Néstor D. Montiel-Bohórquez, Manuele Gatti, Matteo C. Romano
{"title":"电弧炉炼钢中捕集二氧化碳的柔性钙环:技术经济分析","authors":"Néstor D. Montiel-Bohórquez, Manuele Gatti, Matteo C. Romano","doi":"10.1016/j.ccst.2025.100504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study presents a techno-economic analysis of four configurations of the Calcium Looping (CaL) technology, tailored to enhance system flexibility for capturing CO<sub>2</sub> from the fluctuating flue gases generated by a scrap-based Electric Arc Furnace with a capacity of 112 t<sub>steel</sub>/h. The configurations differ based on the solids circulation strategy between reactors (constant or variable) and the presence of one or two intermediate solids storage vessels. Configurations incorporating intermediate solids storage demonstrated operational advantages, including enhanced process stability and downsized calciner island components. Moreover, the plant configuration with two intermediate solids storages led to the lowest specific fuel consumption of 5.85 MJ per kg<sub>CO2</sub> captured.</div><div>Under the assumptions considered, the CaL system achieved a CO<sub>2</sub> capture rate of 91 % from the EAF off-gas. Moreover, using residual forestry biomass as fuel in the calciner enabled to achieve negative emissions with net CO<sub>2</sub> removal rates of 13-26 t<sub>CO2</sub>/h, corresponding to 100-200 kg<sub>CO2</sub> removed per t<sub>steel</sub> produced.</div><div>From an economic standpoint, increment in steel cost ranged from 26 to 36 €/t<sub>steel</sub> (assuming a carbon tax of 100 €/t<sub>CO2</sub>), with costs of CO<sub>2</sub> avoided of 202-255 €/t<sub>CO2</sub>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":9387,"journal":{"name":"Carbon Capture Science & Technology","volume":"17 ","pages":"Article 100504"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Flexible calcium looping for CO2 capture in electric Arc Furnace steelmaking: A techno-economic analysis\",\"authors\":\"Néstor D. Montiel-Bohórquez, Manuele Gatti, Matteo C. Romano\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ccst.2025.100504\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study presents a techno-economic analysis of four configurations of the Calcium Looping (CaL) technology, tailored to enhance system flexibility for capturing CO<sub>2</sub> from the fluctuating flue gases generated by a scrap-based Electric Arc Furnace with a capacity of 112 t<sub>steel</sub>/h. The configurations differ based on the solids circulation strategy between reactors (constant or variable) and the presence of one or two intermediate solids storage vessels. Configurations incorporating intermediate solids storage demonstrated operational advantages, including enhanced process stability and downsized calciner island components. Moreover, the plant configuration with two intermediate solids storages led to the lowest specific fuel consumption of 5.85 MJ per kg<sub>CO2</sub> captured.</div><div>Under the assumptions considered, the CaL system achieved a CO<sub>2</sub> capture rate of 91 % from the EAF off-gas. Moreover, using residual forestry biomass as fuel in the calciner enabled to achieve negative emissions with net CO<sub>2</sub> removal rates of 13-26 t<sub>CO2</sub>/h, corresponding to 100-200 kg<sub>CO2</sub> removed per t<sub>steel</sub> produced.</div><div>From an economic standpoint, increment in steel cost ranged from 26 to 36 €/t<sub>steel</sub> (assuming a carbon tax of 100 €/t<sub>CO2</sub>), with costs of CO<sub>2</sub> avoided of 202-255 €/t<sub>CO2</sub>.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Carbon Capture Science & Technology\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100504\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Carbon Capture Science & Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772656825001411\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Carbon Capture Science & Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772656825001411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Flexible calcium looping for CO2 capture in electric Arc Furnace steelmaking: A techno-economic analysis
This study presents a techno-economic analysis of four configurations of the Calcium Looping (CaL) technology, tailored to enhance system flexibility for capturing CO2 from the fluctuating flue gases generated by a scrap-based Electric Arc Furnace with a capacity of 112 tsteel/h. The configurations differ based on the solids circulation strategy between reactors (constant or variable) and the presence of one or two intermediate solids storage vessels. Configurations incorporating intermediate solids storage demonstrated operational advantages, including enhanced process stability and downsized calciner island components. Moreover, the plant configuration with two intermediate solids storages led to the lowest specific fuel consumption of 5.85 MJ per kgCO2 captured.
Under the assumptions considered, the CaL system achieved a CO2 capture rate of 91 % from the EAF off-gas. Moreover, using residual forestry biomass as fuel in the calciner enabled to achieve negative emissions with net CO2 removal rates of 13-26 tCO2/h, corresponding to 100-200 kgCO2 removed per tsteel produced.
From an economic standpoint, increment in steel cost ranged from 26 to 36 €/tsteel (assuming a carbon tax of 100 €/tCO2), with costs of CO2 avoided of 202-255 €/tCO2.