CO2 capture from multiple sources: To be, or not to be clustered, that is the question

${\text{CO}}_2$ capture from industrial clusters and multi-source industrial sites can reduce costs and facilitate large-scale implementation through shared infrastructure. However, since multiple clustering strategies are possible, a key question arises: when and how should ${\text{CO}}_2$ capture be clustered? While previous studies focused on specific clusters, this study provides a comprehensive cost assessment of general clustering strategies for post-combustion solvent-based ${\text{CO}}_2$ capture. A CCS value chain model is developed to carry out techno-economic evaluations of different clustering strategies from multiple sources across a wide range of cases.

When considering clustering from two sources, flue gas flowrates and distance between sources are key factors. Clustering is less attractive when flowrates are high and distances are large due to limited economies of scale and high ducting costs. Results show that it is immaterial if clustering is done at the desorber as the cost savings are relatively minimal. Other considerations than cost can have an impact on the decision. Clustering at the absorber level is more impactful. Typically, clustering at the absorber increases cost, but there are significant investment cost savings in a few cases. For multiple sources, clustering becomes more beneficial with smaller flowrates and more number of sources, although cost savings remain limited. While clustering may not significantly reduce ${\text{CO}}_2$ avoidance costs, it can provide benefits like reduced land use.