10.1007/s40095-022-00518-0

Simulation and comprehensive technical, economic, and environmental assessments of carbon dioxide capture for methanol production through flue gas of a combined cycle power plant

Show Details XML
  • Hao Qi*1,
  • Xuewen Wu1,
  • Hehuan Huan1,
  1. Solar Energy Application Technology, Shenzhen BALUN Technology Co., Ltd, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518053, CN

Published in Issue 2022-08-08

How to Cite

Qi, H., Wu, X., & Huan, H. (2022). Simulation and comprehensive technical, economic, and environmental assessments of carbon dioxide capture for methanol production through flue gas of a combined cycle power plant. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering, 14(3 (September 2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-022-00518-0
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Abstract Although it is an environmental threat, the flue gas of a combined cycle power plant can be a good motivation to produce methanol due to its high carbon dioxide richness. This paper includes a simulation and comprehensive technical, economic, and environmental analyses of the methanol production process through CO 2 capture. In other words, an improved and modified power plant (plus version) is introduced through structural optimization. At first, the combined cycle power plant was simulated, and thermoeconomic and environmental evaluations were performed. Then, it was found that its energy and exergy efficiencies were 44.87 and 42.86%, respectively, and its annual profit was approximately equal to 1.96 M$. In the second stage, in addition to the power generation section, two sections of carbon dioxide capture and methanol production were simulated, which showed that the performance of the power plant plus was improved compared to the conventional system. Energy and exergy analysis for the power plant plus demonstrated that the total energy and exergy efficiency, in this case, was 58.22 and 97.47%, respectively. From the environmental viewpoint, it was found that the power plant plus could reduce the net carbon dioxide emission by 58.84% compared to the simple system. Economic estimations explained that despite the 116.09% increase in the investment cost of the power plant plus compared to the combined cycle power plant, the annual revenue and profit increased by 182.03 and 116.08%, respectively, and the payback period also decreased by 0.66 years. Graphical abstract

Keywords

  • Power plant,
  • Methanol production,
  • CO2 capture,
  • Thermodynamic analysis,
  • Thermoeconomic and environmental assessment

References

  1. Hamrang et al. (2020) Performance analysis of a new electricity and freshwater production system based on an integrated gasification combined cycle and multi- effect desalination 12(19) https://doi.org/10.3390/su12197996
  2. Ziapour et al. (2017) Power generation enhancement in a salinity-gradient solar pond power plant using thermoelectric generator (pp. 283-293) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.01.031
  3. Ahmadi et al. (2019) A comprehensive thermodynamic analysis of a novel CHP system based on SOFC and APC cycles https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.115899
  4. Cao et al. (2020) Performance enhancement and multi-objective optimization of a solar-driven setup with storage process using an innovative modification https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2020.101956
  5. Haghghi et al. (2019) Thermodynamic, exergoeconomic, and environmental evaluation of a new multi-generation system driven by a molten carbonate fuel cell for production of cooling, heating, electricity, and freshwater https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.112040
  6. Huang and Tan (2014) A review: CO2 utilization (pp. 480-499) https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2013.10.0326
  7. Pak et al. (1993) CO2-recovering power generation system in a CO2-recycling global energy system based on solar energy (pp. 821-824) https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-6670(17)48584-3
  8. Fernando-Foncillas et al. (2021) Highly selective recovery of medium chain carboxylates from co-fermented organic wastes using anion exchange with carbon dioxide expanded methanol desorption https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124178
  9. Sarp et al. (2021) Alcohol production from carbon dioxide: methanol as a fuel and chemical feedstock (pp. 59-76) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2020.11.005
  10. Herdem et al. (2020) Simulation and modeling of a combined biomass gasification-solar photovoltaic hydrogen production system for methanol synthesis via carbon dioxide hydrogenation https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113045
  11. Li et al. (2021) Comparative investigation on the supercritical carbon dioxide power cycle for waste heat recovery of gas turbine https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113670
  12. Mohammadi et al. (2017) Exergy analysis of a combined cooling, heating and power system integrated with wind turbine and compressed air energy storage system (pp. 69-78) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.11.003
  13. Nazerifard et al. (2021) Design and thermodynamic analysis of a novel methanol, hydrogen, and power trigeneration system based on renewable energy and flue gas carbon dioxide https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.113922
  14. Castellani et al. (2018) Flue gas treatment by power-to-gas integration for methane and ammonia synthesis–energy and environmental analysis (pp. 626-634) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.06.025
  15. Yuan et al. (2012) Recovery of methane from hydrate reservoir with gaseous carbon dioxide using a three-dimensional middle-size reactor (pp. 47-58) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.02.043
  16. Abdelaziz et al. (2017) Novel process technologies for conversion of carbon dioxide from industrial flue gas streams into methanol (pp. 52-63) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2017.06.018
  17. Sharif et al. (2021) CO2 capturing from flue gases injected into the NDDCT: feasibility study, exergy and economic investigation of simultaneously MEA-solvent chemical absorption and flue gas injection https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101102
  18. León and Martín (2016) Optimal production of power in a combined cycle from manure based biogas (pp. 89-99) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.02.002
  19. Fu and Gundersen (2016) Heat and work integration: Fundamental insights and applications to carbon dioxide capture processes (pp. 36-48) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.04.108
  20. Leonzio (2018) State of art and perspectives about the production of methanol, dimethyl ether and syngas by carbon dioxide hydrogenation (pp. 326-354) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2018.08.005
  21. Deng and Adams (2020) Techno-economic analysis of coke oven gas and blast furnace gas to methanol process with carbon dioxide capture and utilization https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.112315
  22. Wiesberg et al. (2019) Carbon dioxide management via exergy-based sustainability assessment: carbon capture and storage versus conversion to methanol (pp. 720-732) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.06.032
  23. Alsayegh et al. (2019) Methanol production via direct carbon dioxide hydrogenation using hydrogen from photocatalytic water splitting: process development and techno-economic analysis (pp. 1446-1458) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.132
  24. Parigi et al. (2019) Power-to-fuels through carbon dioxide re-utilization and high-temperature electrolysis: a technical and economical comparison between synthetic methanol and methane (pp. 679-691) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.087
  25. Haydary, J.: Chemical process design and simulation: Aspen Plus and Aspen Hysys applications. John Wiley & Sons (2019)
  26. Zhao et al. (2017) Enhancing the energetic efficiency of MDEA/PZ-based CO2 capture technology for a 650 MW power plant: process improvement (pp. 362-375) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.11.009
  27. Dubois and Thomas (2018) Comparison of various configurations of the absorption-regeneration process using different solvents for the post-combustion CO2 capture applied to cement plant flue gases (pp. 20-35) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.12.004
  28. Osagie et al. (2018) Techno-economic evaluation of the 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP) process for CO2 capture from natural gas combined cycle power plant (pp. 45-56) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2018.01.010
  29. Pérez-Fortes et al. (2014) CO2 capture and utilization in cement and iron and steel industries (pp. 6534-6543) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.689
  30. Nwaoha et al. (2018) Techno-economic analysis of CO2 capture from a 1.2 million MTPA cement plant using AMP-PZ-MEA blend (pp. 400-412) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2018.07.015
  31. Ozcan et al. (2014) A hybrid carbon capture system of indirect calcination and amine absorption for a cement plant (pp. 6428-6439) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.678
  32. Laribi et al. (2019) Study of the post-combustion CO2 capture process by absorption-regeneration using amine solvents applied to cement plant flue gases with high CO2 contents https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102799
  33. Cengel, Y.A., Boles, M.A., Kanoglu, M.: Thermodynamics: an engineering approach. McGraw-hill New York (2011)
  34. Abd et al. (2020) Comprehensive evaluation and sensitivity analysis of regeneration energy for acid gas removal plant using single and activated-methyl diethanolamine solvents (pp. 1684-1693) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2019.12.004
  35. Nwaoha et al. (2018) Process simulation and parametric sensitivity study of CO2 capture from 115 MW coal–fired power plant using MEA–DEA blend (pp. 1-11) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2018.06.006
  36. Bussche and Froment (1996) A steady-state kinetic model for methanol synthesis and the water gas shift reaction on a commercial Cu/ZnO/Al2O3Catalyst (pp. 1-10) https://doi.org/10.1006/jcat.1996.0156
  37. Gholamian et al. (2016) Integration of biomass gasification with a solid oxide fuel cell in a combined cooling, heating and power system: a thermodynamic and environmental analysis (pp. 20396-20406) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.07.217
  38. Nguyen and Zondervan (2019) Methanol production from captured CO2 using hydrogenation and reforming technologies_ environmental and economic evaluation (pp. 1-11) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2019.05.033
  39. Yao et al. (2022) Research on an integrated power and freshwater generation system from natural gas energy and geothermal sources https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2021.115494
  40. Bejan et al. (1996) Inc
  41. Eisavi et al. (2022) Low-carbon biomass-fueled integrated system for power, methane and methanol production https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.115163
  42. Mahdavi et al. (2022) Proposal and multi-aspect assessment of a novel solar-based trigeneration system; investigation of zeotropic mixture’s utilization https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2022.118110
  43. Odejobi and Ayorinde (2018) Exergy and economic analyses of methanol production process (pp. 365-373) https://doi.org/10.4314/njt.v37i2.11
  44. Peters, M.S., Timmerhaus, K.D., West, R.E.: Plant design and economics for chemical engineers. McGraw-Hill New York (2003)
  45. Chen et al. (2019) A novel path for carbon-rich resource utilization with lower emission and higher efficiency: an integrated process of coal gasification and coking to methanol production (pp. 304-318) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.161
  46. Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A.: Exergy: energy, environment and sustainable development. Newnes (2012)
  47. Do and Kim (2019) Process development and techno-economic evaluation of methanol production by direct CO2 hydrogenation using solar-thermal energy (pp. 461-472) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2019.07.003