skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Front-End Engineering Design for Piperazine with the Advanced Stripper

Technical Report ·
DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/1878608· OSTI ID:1878608

This Department of Energy (DOE) funded project was executed with the goal of preparing a Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) for the capture and compression of 90% of the CO2 that would normally be emitted from an existing natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plant. The FEED focused on the application of the piperazine advanced stripper (PZAS) process at Mustang Station of the Golden Spread Electric Cooperative (GSEC), which consists of two gas turbines with common heat recovery steam generator (HRSG). The University of Texas at Austin (UT) served as the prime contractor, and subcontracted AECOM Technical Services and Trimeric Corporation to support FEED development. This project team has worked together to advance PZAS for more than a decade. ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Total provided project co-funding. The objectives of this work included: 1. To advance engineering design such that a comprehensive estimate for the total installed cost of a full-scale PZAS CO2 Capture Plant with CO2 compression can be developed on an existing NGCC power plant. a. These detailed costs can also be used to qualify PZAS and other related second generation (2G) amine scrubbing processes for use on cogeneration facilities in refineries and chemical plants that use gas turbines with HRSGs to produce steam. b. These detailed costs will help qualify 2G amine scrubbing for use on NGCC power plants and establish a more accurate baseline cost to be used as a target by other capture technologies. 2. To provide cost details to be used in the economic optimization of the process features of PZAS and other 2G amine scrubbing processes. 3. To provide DOE with a more detailed understanding of carbon capture costs in a commercial application, enabling DOE to better design its R&D program to improve the economics for carbon capture. 4. To provide the host site and cost share partners with the information necessary to determine whether a commercial project to capture and use CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) or for sequestration can be justified (when accounting for the 45Q tax credit). A key component of the FEED is the estimated total installed cost, which provides a basis for the likely capital investment necessary to implement the PZAS carbon capture process at this location and scale. In combination with the included economic analysis, which accounts for potential revenue from the produced CO2, potential avenues to profitability are explored. The major findings of the FEED are as follows: The Mustang Station PZAS CO2 Capture Plant estimated total project cost of $698 MM of which $384 MM was direct costs. The annual operating costs were $32.6 MM. The total investment for a PZAS facility at Mustang Station is $725 MM. This estimate includes owner’s cost of $25 million and a contingency of $110 MM. • The study estimated the CO2 capture plant at Mustang Station would generate CO2 at $110/tonne for EOR, assuming a 12% IRR (internal rate of return) and an 85% capacity factor. For CO2 storage, the same case would achieve a 12% IRR at about $114/tonne. At a capacity factor of 52%, the storage and EOR cases would break even when carbon is priced ~$150/tonne. The economic analysis determined that the capacity factor and utility pricing, among other variable factors, had a significant effect on the economics and will need additional studied. • The energy penalty of the PZAS plant would be about 46 MW in connected power and 35 MW in operating load. The natural gas requirement (for the Gas Boiler package) would be about 354 MMBTU/hr. • The FEED revealed no major risks in process maturity. However, some areas were outlined for further engineering during detailed design, which included the Gas Boiler system, general arrangement and site layout, air coolers, schedule development, and optimization of the process for higher CO2 removal. • If PZAS were to be implemented at another host site, additional opportunities for cost reduction for would include cost reduction through use of cooling water and steam extraction.

Research Organization:
Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX (United States)
Sponsoring Organization:
USDOE Office of Fossil Energy (FE)
Contributing Organization:
University of Texas at Austin, AECOM, Trimeric, Kronos Management
DOE Contract Number:
FE0031844
OSTI ID:
1878608
Report Number(s):
DOE-UTAustin-31844-1; DOE-UTAustin-31844-2; DOE-UTAustin-31844-3
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

References (1)