IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v282y2023ics036054422301705x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of CO2 capture process from flue-gases in combined cycle gas turbine power plant using post-combustion capture technology

Author

Listed:
  • Subramanian, Navaneethan
  • Madejski, Paweł

Abstract

Combined cycle gas turbine power plants (CCGTs) are a combined cycle consisting of a gas turbine and a steam turbine to generate electricity. Sometimes CCGTs incorporate cogeneration to produce both heat and power. After the gas fuel combustion in the gas turbine combustion chamber, the flue gases are passed through the Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) to extract heat and generate additional electrical power using the steam turbine. The CCGT technology is recognized for its highest efficiency of 58% in electricity production among the power production technology. A highly efficient CCGT power plant with 60% efficiency produces even 2.5 times less CO2 than a modern coal power plant with an efficiency of 45% because of the use of gas fuel and electrical efficiency. The CO2 emission can be reduced further when the post-combustion CO2 capture methods are applied. To perform CO2 capture and to reduce the CO2 emission from power plants, the CO2 mass fraction in flue gas is the crucial parameter for the operation of the Post-combustion Carbon Capture and Storage (PCCS) technology. The PCCS technology uses solvents, which is the aqueous solution of amine that reacts with flue gas and absorbs the CO2, which is treated and separated later. The paper presents the results of the energy analysis of a post-combustion carbon capture process when integrated with a combined cycle gas power plant. The study considered two different gas fuels such as methane and syngas. Syngas composition was determined from the sewage sludge gasification process and can be treated as zero-emission CO2 gas fuel. When the flue gas produced from the syngas is used in PCCS at more than 50% of load conditions, the negative CO2 emission level in large-scale CCGT power plants can be reached. The paper presents the results of mass and energy balance analysis of HRSG of a CCGT integrated with PCCS to perform CO2 capture. The analysis of HRSG using flue gases from methane and syngas is performed by calculating the enthalpy of flue gas, rate of heat exchange, and temperature distribution of each component of HRSG. The comparison of the result shows slight differences due to the different composition and flow rates of flue gases. The flue gas at the outlet of two HRSG is used in the PCCS at different load conditions. An aqueous solution of 30 wt% Monoethanolamine (MEA) with rich loading of 0.5 mol-CO2/mol-MEA and a mixture of 16 wt% 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP) – 14 wt% Piperazine (PZ) with rich loading of 0.62 and 0.86 mol-CO2/mol-amine respectively are used in the PCCS. Due to the reboiler duty of amines, the steam consumed by the PCCS for AMP-PZ regeneration is less compared to MEA. Depending upon the flue gas and solvent used in the PCCS, the power consumed by the PCCS from CCGT power plant is measured from 9.6% to 11.6%. For the given operating condition of the CCGT and PCCS at more than 50% load condition, the negative CO2 emission level can be achieved.

Suggested Citation

  • Subramanian, Navaneethan & Madejski, Paweł, 2023. "Analysis of CO2 capture process from flue-gases in combined cycle gas turbine power plant using post-combustion capture technology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:282:y:2023:i:c:s036054422301705x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.128311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036054422301705X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128311?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Najmus S. Sifat & Yousef Haseli, 2019. "A Critical Review of CO 2 Capture Technologies and Prospects for Clean Power Generation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-33, October.
    2. Shin, J.Y. & Jeon, Y.J. & Maeng, D.J. & Kim, J.S. & Ro, S.T., 2002. "Analysis of the dynamic characteristics of a combined-cycle power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 27(12), pages 1085-1098.
    3. Paweł Madejski & Karolina Chmiel & Navaneethan Subramanian & Tomasz Kuś, 2022. "Methods and Techniques for CO 2 Capture: Review of Potential Solutions and Applications in Modern Energy Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jia, Dongqing & Li, Xingmei & Gong, Xu & Lv, Xiaoyan & Shen, Zhong, 2024. "Bi-level strategic bidding model of novel virtual power plant aggregating waste gasification in integrated electricity and hydrogen markets," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 357(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vera Marcantonio & Marcello De Falco & Enrico Bocci, 2022. "Non-Thermal Plasma Technology for CO 2 Conversion—An Overview of the Most Relevant Experimental Results and Kinetic Models," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Georgios Varvoutis & Athanasios Lampropoulos & Evridiki Mandela & Michalis Konsolakis & George E. Marnellos, 2022. "Recent Advances on CO 2 Mitigation Technologies: On the Role of Hydrogenation Route via Green H 2," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-38, June.
    3. Brenda Raho & Gianpiero Colangelo & Marco Milanese & Arturo de Risi, 2022. "A Critical Analysis of the Oxy-Combustion Process: From Mathematical Models to Combustion Product Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-25, September.
    4. Blanco, Jesús M. & Vazquez, L. & Peña, F., 2012. "Investigation on a new methodology for thermal power plant assessment through live diagnosis monitoring of selected process parameters; application to a case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 170-180.
    5. Taler, Jan & Taler, Dawid & Kaczmarski, Karol & Dzierwa, Piotr & Trojan, Marcin & Sobota, Tomasz, 2018. "Monitoring of thermal stresses in pressure components based on the wall temperature measurement," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 500-519.
    6. Caselles-Moncho, Antonio & Ferrandiz-Serrano, Liliana & Peris-Mora, Eduardo, 2006. "Dynamic simulation model of a coal thermoelectric plant with a flue gas desulphurisation system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3812-3826, December.
    7. Angerer, Michael & Kahlert, Steffen & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2017. "Transient simulation and fatigue evaluation of fast gas turbine startups and shutdowns in a combined cycle plant with an innovative thermal buffer storage," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 246-257.
    8. Alexander García-Mariaca & Eva Llera-Sastresa, 2021. "Review on Carbon Capture in ICE Driven Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-30, October.
    9. Omar Mohamed & Ashraf Khalil, 2020. "Progress in Modeling and Control of Gas Turbine Power Generation Systems: A Survey," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-26, May.
    10. Carlos Arnaiz del Pozo & Ángel Jiménez Álvaro & Jan Hendrik Cloete & Schalk Cloete & Shahriar Amini, 2020. "Exergy Analysis of Gas Switching Chemical Looping IGCC Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-25, January.
    11. Imran, Muhammad & Pili, Roberto & Usman, Muhammad & Haglind, Fredrik, 2020. "Dynamic modeling and control strategies of organic Rankine cycle systems: Methods and challenges," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    12. Martin Greco-Coppi & Carina Hofmann & Diethelm Walter & Jochen Ströhle & Bernd Epple, 2023. "Negative CO2 emissions in the lime production using an indirectly heated carbonate looping process," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(6), pages 1-32, August.
    13. Alobaid, Falah & Pfeiffer, Stefan & Epple, Bernd & Seon, Chil-Yeong & Kim, Hyun-Gee, 2012. "Fast start-up analyses for Benson heat recovery steam generator," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 295-309.
    14. Wang, Dantong & Han, Xiaoxuan & Li, Pengcheng & Hu, Zhan & Wang, Min & Song, Chunfeng & Kitamura, Yutaka, 2024. "Cyclic stability evaluation of a novel CO2 absorption-microalgae conversion (CAMC) system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    15. Fares Almomani & Amera Abdelbar & Sophia Ghanimeh, 2023. "A Review of the Recent Advancement of Bioconversion of Carbon Dioxide to Added Value Products: A State of the Art," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-30, July.
    16. Alobaid, Falah & Postler, Ralf & Ströhle, Jochen & Epple, Bernd & Kim, Hyun-Gee, 2008. "Modeling and investigation start-up procedures of a combined cycle power plant," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(12), pages 1173-1189, December.
    17. Christiano B. Peres & Pedro M. R. Resende & Leonel J. R. Nunes & Leandro C. de Morais, 2022. "Advances in Carbon Capture and Use (CCU) Technologies: A Comprehensive Review and CO 2 Mitigation Potential Analysis," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-15, November.
    18. Muhammad Nawaz & Humbul Suleman & Abdulhalim Shah Maulud, 2022. "Carbon Capture and Utilization: A Bibliometric Analysis from 2007–2021," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-17, September.
    19. Delattin, F. & De Ruyck, J. & Bram, S., 2009. "Detailed study of the impact of co-utilization of biomass in a natural gas combined cycle power plant through perturbation analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(5), pages 622-629, May.
    20. Tomasz Czakiert & Jaroslaw Krzywanski & Anna Zylka & Wojciech Nowak, 2022. "Chemical Looping Combustion: A Brief Overview," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:282:y:2023:i:c:s036054422301705x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.