Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Rochelle, Gary T.

Publications and source records attributed to Rochelle, Gary T..

11 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Cost details from front-end engineering design of piperazine with the advanced stripper

This Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to estimate the cost to capture and compress 90% of the CO 2 from an existing natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) in Denver City, Texas, USA. The FEED used the PZAS (Piperazine with the Advanced Stripper) 2G amine scrubbing technology developed and modeled by The University of Texas at Austin. This FEED is unique in providing more public cost details than other FEEDs funded by DOE. The primary objective of the FEED was to provide a comprehensive estimate for the total installed cost of the capture plant. The estimated capital cost of NGCC at the Mustang Station is $\$727$ million for a capacity of 460 MW and 1.6 million tonnes CO 2 /yr. This includes a contingency of $\$104.6$ million and a contractor’s profit of $\$60.1$ million. The total direct field cost is $\$384.1$ million. With an optimistic fuel value of $\$3$/MMBtu, the estimated cost of capture varies from $\$85$/t at 4% IRR/85% load to $\$170$/t at 10% IRR/52% load. Air cooling is technically feasible but expensive. The air cooling systems for the water wash and pump-around intercooling account for 23.4% of the direct cost. The gas-fired boilers represent only 4% of the direct costs, but steam extraction would reduce energy cost, free up cooling water, and reduce the direct costs of processing additional flue gas and CO 2 from the boilers. The absorbers represent 9.6% of the direct cost in this FEED with no direct contact cooler and only 7.6 m of packing. Furthermore, the solvent cross exchangers are less expensive than expected (2.5% of direct costs). Doubling the number of these exchangers could reduce the heat duty from 3.0 to 2.5 GJ/t CO 2 .

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Role of carbon treating in piperazine oxidation

Bench-scale experiments were performed to test the effects of carbon treating (8 × 30 mesh, lignite-based granular activated carbon from Nowata Filtration) on the oxidation of aqueous piperazine (PZ) at conditions of CO 2 capture. The combined mitigation with carbon treating and N 2 sparging was also tested. When carbon treating is applied, the UV–Vis absorbance at 320 nm, the NH 3 production rate, and the accumulation rate of dissolved Fe concentration and total formate concentration decrease. The effects of carbon treating last even when the carbon is bypassed, which is possibly due to the removal of catalytic degradation products. Therefore, it is better to apply carbon treating in the early stages of oxidation. Combining carbon treating and nitrogen sparging is more effective in oxidation mitigation than applying the methods separately. The amount of Fe removed by the carbon bed is greater than the result calculated from the solvent inventory and concentration difference of Fe in solvent, indicating that Fe colloids or other “soluble” Fe will dissolve into the solvent and replace the dissolved Fe that is adsorbed and removed. Furthermore, the carbon removes the degradation products that can complex with Fe 3+ , even if they are not complexed. Since the source of Fe includes fly ash and corrosion, removing the complexing agents instead of all the available Fe is a more feasible target.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Optimization of Operating Profit for the FEED of the PZAS Process for CO 2 Capture on a 460 MW NGCC

A rating model of PZAS (Piperazine with the Advanced Stripper) for a 460 MW natural gas combined cycle was developed from vendor-provided equipment performance data. Surrogate rating models were built and used to optimize variable profit of the system subject to natural gas and electricity price at a fixed value for CO 2 of $\$80$/tonne. Several process constraints were considered between ambient temperatures of 4.4 and 40.5 °C. Lower lean loading resulted in lower reboiler heat duty of about 2.2 GJ/tonne. Lean loading at 0.2 mol/equiv N was sufficient at an ambient temperature of 4.4 °C to maximize variable profit. Solvent precipitation was avoided even at low lean loading (0.18 mol/mol) in the absence of a trim cooler for the lean solvent between the absorber and the cold cross exchanger. Optimal CO 2 removal was always higher than the design case removal of 90% and achieved a peak of 93.6% for 4.4 ºC ambient temperature. Lean solvent rate was a significant driver of profitability. The maximum capacity of the compressor was a significant constraint on profitability. Increasing compressor capacity by 20–30% could increase variable profit by about 21% in the case of 0.18 lean loading at 4.4 °C ambient temperature. Furthermore, this increase in profit was lower at higher ambient temperature and higher lean loading. The breakeven gas price was $\$4.6$/MMBtu at high lean loading of 0.22 mol/mol. Below this value, profit was maximized by increasing the boiler heat rate. Above this value, profit could not be increased by burning additional natural gas, requiring a reduction in boiler heat rate and consequently, specific heat duty. At lower lean loading (0.2, 0.18 mol/mol), this transition in heat duty was not observed due to the lower heat duty. As the ambient temperature increased, a similar trend in heat duty was observed at 0.22 lean loading, but the transition to lower heat duty occurred earlier at $\$4$/MMBtu. This was because of the lower CO 2 production at higher ambient temperature, making the process unprofitable at a gas price higher than $\$3$/MMBtu unless the heat duty of the stripper and natural gas boiler is steeply decreased.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2022

Creative absorber design and optimization for CO 2 capture with aqueous piperazine

The Texas Carbon Management Program is preparing a Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) of the PZASTM (Piperazine with the Advanced Stripper TM ) for CO 2 capture at a natural gas combined cycle power plant in West Texas. This paper develops the absorber design for the capture system and studies the operational strategies of the absorber in response to ambient temperature swing. The design uses 2 absorber trains, and each train integrates absorption and a water-wash section in one column. Each column has a cross-section area of 174 m 2 and consists of 3 sections of MellapakPlus® 252Y structured packing. Packing heights for each section are 3, 4.9, and 2.7 m from top to bottom. A pump-around intercooler applied at the bottom bed circulates solvent and eliminates the direct contact cooler. The baseline CO 2 removal rate is 90% and will vary between 78% and 90% with ambient temperature. The system uses air cooling to eliminate cooling water usage. The water balance in the system will be managed by operating the water wash at a high circulation rate (1300 kg/h) to condense water during the night and make up for water loss during the day. Finally, the proposed design reduces the capital cost of the absorber column by minimizing the packing height and eliminating the direct contact cooler (DCC), and improves the energy cost by lowering the pump-around intercooling temperature and increasing the pump-around rate.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Process design of the piperazine advanced stripper for a 460 MW NGCC

The Texas Carbon Management Program is conducting a Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) for Piperazine with the Advanced Stripper™ (PZAS™) at a natural gas combined cycle power plant in west Texas. Here, this paper presents the design of the advanced stripper system with an emphasis on the selection of packing type, packing height, column diameter, and heat exchanger size, demonstrates the effect of ambient temperature swing on the regeneration energy requirement, and investigates two alternate process configurations that provide better energy performance than PZAS™. The design uses 2 stripper trains, and each train uses two cold cross exchangers, one hot cross exchanger, a stripper column, a CO 2 exchanger, and a condenser. Each column consists of two sections of random packing with RSR 2 packing at the top and RSR 3 packing at the bottom, with a total packed height of 7.5 m. The cold exchanger was designed with an NTU of 6, the hot exchanger with an NTU of 2, and the CO 2 exchanger with an NTU of 5. At 0.4 rich loading and 0.2 lean loading, this design resulted in a heat duty of 2.85 GJ/tonne CO 2 . The heat duty can vary up to 3.1 GJ/tonne CO 2 due to lower rich loading at higher summer temperature, but the absolute steam requirement is 8–15% lower in the summer. An alternate design, PZAS with hot rich bypass, is proposed, which can reduce the equivalent work of stripping by 1.5–3.5% compared to PZAS at low heat exchanger size, due to a reduction in stripper driving force. Using a hot rich bypass increases the vapor fraction of the total rich bypass stream from 0.3 to 1 mol% compared to using the warm rich bypass, which also contributes to a reduction in lost work in the column. PZAS with hot rich bypass outperforms PZAS in energy requirement below a packing height of 15 m, but fails to do so above 15 m of packing due to a column pinch that results in little change in LMTD of the column. PZAS with hot rich bypass has the potential to minimize capital cost in addition to reducing energy requirement as it requires less packing to strip CO 2 than PZAS and requires only one cross exchanger with 8 heat transfer units.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Energy use of piperazine with the advanced stripper from pilot plant testing

Here, piperazine with the Advanced Stripper (PZAS™) was tested at the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC) at coal and NGCC conditions. Energy performance was measured with accounting for heat loss. The net heat duty was found to be identical at 2.45 GJ/tonne for both 4 and 12% CO 2 at 90% CO 2 removal. The average measured heat loss was 0.38 GJ/tonne and represented 30% of the gross heat rate. For PZAS, the warm rich piping before the control valve is the largest in surface area. Heat loss at this location increased heat duty by 80% of the heat loss value. Therefore, the total heat duty was decreased by 80% of the heat loss. The Independence™ model was validated using 112 steady-state pilot plant runs and predicted average net heat duty with an error of 9% and lean loading with an error of 10%. The model was used to simulate process impacts of heat loss for the PZAS and simple stripper configurations. For both strippers, heat loss was found to impact heat duty at locations other than just the steam heater. While heat loss in the steam heater was the most important for PZAS, heat loss in the column was the most important for the simple stripper due to a large top-side pinch and CO 2 reabsorption at the same location. CO 2 reabsorption in PZAS occurred only at high heat loss values (~0.14 GJ/hr), compared to low heat loss values (~ 0.03 GJ/hr) in the PZ-simple stripper. Excessive packing in the PZ-simple stripper caused a large top-side pinch at 0.23 mol/mol lean loading, making the column very sensitive to heat loss. Heat loss in the PZ-simple stripper increased heat duty by 120–150% at typical heat loss values and lean loading of 0.23 mol/mol. Heat loss in the MEA-simple stripper only increased heat duty by 1–13% in a typical lean loading range of 0.1–0.2 mol/mol. A large bottom side pinch at low lean loading for 7 m MEA made the effect of heat loss less pronounced.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Effects of carbon treating on piperazine oxidation in pilot plant testing of PZAS™

From February to June 2019, a pilot plant campaign was run for 2100 h at the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC) using moderately degraded 5 m PZ with simulated flue gas equivalent to a 0.64 MW natural gas combined cycle. Piperazine with the Advanced Stripper™ (PZAS™) and a baghouse were used, and N 2 sparging was applied at the bottom of the absorber. A carbon bed was activated and showed beneficial effects in removing degradation products and reducing the oxidation rate. The cumulative NH 3 production was 180 mmol/k, indicating a PZ oxidation rate of 0.07 mmol/kg/h (0.3 kg PZ/tonne of CO 2 ). The total formate before turning on the carbon bed was 41 mmol/kg, and the total Fe was 0.1 mmol/kg. Carbon treating reduced NH3 production from 0.1 mmol/kg/h to 0.056 mmol/kg/h after 400 h of operation, reduced the UV-Vis absorbance of the samples at 320 nm, and caused a decrease of dissolved Cr. Bench-scale experiments were performed using the NCCC solvent and the same type of carbon. In bench-scale experiments, the UV-Vis absorbance and the concentration of Fe, Mn, and Cr all decreased. Finally, a linear equilibrium relationship was observed between the UV-Vis absorbance and the carbon loading.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Quarterly Technical Progress Report Piperazine Advanced Stripper (PZAS™) Front End Engineering Design

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document summarizes the status of Cooperative Agreement DE-FE0031844, “Piperazine Advanced Stripper (PZAS™) Front-End Engineering Design,” during the reporting period of January 1 through March 31, 2020. The objective of this project is to develop accurate installed costs by conducting a Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) of PZAS™ at Golden Spread Electric Cooperative’s (GSEC) Mustang Station located in Denver City, TX. Complementary benefits include positioning the technology for a commercial project with the 45Q tax credits, qualifying PZAS™ for use on a Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) Cogen facility, and to provide cost detail to optimize PZAS™ and help guide R&D of second-generation solvent CO2 capture technologies. Results from the FEED will be used to evaluate the economic feasibility of the process at Mustang Station. This project is funded by the U.S. DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory under the aforementioned Cooperative Agreement. Exxon, Total, Chevron, UOP-Honeywell, and the University of Texas (UT) are project co-funders. AECOM and Trimeric are project team members; UT is the prime contractor. Summary of Progress Cooperative Agreement DE-FE0031844 was established in October 2019. The current reporting period, January 1 through March 31, 2020, is the second technical progress reporting period for the project. Several milestones were accomplished during this reporting period, including: • Kickoff Meeting with DOE on February 3, 2020. • Kickoff Meeting with GSEC on March 30, 2020. (Note: Due to Covid-19 travel restrictions and shelter-in-place guidelines, the kickoff meeting was conducted remotely via videoconferencing. See attached notes from that telecon.) • Updated Project Management Plan March 2020, submitted with this quarterly report Other activities during the quarter included progress on contracting and other legal agreements (e.g., non-disclosure agreements), internal kickoff meetings at both AECOM and Trimeric, and development of a Technical Implementation Plan (TIP). The TIP will help the team to make critical, early process decisions and, ultimately, to develop a project and process design basis. Note that all agreements between project team participants are complete as of this submittal, except the vendor agreement with Kiewit (steam cycle modeling). Plans for Next Reporting Period Activities during the next reporting period (April 1, 2020 through June 30, 2020) include: the completion of the Project Design Basis and progress towards the Process Design Basis/Process Design Package (PDP). The Project Design Basis is due as a deliverable and milestone during the next reporting period.

Rochelle, Gary T.↗