Facilitating CO 2 capture at a cement plant. Dr Dennis R Van Puyvelde Chemeca 2013, Brisbane 29 Sep 2 Oct 2013

Similar documents
(Part 2: Cement Industry Sector) Stanley Santos

ENVIRONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF CCS TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION IN THE CEMENT PROCESS CHAIN

CO 2 Capture and Storage: Options and Challenges for the Cement Industry

BCSAF clinkers A credible low carbon alternative to Portland Cement

STATUS OF ALTERNATE FUELS & RAW MATERIALS USAGE IN INDIA- Industry Perspective. Dr. S.K. Handoo

Impact of novel PCC solvents on existing and new Australian coal-fired power plants 1 st PCC Conference, Abu-Dhabi

Aker Solutions Carbon Capture Technology Improving Absorption Technology

Calcium Looping Post Combustion CO 2 Capture: A promising technology for emission free cement production

Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Cement and Lime Manufacturing Industries

The full scale CCS-project at Norcem Brevik Can it be realised? Düsseldorf, 7 November 2017

Calcium Looping Post Combustion CO 2 Capture: A promising technology for emission free cement production

CCUS Projects at LafargeHolcim Focus on Oxycombustion. Michel GIMENEZ, ECRA/CEMCAP Workshop Düsseldorf, 16 September 2015

Fully Integrated Simulation of a Cement Plant with a Carbon Capture Ca-looping Process

An introduction to the CEMCAP project

KM-CDR Post-Combustion CO 2 Capture with KS-1 Advanced Solvent

Development of Post Combustion Capture Technology

CCS for industry emissions the CEMCAP project

Design Parameters Affecting the Commercial Post Combustion CO 2 Capture Plants

Assessing the energy and emission reduction potentials in the UK industry sector in the scope of an energy systems analysis

Reduction of Emissions from Combined Cycle Plants by CO 2 Capture and Storage

INNOVATION IN ENERGY CONSUMPTION

Understanding the Cost of Retrofitting CO2 capture in an Integrated Oil Refinery

CEMCAP a Horizon 2020 project on retrofittable CO2 capture from cement plants

Evaluation of Integration of Flue Gas Scrubbing Configurations with MEA for CO 2 Separation in a Coal-Fired Power Plant

Available online at Energy Procedia 100 (2009) (2008) GHGT-9

IEAGHG Work on Gas CCS

CO 2 capture using lime as sorbent in a carbonation/calcination cycle

Southern Company/MHI Ltd. 500 TPD CCS Demonstration. Jerrad Thomas Research Engineer Southern Company Services, Inc.

Modeling post-combustion CO 2 capture with amine solvents

A preliminary evaluation of post-combustion CO 2 capture in a CSIRO pilot plant using MEA at Loy Yang Power in Australia

CEMENT, LIME AND MAGNESIUM OXIDE

The Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI)

Integration and Onsite System Aspects of Industrial Post-Combustion CCS

Fluor s Econamine FG Plus SM Technology

Options for calcium looping for CO 2 capture in the cement industry

POST COMBUSTION CO 2 CAPTURE SCALE UP STUDY

Techno-Economic Study of CO 2 Capture from a Cement Plant

Executive summary. Box ES.1: Scenarios for the industrial sector

Performance Analysis of Cement manufacturing Industry

Pathways for deploying CCS at Australian power plants

Carbon capture in cement production and its reuse

Evaluating the Cost of Emerging Technologies

Energy Saving Measures in. Cement Industry

Abstract on the potential GHG emissions reduction in Turkey through the cement industry

CONTROL STRTEGIES FOR FLEXIBLE OPERATION OF POWER PLANT INTEGRATED WITH CO2 CAPTURE PLANT

Evaluation of Carbonate Looping. for Post-Combustion CO 2 -Capture from a Utility's Perspective. Energie braucht Impulse

Overview of Techniques and Approaches to CO 2 Capture

Available online at Energy Procedia 1 (2009) (2008) GHGT-9. Sandra Heimel a *, Cliff Lowe a

Co-processing waste in the cement industry:

CO 2 Capture. John Davison IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme.

Carbon dioxide sequestration using steelmaking slags as raw material

Cement Technology Roadmap 2009

Part 3 Direct GHG from Cement Manufacturing Calculation of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory for Indonesia Cement Industries

CCS Activities in Canada. February 23, 2009 IZEC Workshop 2009 Toranomon Pastral Hotel, Tokyo Malcolm Wilson

SUBSTITUTION OF COAL BY REFUSE DERIVED FUELS (RDF) IN THE PRECALCINER OF A CEMENT KILN SYSTEM

2010 Energy Intensity (Cement Sector)

PARTIAL CO 2 CAPTURE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS IN THE PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY

Technology Gap Assessment

Success story on mineral carbonation of CO 2

CCUS Moving Ahead: Recent Technical Advances

Cement Manufacturing Plant Guidelines. An Approach to Reconciling the Financing of Cement Manufacturing Plants with Climate Change Objectives

Demonstrating CCS in Italy The Zero Emission Porto Tolle Project

Carbon Capture Options for LNG Liquefaction

Energy efficiency and innovation by industrial co-generation within Holcim Romania

Methodology for the free allocation of emission allowances in the EU ETS post Sector report for the cement industry

Techno-Economic Evaluation of. with Post Combustion Capture

collectively made significant progress on measuring, reporting and mitigating their CO 2

RITE s Advanced CO 2 Capture Technologies

Hadong and Boryeong 10 MW Pilot Projects

CCPilot100+ Test Results and Operating

OPTIMISATION OF COAL FIRED POWER PLANT PERFORMANCE WHEN USING FLUE GAS SCRUBBERS FOR CO 2 CAPTURE

CCUS Status and New Developments.

Importance of experimental unit for Fluidised Circulating Coal Combustion (FCCC) in the process of capturing CO 2 from combustion gas streams

Performance of Amine Absorption Systems with Vacuum Strippers for Post-combustion Carbon Capture

CO 2 CAPTURE FROM MEDIUM SCALE COMBUSTION INSTALLATIONS. Background

CO2 Capture from Industrial Sources by Hightemperature

Advanced CO 2 Capture process using MEA scrubbing: Configuration of a Split Flow and Phase Separation Heat Exchanger

Performance and Costs of CO 2 Capture at Gas Fired Power Plants

Available online at ScienceDirect. Energy Procedia 63 (2014 ) GHGT-12

CO2 Capture in the Steel Industry Review of the Current State of Art

Development and Cost Estimation of Green Gas Reduction Process for Power Plant

New Model Configuration for Post Combustion Carbon Capture

Aspen plus simulation of CO 2 removal from coal and gas fired power plants

CCS ONLY FOR OIL AND GAS SOURCES?

Commercialisation of CCS on CCGT Power Plants

CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE AND BENEFICIAL REUSE Louis Fradette, Sylvain Lefebvre, Jonathan Carley October 14, 2016

Dr. Richard Venditti Forest Biomaterials North Carolina State University Revised March 26, 2012

Integration of Ca-Looping systems for CO 2 capture in cement plants

The GHG Protocol for Project Accounting: Example Using Project Specific Baseline Procedure

Capture of CO 2 from industrial sources. Professor Dianne Wiley School of Chemical Engineering, UNSW Australia

E4 Training Week: Trends in industrial energy use. 9 June 2015 Kira West

Modelling of CO 2 capture using Aspen Plus for EDF power plant, Krakow, Poland

Thermodynamic analysis on post combustion CO 2 capture of natural gas fired power plant

Toshibaʼs Activities in Carbon Capture

CO 2 CAPTURE FOR GAS PLANT. Robin Irons E.ON Innovation Centre, CCS Millbank, May 2013

Carbon Capture in the Cement Industry? LOWCAP CCS Workshop, Tel-Tek Nov. 8th 2012 Liv Bjerge

Panel II Jänschwalde Oxyfuel demonstartion plant.

Optimization of an Existing Coal-fired Power Plant with CO 2 Capture

Demonstration of the DMX process description of the Octavius SP3 project

Transcription:

Facilitating CO 2 capture at a cement plant Dr Dennis R Van Puyvelde Chemeca 2013, Brisbane 29 Sep 2 Oct 2013

Background

Emissions from Cement Production Direct Emissions/ Pyroprocessing Limestone emissions CaCO 3 CaO+CO 2 535 kg CO 2 / t-clinker Fuel emissions C n H m +y O 2 n CO 2 +m/2 H 2 O 175 to 542 kg CO 2 / t-clinker Represents approx. 90% of total emissions for producing cement. Globally, direct emissions are over 2 billion tonnes CO 2 pa Reference: IEAGHG (2008), Kline (2012)

Emissions from Cement Production Indirect Emissions Electricity consumption on site for Conveying Grinding Mixing Bagging Transport emissions

Emissions Reduction Strategies Energy Efficiency More efficient process Reduction in electricity consumption Alternative Fuels Switching to gas and/or biomass Clinker Substitution Slag from steel production Carbon Capture & Storage Oxyfiring Studies underway Can technically be done but requires further research Post combustion Previous studies show this is feasible Demonstration in Norway Possibly 44% of total 56% of reductions Reference: ECRA (2007), ECRA (2012), AkerSolutions (2013)

Emissions Reduction Strategies Contribution of CCS Over 56% of emission reductions Between 450 and 900 Mt CO 2 pa by 2050 CEO for HeidelbergCement Northern Europe: We have a vision that our product in a life-cycle perspective will be carbon neutral by 2030, and we believe that carbon capture from cement production is an important part of and long step toward achieving this vision. Reference: IEA (2012) - Energy Technology Perspectives

Aim To identify opportunities where the waste heat from cement processing may be used to meet the energy requirements for post combustion capture.

Absorber Stripper Post Combustion Capture Process Cleaned Flue Gases CO2 Flue Gases from kiln HX Reboiler Steam Amine based capture Regeneration energy of 4.0 GJ/ t CO 2 at 120 C for monoethaleneamine

Heat Losses from Cement Production Cement Plant Component Author Preheater Kiln Cooler Total Engin et al (2005) 0.71 (315 C) 0.56 (308 C) 0.21 (215 C) 1.48 Radwan (2012) Gahzi (1997) Gardiek (1983) 0.75-1.25 0.2-0.55 0.4-0.65 1.35-2.45 0.74 0.96-1.70 0.87 1.18-2.05

Methodology

Methodology (1)

Methodology (2) Assumptions Base case heat losses based on data by Engin, 2005 Reboiler duty needs to be provided above 120 C A temperature approach of 10 C Only 50% of theoretically recoverable heat is assumed to be available for this process Daily kiln capacity of 3,000 t clinker Regeneration energy for MEA solvent is 4.0 GJ/ t-co 2

Methodology (3) Example (base case) Heat losses of 0.56 GJ/t-clinker and that this heat is available from the kiln wall at 310 C. The Theoretically Recoverable Energy is 310 C 130 C = 0.35 GJ/t-clinker. 310 C 25 C The available heat is 0.177 GJ/t-clinker (50% assumption). The total available heat per day is obtained by multiplying the daily kiln capacity of 3,000 t-clinker per day by the available heat. This equals 531 GJ. The regeneration of solvent is taken as 4 GJ/t-CO 2. Dividing the available heat by the regeneration heat provides an estimate of the amount of CO 2 that can be recovered. this equals 531/4 = 133 t CO 2 per day. In the base case, a world average kiln is considered which produces 0.865 t-co 2 / t-clinker. The direct daily emissions from this kiln are 2,595 t-co 2. The percentage of recoverable CO 2 is then 133/ 2,595 = 5.1% So while the Heat Losses from Kiln to Atmosphere for the base scenario are 0.56 GJ/ t-clinker, only 0.177 GJ/t-clinker (approximate a third) is available for PCC by applying the above conditions. Each scenario is calculated as above but using the specific conditions for that scenario (heat losses, solvent, fuel).

Results

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Results (1) Heat Losses 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0.56 (kiln only) 1.27 (kiln and precalciner) 1.48 (kiln, precalciner and air cooler) Total Heat Losses from Cement Plant (GJ/t-clinker) 2.00 (greater kiln losses) 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Results (2) Solvent Performance 600 25% 500 20% 400 15% 300 10% 200 100 5% 0 4 3 2.5 2 1 Regeneration heat of solvent (GJ/t CO 2 ) 0% CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured

CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Results (3) Fuel/ Cement Manufacturing Process 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% Dry kiln (gas fired) Semi dry kiln (gas fired) Dry kiln (coal fired) World average Wet kiln (coal fired) Kiln configuration and fuel used Percent CO2 Captured

Opportunities for the use of Waste Heat

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Opportunities for the use of Waste Heat Base Case 2000 1800 100% 90% 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 Base Dry kiln & gas fired (from 0.865 t-co2/t-clinker down to 0.71) Additional heat losses (from 0.56 up to 2 GJ/clinker) Improved Solvent (from 4 GJ/t-CO2 down to 2.5) Functionalised Ionic Liquids 0% Effect of cumulatative improvements CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured Capture of 133 tpd (5.1% of total emissions)

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Opportunities for the use of Waste Heat Switch to dry kiln and gas firing 2000 1800 100% 90% 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 Base Dry kiln & gas fired (from 0.865 t-co2/t-clinker down to 0.71) Additional heat losses (from 0.56 up to 2 GJ/clinker) Improved Solvent (from 4 GJ/t-CO2 down to 2.5) Functionalised Ionic Liquids 0% Effect of cumulatative improvements CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured Capture of 133 tpd (6.2% of total emissions)

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Opportunities for the use of Waste Heat Utilise Additional Heat Losses 2000 1800 100% 90% 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 Base Dry kiln & gas fired (from 0.865 t-co2/t-clinker down to 0.71) Additional heat losses (from 0.56 up to 2 GJ/clinker) Improved Solvent (from 4 GJ/t-CO2 down to 2.5) Functionalised Ionic Liquids 0% Effect of cumulatative improvements CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured Capture of 474 tpd (22.2% of total emissions)

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Opportunities for the use of Waste Heat Improve Solvent Performance 2000 1800 100% 90% 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 Base Dry kiln & gas fired (from 0.865 t-co2/t-clinker down to 0.71) Additional heat losses (from 0.56 up to 2 GJ/clinker) Improved Solvent (from 4 GJ/t-CO2 down to 2.5) Functionalised Ionic Liquids 0% Effect of cumulatative improvements CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured Capture of 758 tpd (35.5% of total emissions)

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Opportunities for the use of Waste Heat Next Generation Solvents 2000 1800 100% 90% 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 Base Dry kiln & gas fired (from 0.865 t-co2/t-clinker down to 0.71) Additional heat losses (from 0.56 up to 2 GJ/clinker) Improved Solvent (from 4 GJ/t-CO2 down to 2.5) Functionalised Ionic Liquids 0% Effect of cumulatative improvements CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured Capture of 1,895 tpd (89.0% of total emissions)

CO 2 captured (tpd) CO 2 captured (% of total produced) Opportunities for the use of Waste Heat Combined Effects 2000 1800 100% 90% 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 Base Dry kiln & gas fired (from 0.865 t-co2/t-clinker down to 0.71) Additional heat losses (from 0.56 up to 2 GJ/clinker) Improved Solvent (from 4 GJ/t-CO2 down to 2.5) Functionalised Ionic Liquids 0% Effect of cumulatative improvements CO2 captured (tpd) Percent CO2 Captured Enough energy to capture from 5.1% to 89.0% of total emissions

Conclusions

Conclusions Deep CO 2 reductions from cement require CCS. Two capture options Oxyfiring Post Combustion Waste heat may be utilised to regenerate solvent Up to 35.5% can be captured now, rising to 89% with next generation capture technology Further work required to develop practical approaches of utilising this heat

Contact dennis.vanpuyvelde@globalccsinstitute.com 0423 024 550