Comparison of TERC and TNO’s LR2 CO2 capture rigs for normal and accelerated degradation

12 Pages Posted: 18 Nov 2022

See all articles by Muhammad Akram

Muhammad Akram

Translational Energy Reserach Centre, University of Sheffield

Eirini Skylogianni

TNO Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research

Roberta Veronezi Figueiredo

TNO Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research

Juliana Monteiro

TNO

Andreas Grimstvedt

SINTEF Industry

Solrun Johanne Vevelstad

SINTEF Industry

Kris Milkowski

University of Sheffield

Jon Gibbins

University of Sheffield

Peter van Os

TNO Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research

M Pourkashanian

University of Sheffield - Department of Mechanical Engineering

Date Written: November 17, 2022

Abstract

Solvent degradation is one of the main obstacles hindering the implementation of CO2 capture in various industries. This research work aims at establishing a fast-track, cost-effective de-risking mechanism to predict and control degradation of capture solvents, thus accelerating industrial uptake of CO2 capture. This is done within the LAUNCH project (ACT 2 program no. 299662), where the goal is to accelerate the development and qualification of novel solvents by developing strategies to control degradation, minimizing solvent loss and, therefore, the environmental impacts of CO2 capture.

The small-scale LAUNCH rig (LR2) located at TNO, Netherlands, and the pilot-scale 1TPD CO2 capture plant located at Translational Energy Research Centre (TERC), United Kingdom, are used to develop strategies to accelerate degradation in a manner that leads to representative results for industrially relevant conditions. LR2 has a capture capacity of 25 kgCO2/day, while the significantly larger TERC plant has a capture capacity of 1000 kgCO2/day. The investigation of solvent degradation has been carried out under normal operational conditions and accelerated degradation conditions. This paper presents the results of five test campaigns. For normal operation (Campaign 1) both of the rigs have been operated with cMEA solvent (35 wt%) for approximately 500 hours each using similar operational conditions, so for example absorber L/G ratio and solvent residence times are kept as close as possible. A synthetic flue gas representative of gas turbine flue gas (5% CO2 in air) has been used for direct comparison between the two rigs. For accelerated degradation, four single accelerated degradation strategies have been studied, i.e. elevated stripper temperature, injection of NOx, higher solvent concentration (40 wt% MEA), and intentional rich solvent de-oxygenation by varying oxygen level in the flue gas. Degradation control measures are not included in this publication.

Online and offline analysis were used for solvent and gas monitoring during the tests to determine solvent concentration, CO2 loadings, emissions to atmosphere and degradation products. Ammonia emissions were observed to be higher at TERC than LR2. However, degradation products were observed to be higher at LR2. HEPO was observed to be the most abundant degradation product at both the rigs. MEA-Urea and HeGly were also observed in significant amounts but not in a specific order. However, the rest of the degradation products did not show any clear trend with respect to the operational conditions or the experimental setups. Therefore, further investigation is required to better understand the phenomenon behind the unexplained trends in the formation of degradation products.

Keywords: Accelerated degradation; higher solvent concentration, increased stripper temperature, NOx injection

Suggested Citation

Akram, Muhammad and Skylogianni, Eirini and Veronezi Figueiredo, Roberta and Monteiro, Juliana and Grimstvedt, Andreas and Vevelstad, Solrun Johanne and Milkowski, Kris and Gibbins, Jon and van Os, Peter and Pourkashanian, Mohamed, Comparison of TERC and TNO’s LR2 CO2 capture rigs for normal and accelerated degradation (November 17, 2022). Proceedings of the 16th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference (GHGT-16) 23-24 Oct 2022, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4279777 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4279777

Muhammad Akram (Contact Author)

Translational Energy Reserach Centre, University of Sheffield ( email )

Sheffield Business Park
Europa Avenue
Sheffield, Sheffield S9 1ZA
United Kingdom

Eirini Skylogianni

TNO Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research ( email )

Netherlands

Roberta Veronezi Figueiredo

TNO Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research ( email )

Hoofddorp
Netherlands

Juliana Monteiro

TNO ( email )

Leeghwaterstraat 44
Delft, 2628CA
Netherlands

Andreas Grimstvedt

SINTEF Industry ( email )

Post box 4760 Torgarden
Trondheim, NO-7465
Norway

Solrun Johanne Vevelstad

SINTEF Industry ( email )

Post box 4760 Torgarden
Trondheim, NO-7465
Norway

Kris Milkowski

University of Sheffield

17 Mappin Street
Sheffield, Sheffield S1 4DT
United Kingdom

Jon Gibbins

University of Sheffield ( email )

Sir Frederick Mappin Building
Mappin Street
Sheffield, S1 3JD
United Kingdom

Peter Van Os

TNO Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research

Netherlands

Mohamed Pourkashanian

University of Sheffield - Department of Mechanical Engineering ( email )

Sir Frederick Mappin Building
Mappin Street
Sheffield, S1 3JD
United Kingdom

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
64
Abstract Views
359
Rank
647,215
PlumX Metrics