Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CESAR1”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

Techno-economic evaluation of emission control configurations for AMP/PZ-based post-combustion CO 2 capture

Minimizing the environmental impacts of amine-based post-combustion carbon capture technologies is essential for regulatory compliance and public acceptance. Experimental campaigns at RWE's CO 2 capture pilot plant in Niederaussem using CESAR1 demonstrated that combining existing emission abatement technologies can substantially reduce the concentration of amines and degradation products in the CO 2 -depleted flue gas to below the detection limit of an infrared spectrometer. The campaign confirmed that a proprietary dry bed technology (OEASE aerozone™) or a second water wash can reduce AMP and PZ emissions to below 1 mg/Nm 3 . However, an acid or chemically active wash downstream of the water wash is necessary to reduce NH 3 emissions to very low levels (<2 mg/Nm 3 ). Combining a dry bed with an acid wash significantly reduces both the required acid solution and the resulting acid waste. The techno-economic analysis indicates that implementing emission mitigation technologies provides substantial environmental benefits for the CESAR1 process, with only a marginal increase (<1 €/tCO 2 ) in both the carbon capture cost (CCC) and CO 2 avoidance cost (CAC). The additional capital cost associated with extra column packing is offset by operational cost savings from reduced solvent losses. For stringent emission permits targeting NH 3 , a configuration combining a dry bed upstream of the water wash followed by an acid wash achieves the best balance between emission control and cost efficiency. This configuration results in a Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) of 143 €/MWh, a CCC of 45.4 €/tCO 2 , and a CAC of 88.4 €/tCO 2 .

AMP↗

Techno-economic assessment of emissions mitigation technologies for post-combustion CO2 capture using AMP/PZ

Minimizing the environmental impacts of amine-based post-combustion carbon capture technologies is essential for meeting environmental permitting regulations and ensuring public acceptance. Experimental test campaigns at the CO₂ capture pilot plant in Niederaussem using CESAR1 demonstrated that integrating available emission abatement technologies can significantly reduce the concentration of amines and degradation products in CO₂-depleted flue gas to below the detection limit of an infrared spectrometer. The study confirmed that proprietary dry bed technology (OEASE Aerozone™) or a second water wash can lower AMP and PZ emissions to below 1 mg/Nm³. However, to achieve very low NH₃ emissions below 2 mg/Nm³, an acid or other chemically active wash downstream of the water wash is required. A configuration with a dry bed or a double water wash results in a carbon capture cost (CCC) of 44 €/tCO₂, and a CO₂ avoided cost (CAC) of 86 €/tCO₂. A configuration with an acid wash increases the CCC to 47 €/tCO₂ and the CAC to 90 €/tCO₂ due to the amine losses in the acid waste and its treatment.

CO2 capture↗