Absorption - Introduction to Carbon Capture and Sequestration - page 218

carbon capture, and that as researchers we create as many options to
promote this goal as possible. Unfortunately, this process is very similar to
the lottery; at the end of the day, it is likely that only one or two of these
options will survive. Unlike the lottery, however, a “losing ticket” is not
worthless. Even “unsuccessful” strategies for carbon capture will allow us
to gain invaluable insights into the syntheses and properties of novel
materials.
Section 8
Case Study: water versus
amines
It is instructive to summarize this chapter by making a comparison
between use of MEA and water as a solvent in a CO 2 absorption process.
This case study was carried out by the UC Berkeley students, Forrest
Abouelnasr, Josh Howe, Vicky Jun, and Karthish Manthiram.
Design an absorption and stripper unit that would remove 90% of the
CO 2 from a coal-fi red power plant (post-combustion). Be sure to clearly
label the top and bottom of both units on your diagram, and state what-
ever assumptions you used in generating your diagrams. The analyses
should demonstrate the benefi ts of using amines (e.g., MEA) versus
water. To further illustrate the benefi ts of using amines, please estimate
the capital cost of both a water and an MEA process.
HINT: Here are several ways to do this: you might use the same
operation conditions and then compare the costs, or you could try to
optimize some relevant variables for both processes to make a fair com-
parison. For an extra thought experiment, take the operational costs into
consideration.
Coal-fi red power plants in the United States produce 30% of domes-
tic CO 2 emissions, making them an ideal target for carbon capture pro-
jects. Of the various adsorption, absorption, and membrane-based