Abu Dhabi, where CO2 is captured in the steam methane reforming (SMR) for H2 production to be used in a direct reduction iron (DRI) process. A recent cost review identified promising CO2 capture solutions for this sector, perhaps at lower TRL and potentially with less accurate cost figures [71]. Other projects are advancing on CO2 capture technologies applied to the steelmaking sector. For example, the C4U project will test high‐temperature solid sorbents, aiming to reach a TRL of 7 once the demonstration facility is fully operational. Additionally, the STEPWISE project will advance on the testing of the sorption‐ enhanced water gas shift technology, reaching a TRL of 7 once it operates successfully, while the 3D project will test an advanced solvent in a steel mill.7
Other sectors such as refining, hydrogen, natural gas, heavy oil, fertilizer productions, and waste‐to‐energy are important and are being considered for further study, for example, by the CSLF.
1.5 Conclusions
In this chapter, the main CO2 capture systems applied to the industrial and power sectors have been described, covering a wide range of TRLs. Chemical absorption as post‐combustion arrangement was further discussed, including advanced process configurations and its integration in the power plant and electricity grid.
Based on the information from the literature, Figure 1.12 aims to provide an overview of the current TRLs of the different CO2 capture technologies applied to the power and industrial sectors. Note that differences on the TRL definitions from different sources can impact on the TRL assessment. Additionally, several systems can vary and it would be reflected in their TRL. For example, chemical absorption systems have reached their maximum TRL when commercial solvents are used. However, emerging solvents might be at a much lower TRL. Similar limitations of those estimations can be seen, for example, in the use of different absorbents, different types of membranes or using novel O2 separation process for oxyfuel. Moreover, in the case of the industrial sector, the TRL is also dependent on the industry. For example, while a system has been tested within a cement production facility, it might not have been used in the iron and steel production environment. In addition, in some industries, there could be a wide range of production processes, which impact on the CO2 emitted and composition of the flue gas, and will be considered when assessing the TRL at the relevant environment.
Figure 1.12 Review of current TRL of different CO2 capture technologies. *The prediction of the TRL of fuel cells is based on the project implemented in Alabama by ExxonMobil and Fuel Cell Energy partnership using MCFC. **SEWGS = Sorption‐enhanced water gas shift. This prediction is based on the expected outcome of the STEPWISE project. ***The prediction of the calcium looping technology on the industrial sector is based on the expected outcome of the CLEANKER project. ****Oxyfuel is considered here as the combustion with almost pure oxygen. Other configurations of, for example, chemical looping, cryogenics, membranes (oxygen separation), among others, can be considered as part of the oxy‐combustion technologies.
References
1 1 Masson‐Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.‐O. et al. (eds.) (2018). IPCC, 2018: summary for policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre‐industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland, 32 pp.: World Meteorological Organization.
2 2 Giannaris, S., Jacobs, B., Srisang, W. et al. (2019). Heat integration analysis and optimization for a post combustion CO2 capture retrofit study of SaskPower's Shand Power Station. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 84: 62–71.
3 3 Rock, L., McNaughton, C., Black, A. et al. (2017). Assessment of CO2 levels prior to injection across the quest sequestration lease area. Energy Procedia 114: 2836–2846.
4 4 Allam, R., Martin, S., Forrest, B. et al. (2017). Demonstration of the Allam cycle: an update on the development status of a high efficiency supercritical carbon dioxide power process employing full carbon capture. Energy Procedia 114: 5948–5966.
5 5 Knudsen, J.N., Bade, O.M., Askestad, I. et al. (2014). Pilot plant demonstration of CO2 capture from cement plant with advanced amine technology. Energy Procedia 63: 6464–6475.
6 6 Bjerge, L.‐M. and Brevik, P. (2014). CO2 capture in the cement industry, Norcem CO2 Capture Project (Norway). Energy Procedia 63 (1876): 6455–6463.
7 7 Hills, T.P., Sceats, M., Rennie, D., and Fennell, P. (2017). LEILAC: low cost CO2 capture for the cement and lime industries. Energy Procedia 114: 6166–6170.
8 8 Herzog, H.J. (2018). Carbon Capture. The MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series.
9 9 Fout, T., Zoelle, A., Keairns, D. et al.. Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 1b: Bituminous Coal (IGCC) to Electricity. NETL‐PUB‐22638. https://netl.doe.gov/projects/files/CostAndPerformanceBaselineForFossilEnergyPlantsVol1BitumCoalAndNGtoElectBBRRev4-1_092419.pdf.
10 10 Wu, S., Kukoski, A., Jin, P. et al. Development of Oxyfuel Combustion Technology for Existing Power Plants, 1–6. Hitachi Power Systems America, Ltd www.hitachipowersystems.us.
11 11 Younas, M., Sohail, M., Kong, L.L. et al. (2016). Feasibility of CO2 adsorption by solid adsorbents: a review on low‐temperature systems. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 13 (7): 1839–1860.
12 12 Samanta, A., Zhao, A., Shimizu, G.K.H. et al. (2012). Post‐combustion CO2 capture using solid sorbents: a review. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51 (4): 1438–1463.
13 13 Cherbański, R. and Molga, E. (2009). Intensification of desorption processes by use of microwaves: an overview of possible applications and industrial perspectives. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 48 (1): 48–58.
14 14 Chronopoulos, T., Fernandez‐Diez, Y., Maroto‐Valer, M.M. et al. (2014). CO2 desorption via microwave heating for post‐combustion carbon capture. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 197: 288–290.
15 15 Yu, C.H., Huang, C.H., and Tan, C.S. (2012). A review of CO2 capture by absorption and adsorption. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 12 (5): 745–769.
16 16 Abanades, J.C. (2013). Chapter 21‐Calcium looping for CO2 capture in combustion systems. In: Fluidized Bed Technologies for Near‐Zero Emission Combustion and Gasification, 931–970. Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy.
17 17 Abanades, J.C., Arias, B., Lyngfelt, A. et al. (2015). Emerging CO2 capture systems. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 40: 126–166.
18 18 Mores, P.L., Arias, A.M., Scenna, N.J. et al. (2019). Cost‐based comparison of multi‐stage membrane configurations for carbon capture from flue gas of power plants. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 86: 177–190.
19 19 Roussanaly, S. and Anantharaman, R. (2017). Cost‐optimal CO2 capture ratio for membrane‐based capture from different CO2 sources. Chem. Eng. J. 327: 618–628.
20 20 Lockwood, T. (2016). Next‐generation carbon capture technologies for coal. IEA Clean Coal Centre, CCC/265, London, United Kingdom.
21 21
