Abstract
The comparison study of CO2 removal efficiency from flue gases at low pressures and temperatures is presented, based on commonly used methods and materials. Our own experimental results were compared and analyzed for different methods of CO2 removal from flue gases: absorption in a packed column, adsorption in a packed column and membrane separation on polymeric and ceramic membranes, as well as on the developed supported ionic liquid membranes (SILMs). The efficiency and competitiveness comparison of the investigated methods showed that SILMs obtained by coating of the polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) membrane with 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate ([Emim][Ac]) exhibit a high ideal CO2/N2 selectivity of 152, permeability of 2400 barrer and long term stability. Inexpensive and selective SILMs were prepared applying commercial membranes. Under similar experimental conditions, the absorption in aqueous Monoethanolamine (MEA) solutions is much faster than in ionic liquids (ILs), but gas and liquid flow rates in packed column sprayed with IL are limited due to the much higher viscosity and lower diffusion coefficient of IL. For CO2 adsorption on activated carbons impregnated with amine or IL, only a small improvement in the adsorption properties was achieved. The experimental research was compared with the literature data to find a feasible solution based on commercially available methods and materials.
Highlights
The comparison study of CO2 removal efficiency from flue gases at low pressures and temperatures is presented, based on commonly used methods and materials
The experimental research is presented for different methods of carbon dioxide removal from flue gases: absorption, adsorption and membrane separation under the same or similar experimental conditions, based on commonly used materials: packings, beds, membranes and CO2 solvents
The efficiency comparison of the investigated methods showed that for an supported ionic liquid membranes (SILMs) based on a ceramic membrane C (PDMS) impregnated with [Emim][Ac] by coating in a vacuum (Figure 10), the best results of long-term stability and permselectivity were obtained with a high value of ideal selectivity and permeability 152 and 2400 barrer, respectively
Summary
The comparison study of CO2 removal efficiency from flue gases at low pressures and temperatures is presented, based on commonly used methods and materials. Our own experimental results were compared and analyzed for different methods of CO2 removal from flue gases: absorption in a packed column, adsorption in a packed column and membrane separation on polymeric and ceramic membranes, as well as on the developed supported ionic liquid membranes (SILMs). The carbon dioxide capture and separation is the first step of these techniques and its cost is estimated to be as much as 80% of the total CCS cost [9,10]. In post-combustion processes, CO2 concentration in flue gas is about 10 to 15% vol, pressure is near atmospheric, and the temperature is usually in the range of 313–348 K [14]. The CO2 concentrations and pressures are higher for CO2 separation from natural gas [15]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
