A techno-economic case study of CO2 capture, transport and storage chain from a cement plant in Norway. (15th February 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jakobsen, Jana; Roussanaly, Simon; Anantharaman, Rahul
• Is Part Of: Journal of cleaner production. Volume 144(2017)
• Page Start: 523
• Page End: 539
• Publication Date: 2017-02-15
• Subjects: CCS -- Cement industry -- CO2 capture -- CO2 transport -- CO2 storage -- Techno-economic benchmarking; API American Petroleum Institute -- CAPEX capital expenditure -- CCS carbon capture and storage -- CEPCI chemical engineering plant cost index -- DOGF depleted oil and gas field -- EOR enhanced oil recovery -- FEED front end engineering design -- FOB free on board -- FSC fixed site carrier -- GWP global warming potential -- MEA mono-diethanolamine -- NETL National Energy Technology Laboratory -- TRL technology readiness level -- SA saline aquifer -- SRD specific reboiler duty -- ZEP zero emissions platform; Factory and trade waste -- Management -- Periodicals; Manufactures -- Environmental aspects -- Periodicals; Déchets industriels -- Gestion -- Périodiques; Usines -- Aspect de l'environnement -- Périodiques; 628.5
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.120
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0959-6526

Abstract

Abstract: This paper investigates various alternatives for the application of CCS at a cement plant which is one of the focus site for CCS deployment in Norway. A matrix consisting of nine CCS alternative chains is analysed in order to quantify cost reduction potentials across the CCS value chain based on an in-house techno-economic assessment methodology and tool called iCCS. In particular, the paper quantifies the strong cost reduction potential of second generation capture technologies and transport technology selection. CO2 EOR is also identified to have a strong potential to reduce the overall CCS cost, however the cost benefits are strongly dependent on the oil value and the considered EOR injection period. The impact of the inclusion of CO2 capture and conditioning in the cost of cement shows that public financial support will be required to ensure that the plant remain competitive under current cement market price. Finally, comparison of the full-scale capture versus part-scale capture shows, in this case, that the economies of scale are nearly compensated by the additional steam cost, therefore limiting the interest for full-scale implementation. However, joint deployment with the two other CCS potential sites in Norway (Yara and Klemenstrud) may bring more synergies. Highlights: The costs of carbon capture and storage from a Norwegian cement plant are estimated. Nine CCS chain alternatives are assessed using an in-house tool called iCCS. The cost-cutting potential of different technologies and scenarios is evaluated. The impact of carbon capture on the cost of cement production is evaluated.