Comparison of Technologies for CO<sub>2</sub> Capture from Cement Production—Part 2: Cost Analysis

This paper presents an assessment of the cost performance of CO<sub>2</sub> capture technologies when retrofitted to a cement plant: MEA-based absorption, oxyfuel, chilled ammonia-based absorption (Chilled Ammonia Process), membrane-assisted CO<sub>2</sub> liquefaction, and c...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Stefania Osk Gardarsdottir, Edoardo De Lena, Matteo Romano, Simon Roussanaly, Mari Voldsund, José-Francisco Pérez-Calvo, David Berstad, Chao Fu, Rahul Anantharaman, Daniel Sutter, Matteo Gazzani, Marco Mazzotti, Giovanni Cinti
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2019-02-01
Series:Energies
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/3/542
Description
Summary:This paper presents an assessment of the cost performance of CO<sub>2</sub> capture technologies when retrofitted to a cement plant: MEA-based absorption, oxyfuel, chilled ammonia-based absorption (Chilled Ammonia Process), membrane-assisted CO<sub>2</sub> liquefaction, and calcium looping. While the technical basis for this study is presented in Part 1 of this paper series, this work presents a comprehensive techno-economic analysis of these CO<sub>2</sub> capture technologies based on a capital and operating costs evaluation for retrofit in a cement plant. The cost of the cement plant product, clinker, is shown to increase with 49 to 92% compared to the cost of clinker without capture. The cost of CO<sub>2</sub> avoided is between 42 &#8364;/t<sub>CO2</sub> (for the oxyfuel-based capture process) and 84 &#8364;/t<sub>CO2</sub> (for the membrane-based assisted liquefaction capture process), while the reference MEA-based absorption capture technology has a cost of 80 &#8364;/t<sub>CO2</sub>. Notably, the cost figures depend strongly on factors such as steam source, electricity mix, electricity price, fuel price and plant-specific characteristics. Hence, this confirms the conclusion of the technical evaluation in Part 1 that for final selection of CO<sub>2</sub> capture technology at a specific plant, a plant-specific techno-economic evaluation should be performed, also considering more practical considerations.
ISSN:1996-1073