System Commissioned in May

14 Schematic and Photograph of the Absorber System CO 2 /Air Rich out Rich out 0.25 to 1 t-co 2 /day capacity 14

15 Regenerator System Vent line Liquid id feed CO 2 product gas 20-ft 15

16 Results from Component Testing 16

17 Bench-Scale Absorber Performance Test Data Modeling and Test Data Better than 90% efficiency with incoming lean absorption solution and < 0.4 CO 2 loading 2 g CO 2 vapor pressure at the absorber exit under various CO 2 -loading conditions The observed overall rates for CO 2 absorption are on the same order as those of MEA-based systems and about 5-7x higher than chilled ammonia systems 17

18 Process Ammonia Management Test Data ABS 1 ABS 1 only ABS2 NH 3 vapor pressure at the Absorber 1 exit under various CO 2 -loading conditions NH 3 vapor pressure at the Absorber 1 and 2 exits under various CO 2 -loading conditions

19 Regenerator Performance Test Data Modeling and Test Data Variation of attainable CO 2 -lean loading level with temperature for rich loadings of 0.40 to 0.50 at bar Comparison of measured and modeled attainable CO 2 -lean loading at 100 to 150 ºC. Process was demonstrated with cyclic loading from 0.2 to (lean) to 0.5 (rich) at 150 C The produced lean loading well exceeds that required for > 90% CO 2 capture from flue gas streams 19

20 Integrated System Testing

21 New Regenerator Installation Single stage regenerator used for component testing New Dual stage regenerator for integrated testing (picture taken on July 2015) Installed reboiler (picture taken on August 2015) 21

22 Simplified PFD of the Integrated System 1. System is currently in operation with buffer tanks for lean and rich solution storage 2. Continuous operation of the absorber system was smooth and the observed results were as expected based on the component testing 22

23 System Testing in Continuous Mode Test Data Modeling and Test Data 90% CO 2 capture efficiency with 0.19 to 0.40 cyclic CO 2 loading in Absorber b 1 Gas flow rate = 15 acfm Process Modeling: SRI (ASPEN) and OLI (ESP) Cyclic Loading = 0.18 to 0.58 Reboiler Duty ~ 1.8 to 1.9 MJ/kg-CO 2 Ammonia Emission < 10 ppm Comparison of observed and modeled temperature profiles for Absorber 1 23

24 Modeling Results: Preliminary Net Power Efficiency Thermodynamic ASPEN Mass & Energy Model Modeling Balance Software package was developed for thermodynamic modeling of mixed-salt system Process layout with two regenerator options were modeled, regenerator energy requirement was in the range 1.8 to 2.2 MJ/kg-CO 2, lowest energy option was chosen for the new regenerator design Next slide shows the summary data from system modeling by OLI (flue stream conditions similar il to DOE Case 11) 24

25 Mixed-Salt Large Scale System Modeling by OLI: Process Summary Mole Fraction Flue Gas Feed Stack Gas CO2 Product H2O CO Ar E 6 N E 4 NH3 9.13E 6 (6 PPM) 6.93E 6 (3 PPM) O E 5 Temperature, o C Pressure, atm Flowrate, kgmol/hr 102,548 76,309 12,571 CO2 Capture 90% CO2 Discharge Pressure, atm 12 99% Purity Reboiler Energy, MJ/KG of CO Reboiler Steam Requirements CoolingWater Requirements Steam Source IP Steam Water Source Cooling Tower 90% Temperature, CO o F ( o C) (428.3) Temperature, o F ( o C) 59 (15) Pressure, psia 2 Capture (atm) (14.42) Pressure, psia (atm) 16.2 (1.1) Steam/CO Flowrate, lb/hr 2 (KG/hr) by weight 939,780 = <0.9, (426,277) Cyclic Flowrate, COGPM 2 Loading (m 3 /hr) ,092 to (21,829) 0.51 Note: Economic analysis data for the process will be available in Spring 2014

26 Mixed-Salt Technology Summary Process Summary Uses inexpensive, industrially available material (potassium and ammonium salts) Requires no feedstream polishing Does not generate hazardous waste Has the potential for easy permitting in many localities Uses known process engineering g Demonstrated Benefits Enhanced CO 2 capture efficiency High CO 2 -loading capacity High-pressure release of CO 2 Expected Benefits Reduced energy consumption compared to MEA Reduced auxiliary electricity loads compared to the chilled ammonia process Possible flexible carbon capture operation 26

27 Plans for Future Testing and Commercialization

28 Scale-up Plan of Mixed-Salt Process for CO 2 Capture from Coal Power Plants 2 p Mixed-salt scale-up timeline e proposed by IHI corporation o SRI s Bench-scale System Bench-scale Plant 0.25 to 1 ton-co 2 /day (Existing program with DOE) Pilot Plant 1 MW (Future program) Validation Stage Plant MW Demonstration Plant /Full-scale Plant MW SRI is inviting additional partners for future process scale-up demonstrations 28

29 Current Project Location SRI 6 MW Plant S-building: large bench and mini-pilot studies CO 2 yard for mini-pilot testing (up to 100 acfm) P-building: lab-scale tests SRI s site in Menlo Park, CA (~ 65 acres) SRI also has a test site near Livermore, CA (480 acres) 29

30 Acknowledgements NETL (DOE) Mr. Steve Mascaro, Ms. Lynn Bricket, and other NETL staff members SRI Team Dr. Indira Jayaweera, Dr. Palitha Jayaweera, Dr. Jianer Bao, Ms. Regina Elmore, Dr. Srinivas Bhamidi, Mr. Bill Olson, Dr. Marcy Berding, Dr. Chris Lantman, and Ms. Barbara Heydorn Collaborators OLI Systems (Dr. Prodip Kondu and Dr. Andre Anderko), POLIMI (Dr. Gianluca Valenti and others), Stanford University (Dr. Adam Brant and Mr. Charles Kang), Dr. Eli Gal, and Dr. Kaj Thomsen Industrial Partner IHI Corporation (Mr. Shiko Nakamura, Mr. Okuno Shinya, Dr. Kubota Nabuhiko, Mr. Yuichi Nishiyama, and others) 30

31 Disclaimer This presentation includes an account of work sponsored 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 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. 31

32 Contact: Dr. Indira Jayaweera Headquarters: Silicon Valley SRI International 333 Ravenswood Avenue Menlo Park, CA Washington, D.C. SRI International 1100 Wilson Blvd Suite 2800 Arlington, VA Dr. Marcy Berding 1100 Wilson Blvd., Suite Dr. Chris Lantman Thank You Princeton, New Jersey SRI International Sarnoff 201 Washington Road Princeton, NJ Additional U.S. and international locations