Minimizing Carbon Capture Costs in Power Plants: A Novel Dimensional Analysis Framework for Techno-Economic Evaluation of Oxyfuel Combustion, Pre-combustion, and Post-combustion Capture Systems
{"title":"Minimizing Carbon Capture Costs in Power Plants: A Novel Dimensional Analysis Framework for Techno-Economic Evaluation of Oxyfuel Combustion, Pre-combustion, and Post-combustion Capture Systems","authors":"Donald Obi, Samuel Onyekuru, Anslem Orga","doi":"10.1002/ese3.2089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The imperative to mitigate anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from power generation plants, which account for approximately 40% of global emissions, necessitates developing and deploying carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies. This study undertakes a comprehensive techno-economic evaluation of three primary CO<sub>2</sub> capture technologies—pre-combustion, post-combustion, and oxy-fuel combustion—integrated with natural gas power plants. Utilizing Aspen HYSYS design simulation and economic assessments, the technical and economic viability of each technology were investigated, considering key metrics such as levelized cost of energy (LCOE), carbon emission intensity (CEI), cost of carbon avoidance (COA), investment costs, production costs, net present value, and rate of return. A multi-criteria evaluation framework incorporating dimensional analysis was employed to compare the technologies, and the results revealed post-combustion capture as the most viable option with a cost factor (CF) value of 0.85, striking an optimal balance between efficiency, costs, and environmental impact. With minimized TIC and TPC, well below the conventional processes, this study produced a unique framework for reducing costs in CCS technology deployment. Conversely, oxy-fuel combustion has huge drawbacks regarding low profitability as it was found to have the highest total investment cost (TIC) of $8,258,483.99 and annual production cost (APC) of $9,234,870. In contrast, a higher CEI of 0.05 tCO<sub>2</sub>/MWh and COA of $150.33/tCO<sub>2</sub> make pre-combustion less environmentally friendly than the three technologies. The findings of this study provide critical insights to inform decision-making in CCUS development, supporting a low-carbon energy transition. Future research directions should focus on evaluating feasible configurations and optimizing post-combustion capture technology for commercial-scale deployment.</p>","PeriodicalId":11673,"journal":{"name":"Energy Science & Engineering","volume":"13 4","pages":"1749-1770"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ese3.2089","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Science & Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ese3.2089","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The imperative to mitigate anthropogenic CO2 emissions from power generation plants, which account for approximately 40% of global emissions, necessitates developing and deploying carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies. This study undertakes a comprehensive techno-economic evaluation of three primary CO2 capture technologies—pre-combustion, post-combustion, and oxy-fuel combustion—integrated with natural gas power plants. Utilizing Aspen HYSYS design simulation and economic assessments, the technical and economic viability of each technology were investigated, considering key metrics such as levelized cost of energy (LCOE), carbon emission intensity (CEI), cost of carbon avoidance (COA), investment costs, production costs, net present value, and rate of return. A multi-criteria evaluation framework incorporating dimensional analysis was employed to compare the technologies, and the results revealed post-combustion capture as the most viable option with a cost factor (CF) value of 0.85, striking an optimal balance between efficiency, costs, and environmental impact. With minimized TIC and TPC, well below the conventional processes, this study produced a unique framework for reducing costs in CCS technology deployment. Conversely, oxy-fuel combustion has huge drawbacks regarding low profitability as it was found to have the highest total investment cost (TIC) of $8,258,483.99 and annual production cost (APC) of $9,234,870. In contrast, a higher CEI of 0.05 tCO2/MWh and COA of $150.33/tCO2 make pre-combustion less environmentally friendly than the three technologies. The findings of this study provide critical insights to inform decision-making in CCUS development, supporting a low-carbon energy transition. Future research directions should focus on evaluating feasible configurations and optimizing post-combustion capture technology for commercial-scale deployment.
期刊介绍:
Energy Science & Engineering is a peer reviewed, open access journal dedicated to fundamental and applied research on energy and supply and use. Published as a co-operative venture of Wiley and SCI (Society of Chemical Industry), the journal offers authors a fast route to publication and the ability to share their research with the widest possible audience of scientists, professionals and other interested people across the globe. Securing an affordable and low carbon energy supply is a critical challenge of the 21st century and the solutions will require collaboration between scientists and engineers worldwide. This new journal aims to facilitate collaboration and spark innovation in energy research and development. Due to the importance of this topic to society and economic development the journal will give priority to quality research papers that are accessible to a broad readership and discuss sustainable, state-of-the art approaches to shaping the future of energy. This multidisciplinary journal will appeal to all researchers and professionals working in any area of energy in academia, industry or government, including scientists, engineers, consultants, policy-makers, government officials, economists and corporate organisations.