Abstract
We examined the cost implications of selecting six different types of heat exchangers as the lean/rich heat exchanger in an amine-based CO2 capture process. The difference in total capital cost between different capture plant scenarios due to the different costs of the heat exchangers used as the lean/rich heat exchanger, in each case, is in millions of Euros. The gasketed-plate heat exchanger (G-PHE) saves significant space, and it saves considerable costs. Selecting the G-PHE instead of the shell and tube heat exchangers (STHXs) will save €33 million–€39 million in total capital cost (CAPEX), depending on the type of STHX. About €43 million and €2 million in total installed costs (CAPEX) can be saved if the G-PHE is selected instead of the finned double-pipe heat exchanger (FDP-HX) or welded-plate heat exchanger, respectively. The savings in total annual cost is also in millions of Euros/year. Capture costs of €5/tCO2–€6/tCO2 can be saved by replacing conventional STHXs with the G-PHE, and over €6/tCO2 in the case of the FDP-HX. This is significant, and it indicates the importance of clearly stating the exact type and not just the broad classification of heat exchanger used as lean/rich heat exchanger. This is required for cost estimates to be as accurate as possible and allow for appropriate comparisons with other studies. Therefore, the gasketed-plate heat exchanger is recommended to save substantial costs. The CO2 capture costs of all scenarios are most sensitive to the steam cost. The plate and frame heat exchangers (PHEs) scenario’s capture cost can decline from about €77/tCO2 to €59/tCO2 or rise to €95/tCO2.
Highlights
The burning of fossil fuels by power plants and other process industries contributes around half of the world’s CO2 emissions [1]
These results revealed that the difference in total capital cost among the different capture plant scenarios due to the differences in the cost of the heat exchangers in each case is in millions of Euros (M€)
About €43 million and €2 million in CAPEX can be saved using gasketed-plate heat exchanger (G-plate and frame heat exchangers (PHEs)) instead of using the finned double-pipe heat exchanger and welded-plate heat exchanger, respectively. This is significant, and it shows that it is important to state clearly the exact type and not just the broad classification of the heat exchanger used as LRHX
Summary
The burning of fossil fuels by power plants and other process industries contributes around half of the world’s CO2 emissions [1]. These emissions’ adverse effects are evident: the melting of glaziers, deforestation, and droughts in several places [2,3]. Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the International Energy Agency (IEA), carbon capture and storage (CCS) is necessary to achieve the. Several CO2 capture technologies and methods have been identified. They are based on chemical absorption and desorption using solvents [3], adsorption using solid adsorbent [7], and cryogenic
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.
