{"title":"Capturing or offsetting carbon emissions: techno-economic evaluation of decarbonising industries with CO2-lean flue gas","authors":"Sina Hoseinpoori, David Pallarès, Filip Johnsson","doi":"10.1016/j.ijggc.2026.104803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This work investigates the technical feasibility and costs of carbon capture from industrial emission sources with CO₂ concentrations of 0.5–4.0%. Three post-combustion capture schemes are considered: monoethanolamine absorption (MEA-ABS); alkali absorption combined with calcium looping (ALK-ABS); and temperature vacuum swing adsorption (TVSA), the latter two commonly investigated for direct air capture. Capture and avoidance costs are compared across industrial sectors, varying the flow rate and CO₂ concentration of the flue gas, and contrasted with the price of offsetting the emissions through purchases of carbon dioxide removal credits at current voluntary-market prices.</div><div>The results show that MEA-ABS has the lowest levelized cost of capture (LCOC) for flue gas streams with larger flow rates (>200 t/h) and CO₂ concentrations ≥1%. TVSA presents the lowest LCOC at lower flow rates (especially <100 t/h), while ALK-ABS has the lowest LCOC only within a small window of low CO₂ concentration (0.5–1%) and 100–200 t/h. Accounting for the carbon footprints of the input energy changes this picture: the carbon avoidance costs (assuming a transport and storage cost of 105 $/tCO₂) reach their lowest values with ALK-ABS, unless heat with a low carbon intensity is available for MEA-ABS. Comparing the cost of carbon avoidance with carbon dioxide removal credits on the voluntary market, it can be more economical for industries with flue gases with CO₂ concentrations <2.6% to offset their emissions through the purchase of such credits than to install any of the post-combustion capture technologies considered here.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":334,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control","volume":"156 ","pages":"Article 104803"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583626002355","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This work investigates the technical feasibility and costs of carbon capture from industrial emission sources with CO₂ concentrations of 0.5–4.0%. Three post-combustion capture schemes are considered: monoethanolamine absorption (MEA-ABS); alkali absorption combined with calcium looping (ALK-ABS); and temperature vacuum swing adsorption (TVSA), the latter two commonly investigated for direct air capture. Capture and avoidance costs are compared across industrial sectors, varying the flow rate and CO₂ concentration of the flue gas, and contrasted with the price of offsetting the emissions through purchases of carbon dioxide removal credits at current voluntary-market prices.
The results show that MEA-ABS has the lowest levelized cost of capture (LCOC) for flue gas streams with larger flow rates (>200 t/h) and CO₂ concentrations ≥1%. TVSA presents the lowest LCOC at lower flow rates (especially <100 t/h), while ALK-ABS has the lowest LCOC only within a small window of low CO₂ concentration (0.5–1%) and 100–200 t/h. Accounting for the carbon footprints of the input energy changes this picture: the carbon avoidance costs (assuming a transport and storage cost of 105 $/tCO₂) reach their lowest values with ALK-ABS, unless heat with a low carbon intensity is available for MEA-ABS. Comparing the cost of carbon avoidance with carbon dioxide removal credits on the voluntary market, it can be more economical for industries with flue gases with CO₂ concentrations <2.6% to offset their emissions through the purchase of such credits than to install any of the post-combustion capture technologies considered here.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control is a peer reviewed journal focusing on scientific and engineering developments in greenhouse gas control through capture and storage at large stationary emitters in the power sector and in other major resource, manufacturing and production industries. The Journal covers all greenhouse gas emissions within the power and industrial sectors, and comprises both technical and non-technical related literature in one volume. Original research, review and comments papers are included.