The CEMCAP framework: A framework for CO 2 capture from cement - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Technology for a better society

1

TCCS-9, June 13-14, 2017

Mari Voldsund, Rahul Anantharaman, David Berstad, Simon Roussanaly, Sigmund Størset – SINTEF Energy Research Helmut Hoppe – VDZ GmbH Matteo Romano, Edoardo De Lena, Manuele Gatti, Isabel Martínez, Maurizio Spinelli – Politecnico di Milano Giovanni Cinti – Italcementi Matteo Gazzani – ETH Zürich Peter van Os, Erin Schols, Juliana Garcia Moretz-Sohn Monteiro – TNO

The CEMCAP framework: A framework for CO2 capture from cement production

1

Technology for a better society

2

• Background
• Framework overview
• Reference cement burning line
• CO2 capture utilities
• Concluding remarks

Outline

Technology for a better society

3

• 7-9% of global

anthropogenic CO2 emissions from the cement industry

• CO2 emissions an

inherent part of the cement production process

Background

CaCO3 → CaO + CO2

Technology for a better society

4

Chilled ammonia process (CAP)

• NH3/water mixture as liquid solvent
• Require: heat for solvent regeneration, el for refrigeration

Oxyfuel

• Combustion in O2 (not air) gives CO2-rich flue gas
• Require: oxygen
• Generate: power from waste heat

Membrane-assisted liquefaction (MAL)

• Polymeric membrane for flue gas CO2 enrichment followed by

CO2 liquefaction

• Require: El for refrigeration and compression

Calcium looping (CaL)

• CaO reacts with CO2 to form CaCO3
• Require: heat for sorbent regeneration, oxygen
• Generate: power from waste heat

CEMCAP: Four fundamentally different technologies investigated

Cement plant CO2 Power Raw meal Clinker Fuel

Technology for a better society

5

CEMCAP framework

• For consistent comparative assessment of capture technologies
• Provides information relevant for experimental and simulation work
• Suitable for use also outside of CEMCAP
• The framework contains:
• A reference cement burning line
• Process unit specifications
• Utilities – cost and climate impact
• CO2 specifications
• Economic parameters
• Key performance indicators

Technology for a better society

6

• All cement burning lines are different: 14-35 vol% CO2 (dry basis)
• Reference cement burning line
• Based on reference cement kiln of ECRA
• 3,000 tonne clinker per day
• Assumed BAT technologies
• Defines
• raw material
• fuel properties
• process components
• etc.

Reference cement burning line

Technology for a better society

7

Flue gas concentrations

Interconnected Direct Air leak Low Medium

• CO2 [vol%]

25 20 34 N2 [vol%] 67 69 63 O2 [vol%] 8 11 3

Concentrations at stack (dry basis)

• Increasing air leak (base case)
• Constant low air leak

Technology for a better society

8

• No steam generated at the plant
• Small amount of waste heat

Steam

• Assume required steam is generated by:
• Waste heat recovery
• And either
• Natural gas fired boiler (base case)
• External CHP

Steam source Climate impact [kgCO2/MWhth] Cost (2014) [€/MWhth] Waste heat available on the plant 8.5 Natural gas boiler 224 25.3 External CHP steam plant at 100°C 101 7.7 External CHP steam plant at 120°C 136 10.3 External CHP steam plant at 140°C 170 13.0

Technology for a better society

9

• Fuel consumption per fuel in EU-28 (Eurostat)
• Electricity generation per fuel in EU-28 (Eurostat)
• CO2 emission factors of fuels (IEA)
• State-of-the-art efficiency and climate impact (EU directive)
• Cost of electricity EU-28 (Eurostat)

Electricity

EU-28 total:

• Electric efficiency
• Climate impact

Electric efficiency (2014) [%] Climate impact (2014) [kgCO2/MWh] EU-28 total 45.9 262 Pulverized coal, state-of-the-art 44.2 770 Pulverized coal, sub-critical 35.0 973 NGCC 52.5 385 Renewables (100% efficiency) 1 Renewables (infinite efficiency) ∞ Yearly electricity demand Cost (2014) [€/MWhel] 20,000 – 70,000 MWh/y 0.0548 70,000 – 150,000 MWh/y 0.0509

Technology for a better society

10

• Conventional kilns: heat recovery steam cycles seldom adopted
• CEMCAP integrated power production based on waste-to-energy cycles

Integrated power production

Nominal thermal input, MW 12.5 25 50 100 200 300 Steam pressure at turbine inlet, bar 30 40 60 80 100 125 Steam temperature at turbine inlet, °C 350 400 460 480 530 565 LP regenerative condensate preheater No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Feedwater temperature at boiler inlet, °C 120 120 140 140 140 140 Estimated turbine isentropic efficiency, % 70.0 75.0 78.0 80.8 85.6 86.8 65 70 75 80 85 90

• 50

100 150 200 250 300 350

Estimated turbine isentropic efficiency [%] Nominal thermal input, MW

Technology for a better society

11

• Two relevant alternatives of oxygen supply:
• Production on-site in air separation unit (ASU)
• Production outside the site and deliverance by tank trucks to storage tanks
• Costs versus flexibility

Oxygen supply

Supply method Power consumption Cost ASU 220-400 kWh/tO2 66-91 €/tO2 Tank trucks

• 80-100 €/tO2

Technology for a better society

12

• Coefficient of performance versus evaporator temperature

Refrigeration

COP = 𝑅 refrigeration 𝑋 net CoolPack

Technology for a better society

13

• Have presented:
• Reference cement burning line
• Utilities
• You can also find:
• Process unit specifications
• CO2 specifications
• Economic parameters
• Key performance indicators
• Information source for studies on CO2 capture from cement production
• Available at: http://www.sintef.no/projectweb/cemcap/results/

Concluding remarks

Technology for a better society

14

14

Acknowledgements This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no 641185 This work was supported by the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI) under contract number 15.0160 www.sintef.no/cemcap Twitter: @CEMCAP_CO2