Carbon Capture

CHAPTER

CARBON CAPTURE

4.5

Zhien Zhang1, 2, Tohid N.G. Borhani3, Muftah H. El-Naas4 Chongqing University of Technology, Chongqing, China1; Chongqing University, Chongqing, China2; Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom3; Qatar University, Doha, Qatar4

1. INTRODUCTION CO2 and the greenhouse effect are essential for Earth to survive. However, human inventions such as transportation vehicles and power plants, which burn fossil fuels (including coal, oil, and natural gas), emit extra CO2 into the atmosphere. It results in the slowly rising temperature of the planet, a phenomenon called global warming [1e4]. According to the US Energy Information Administration, CO2 emissions are expected to increase from 32.3 billion metric tons in 2012 to 35.6 billion metric tons in 2020, and to 43.2 billion metric tons in 2040 across the world [5]. Electricity and heat, and transport are two main contributors to CO2 emissions. Industrial processes are responsible for about 30% of global CO2 emissions. Some processes produce CO2 emissions via chemical reactions: for instance, the production of metals such as iron and steel, and that of chemicals. China and the United States are two countries with the most CO2 emissions. China is currently the world’s largest developing country and the main carbon emitter, releasing about one-quarter of the global total of carbon dioxide [9.2 gigatons (Gt) of CO2 in 2013]; the United States is a close second, emitting about two-thirds that of China [6]. Both countries have set ambitious goals for the mitigation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, because it is crucial to reduce CO2 and GHG emissions. To date, there have been several carbon capture methods to decrease CO2 emissions, such as fuel switching and developing more fuel-efficient vehicles [7e9]. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a set of technologies that can decrease up to 90% of CO2 emissions from large stationary sources such coal- and natural gas-fired power plants. The CCS process involves three steps: capturing CO2 from power plants, transporting the CO2 using pipelines, and then depositing the CO2 so that it does not escape into the air and contribute to climate change [10e13]. The contents of this chapter are structured as follows. First, carbon capture methods are discussed and the different capture techniques are compared. Then, the strengths and weaknesses of these techniques are discussed in more detail. Finally, the industries that contribute to CO2 emissions, such as cement and clinker production, the iron and steel industry, oil refineries, ethylene oxide production, and gas-to-liquid (GTL) technology, will be explored in detail.

Exergetic, Energetic and Environmental Dimensions. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813734-5.00056-1 Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

997

998

CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

2. CARBON CAPTURE TECHNOLOGIES Technologies related to CO2 capture could be classified into three main categories of approach: precombustion, oxy-combustion, and postcombustion. The three major classes of CO2 capture and their corresponding technologies are illustrated in Fig. 1. A wide variety of separation methods can be applied (most of them use the post- and precombustion approaches), including gas-phase separation, absorption in a solvent (amines, potassium carbonate, ammonia, sodium hydroxide, etc.), adsorption on a sorbent (molecular sieve, molecular basket, and activated carbon adsorption, adsorption on lithium components, etc.), and membrane as well as hybrid processes such as a combination of chemical absorption and membrane. In addition, other separation methods have been developed. Chemical looping combustion (CLC) and hydrate-based separation are two main methods. CLC is also known as unmixed combustion because there is indirect contact between fuel and air in this method. An oxygen carrier (metal oxides such as Fe2O3, NiO, CuO, and Mn2O3) provides oxygen for combustion. This process has one reactor for air and another one for fuel, and the oxygen carrier circulates between two reactors. Another method is hydrate-based separation, in which the hydrates formed by high-pressure injection of the gas stream force CO2 into water. After that, the hydrate is separated and dissociated by releasing CO2. The selection of a proper CO2 capture method significantly depends on the type of CO2-generating plant and fuel used [14]. Among all of these methods, CO2 capture by absorption into a solvent is the most common and mature technology. The aim of this chapter is not to discuss the fundamentals of CO2 capture methods in detail, but rather to give a brief introduction and overview of the processes and technologies involved in the emission and capture of CO2. Excellent textbooks that provide comprehensive details of CO2 capture

FIGURE 1 Technologies dealing with CO2 capture processes of precombustion, oxy-combustion, and postcombustion.

2. CARBON CAPTURE TECHNOLOGIES

999

processes are available [15]. In addition to those books, there are a considerable number of review papers that survey advances in CO2 capture processes and methods [16e19]. The following subsections give more details about the three main categories of CO2 capture methods.

2.1 PRECOMBUSTION CO2 CAPTURE Precombustion CO2 capture involves the sequestration of CO2 from fossil fuel or biomass fuel before completion of the combustion process [20]. In other words, in precombustion CO2 capture, there is a reaction between a fuel and oxygen or air and/or steam to give mainly a synthetic gas (syngas) or fuel gas, generally CO and H2. CO is reacted with steam in a catalytic reactor, called a shift converter, to give CO2 and more H2. After that, the CO2 is removed by a physical or chemical absorption process that results in an H2-rich fuel stream [21]. In addition to CO2 capture from syngas of integrated gasification, precombustion can be applied to power plants using natural gas and combined cycle power generation [22,23]. A schematic diagram of precombustion CO2 capture is shown in Fig. 2. Main studies on precombustion CO2 capture are listed in Table 1. The methods of absorption, adsorption, and membrane are widely used.

2.2 OXY-COMBUSTION CO2 CAPTURE In this method, oxygen is separated from air before combustion and the fuel is combusted in oxygen diluted with recycled flue gas rather than air. This oxygen-rich, N2-free atmosphere results in final flue gases consisting mainly of CO2 and H2O, producing a more concentrated CO2 stream for easier purification [22]. Fig. 3 presents a schematic diagram of oxy-combustion CO2 capture. Table 2 shows work focused on oxy-combustion CO2 capture techniques.

2.3 POSTCOMBUSTION CO2 CAPTURE Postcombustion methods involve the capture of CO2 from gas streams produced after the combustion of fossil fuels or other carbonaceous materials [6,12]. In these methods, the thermodynamic driving force for CO2 capture from gas streams is low because the concentration of CO2 in the gas streams is less than 15%. Different types of solvent can be used in this family of processes. A schematic diagram

N2 CO2 Air

Air SeparaƟon

O2 Gasifier

CO2 + H2

Fuel

CO2 capture

H2 Air

CombusƟon Turbine

Heat

FIGURE 2 Schematic diagram of precombustion CO2 capture [17].

Power

Steam Cycle

1000 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

Table 1 Main Studies on Precombustion Carbon Capture Year

Method

Gas Component

Comment

References

2010

Chemical absorption

Syngas

[24]

2011

PSA

Pure CO2

2012

PSA

CO2/H2

2012

Chemical absorption

Syngas

2013

PSA

CO2/H2

2015

Adsorption

CO2/CH4

2015

Membrane

CO2/H2

2015

Physical absorption

CO2/H2S/COS

2016

Membrane absorption

CO2/He

2017

Hydrate-based gas separation

CO2/H2

Various CO2 capture processes were evaluated and compared by methyl di-ethanol amine solutions Hyperecross linked polymers were synthesized for CO2 adsorption and provided CO2 uptakes of up to 13.4 mmol/g at 30 bar and 298K Three materials including USO-2-Ni metal organic framework (MOF), mesoporous silica MCM-41, and a mixed material of UiO-67 MOF bound with MCM-41 were used K2CO3 solvents were used for CO2 separation from the syngas A comprehensive parametric study of a PSA process for CO2 capture was conducted Selectivity of CO2/CH2 was up to 22.1 at 35 bar and 333K using a mesoporous amineTiO2 sorbent Mixed matrix membranes composed of two-dimensional MOF nanosheets were investigated for carbon capture A two-stage precombustion CO2 capture process was designed and investigated using three physical absorbents The selected absorbent of butyl-3-methlyimidazolium tricyanomethanide showed high CO2 absorption capacity The CO2eH2-TBAF semiclathrate hydrate formation process was proposed

PSA, pressure swing adsorption.

[25]

[26]

[23] [27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

2. CARBON CAPTURE TECHNOLOGIES 1001

Steam Turbines

N2

Air

Air SeparaƟon

Power

O2 Fuel

Boiler

CO2

Recycle Flue Gas

FIGURE 3 Schematic diagram of oxy-combustion CO2 capture [17].

Table 2 Main Studies on Oxy-combustion Carbon Capture Year

Method

Gas Component

Comment

References

2011

e

Flue gas

[33]

2011

e

Flue gas

2015

OTM

Flue gas

2016

OTM

Flue gas

Integrated oxy-combustion with Mg(OH)2 carbonation for CO2 capture from flue gas was presented Sulfur effects on CO2 capture were studied in an oxycombustion process Performance of advanced supercritical steam cycle power plant with CO2 capture based on oxyfuel combustion was studied Oxygen permeability and CO2 selectivity were examined through an OTM reactor. The La0.6Sr0.4Co0.2Fe0.8O3d membrane reactor showed a maximum CO2 selectivity of 87.1%

[34]

[35]

[36]

OTM, oxygen transport membrane.

of this process is given in Fig. 4. Studies using the postcombustion CO2 capture method are illustrated in Table 3. Postcombustion carbon capture techniques are the most common because they deal with the capture of considerable amounts of CO2 that are often emitted from different sources involving the combustion of fossil fuels. Adsorption [46], absorption [47], cryogenic fractionation [48], and membrane separation [49] are the most promising approaches for postcombustion CO2 capture. The use of chemical solvents, such as different types and blends of amines [50] as well as aqueous

1002 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

Steam Turbines

Power N2

Air Boiler

CO2 + N2

Fuel

CO2 Capture

CO2

FIGURE 4 A schematic diagram of postcombustion CO2 capture [17].

ammonia [51], has been gaining considerable attention as an effective industrial approach and a rich area of research. The main challenge facing the chemical absorption approach, which is based on the reversible and selective nature of the chemical reaction between the solvent and CO2 in flue gas [52], is the development of solvents that can minimize the energy consumption of the capture process. The target solvents are often selected based on their high absorption capacity, fast reaction kinetics, low degradation rate, and low regeneration energy [53]. Another important factor that has a key role in the effectiveness of the absorption process is the contact mechanism [54].

3. COMPARISONS AMONG CARBON CAPTURE TECHNOLOGIES In this section, the three main categories of technologies related to CO2 capture are compared in terms of their technology maturity level, advantages of the method, disadvantages of the method, and economical aspects.

3.1 COMPARISON OF TECHNOLOGIES IN TERMS OF MATURITY Postcombustion CO2 capture is highly mature with numerous established applications for full-scale commercial and industrial plants. Studies related to this technology are diverse and wide. In general, these studies can be classified as experimental and modeling studies in three main subsections: kinetic, thermodynamic, and process. Each of these subsections has its own subsections. For example, there are numerous studies on the postcombustion process, using different unit operations from packed or tray columns [55,56] to hollow-fiber membranes [57e59] and also rotating packed beds [60,61]. Solvent-based CO2 capture has high importance in postcombustion CO2 capture. Because of the importance of the effect of solvent on CO2 capture processes, many studies have been devoted to solvent selection, solvent design, and integrated-process solvent design. There are several studies on the systematical selection and design of solvents for postcombustion CO2 capture using different predictive methods [62e64]. In some cases, the authors used statistical associating fluid theory family methods [62], and statistical property methods such as the quantitative structure property relationship have been used as well [65,66]. The use of the universal quasi-chemical functional group activity coefficient method to design a solvent for CO2 capture has also been reported [67]. There have also been some attempts to integrate the solvent selection with the CO2 capture process [68e71].

3. COMPARISONS AMONG CARBON CAPTURE TECHNOLOGIES 1003

Table 3 Main Studies on Postcombustion Carbon Capture Year

Method

Gas Component

Comment

References

2010

PSA

Flue gas

[37]

2010

Ionic liquid

e

2011

Biotechnology

e

2012

Adsorption

CO2/He

2013

Membrane-cryogenic separation

CO2/O2

2014

Membrane absorption

CO2/N2

2016

Adsorption

CO2/N2

2016

Adsorption

CO2/N2

2016

Membrane absorption

CO2/N2

2017

Chemical absorption

e

Novel PSA cycles were synthesized and achieved up to 98% purity and recovery of CO2 Ionic liquid solution was a promising solvent for CO2 capture Carbonic anhydrase could accelerate the process of postcombustion CO2 capture The supported mixed-amine polyethyleneimine (PEI) and 3(aminopropyl)triethoxysilane was an excellent CO2 sorbent The novel membrane-cryogenic system was cost-effective and costed US $35/ton less Effects of membrane and contactor properties on CO2 capture by methyl diethanolamine and 2-(1piperazinyl)-ethylamine solvents were studied numerically Carbonation reaction mechanisms of CO2 and solid K2CO3 were investigated Feasibility of PEI-impregnated, millimeter-sized mesoporous carbon spheres for CO2 capture was observed A pilot-scale membrane experimental system for CO2 capture was proposed and showed good reliability for the investigation of CO2 absorption Formulated, reactive, blended amine solutions (bi-, tri-, and quad-solvents) were used to capture CO2

PSA, pressure swing adsorption.

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[10]

[45]

1004 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

Precombustion CO2 capture is well established in process industries (typically a wateregas shift reaction coupled with an acidegas removal process). There are some full-scale CCS plants under progress [20]. For oxy-combustion, there are no full-scale CCS plants in operation; this method is still limited to pilot-scale operation [20,72]. A few subscale commercial demonstration plants are under development worldwide, such as 25- and 250-MW oxy-coal units [14]. The CLC method and hydrate-based separation are still under development and there are no proper large-scale units for them.

3.2 COMPARISON OF ADVANTAGES OF THE TECHNOLOGIES Postcombustion CO2 capture is useful for retrofitting existing power plants. Inclusive investigations have been done with this approach to improve the energy efficiency of equipment. In addition, there are considerable modeling and numerical studies on this method [73]. With precombustion CO2 capture methods, less energy is required owing to the lower gas volume, higher pressure, and higher amount of CO2. Compared with postcombustion, lower water consumption is necessary for precombustion. Furthermore, in precombustion, hydrogen/syngas is generated as an alternative fuel [21]. Oxyfuel-combustion has minimal emission of pollutants compared with the other two methods. This method does not require on-site chemical operations and is compatible with a wide variety of coal fuels. It is also easier and simpler to retrofit compared with a postcombustion capture system. The method has high CO2 capture efficiency because of the amount of CO2. Other benefits of this method are its reduced equipment size requirement, the high maturity of air separation technology, its high compatibility with a conventional, highly efficient steam cycle without significant modifications, and the elimination of NOx control equipment and the CO2 separation step [20]. For the CLC method, the outlet gas stream from the air reactor is not toxic and contains nitrogen. In addition, because of the absence of a flame, there is no thermal formation of NOx. The outlet gas stream from the reactor of the fuel contains CO2 and water and can be separated using a condenser, which decreases energy consumption in the process compared with other methods [18]. Hydrate-based separation has a small energy penalty [74].

3.3 COMPARISON OF DISADVANTAGES OF THE TECHNOLOGIES In postcombustion CO2 capture, removal of CO2 is constrained by a low CO2 partial pressure in flue gases. Commercially available amine technologies are often on a small scale and require substantial upscaling. There is significant energy penalty for the amine process. Most sorbent technologies are less robust with a high performance requirement. The consumption of water is too high in this method. High amounts of corrosion of equipment and degradation of solvents are reported in chemical absorption processes [75,76]. The biggest challenges in this technology are that the amount of CO2 in the flue gas is low and the energy penalty and associated costs for the capture to reach the concentration of CO2 proper for transport and storage of the CO2 increase considerably [55]. These expenses would increase the cost of electricity production by 70% [74]. In precombustion CO2 capture, there is high energy loss owing to sorbent regeneration, but it is still lower than that of postcombustion capture. There is limited commercial availability of integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) technology, which requires a high auxiliary system. There is also a syngas temperature swing-associated heat transfer problem.

4. CARBON CAPTURE FOR INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS 1005

In oxy-combustion CO2 capture, the development of subscale oxy-combustion capture technology is infeasible. Owing to the energy-intensive air separation unit and CO2 compression, the net power output has a significant reduction. Several technical uncertainties that remain unresolved are associated with the operation of full-scale plants,. The method requires airtight installation to avoid air leakage. In addition, corrosion problems have been reported with this method. The process consumes large amounts of oxygen, which requires an energy-intensive air separation unit [77].

3.4 COMPARISON OF TECHNOLOGIES IN TERMS OF ECONOMY High capital and operational expenses owing to the large equipment size are required in postcombustion CO2 capture methods. Solvent-based postcombustion methods involve a considerable cost for equipment and components. As mentioned, there have been several attempts to design new solvents to reduce the expense of CO2 capture [78,79]. With pre-combustion, the capital cost of IGCC is far higher than that of a conventional coal power plant. In addition, the expense of adsorption methods is too high [20]. With oxy-combustion, the capital cost for separating oxygen from air is considerable [17]. Chemical looping combustion and hydrate-based separation methods are economical processes and are promising technologies for CO2 capture [80].

4. CARBON CAPTURE FOR INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS 4.1 CEMENT AND CLINKER PRODUCTION Cement is a hydraulic blinder used to produce building materials such as mortar and concrete. It mainly consists of clinker (about 70%) in addition to gypsum and calcium sulfate. The clinker is often produced in a clinker burning process at high temperatures approaching 1500 C. During cement and clinker production, considerable amounts of CO2 are released in the calciner, which accounts for about two-thirds of the released CO2; the other third of CO2 emissions is released through the rotary kiln operation [81]. The cement industry is considered to be one of the world’s largest industrial sources of CO2 emissions, accounting for approximately 1.8 Gt/year in 2005 [82]. It is estimated that cement industry results in about 5% of global CO2 emissions [83]. In Europe, the cement industry is responsible for 3%e4% of total CO2 emissions [84]. The mineral decomposition is the main source of CO2 emissions in modern cement plants because it accounts for 60% of total CO2 emissions [85]. Minimizing CO2 emissions during cement and clinker production might be achieved through different strategies such as optimizing the process, reducing the clinker volume in cement, and substituting the kiln operation fuel. However, major reductions in CO2 emissions can be achieved through CO2 capture and storage. Three technologies of CO2 capture are currently applied in cement plants: precombustion, postcombustion, and oxyfuel. Precombustion CO2 capture technology is a process in which the carbon-containing fuel is converted into syngas, which is a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, followed by conversion into carbon dioxide and hydrogen using water. CO2 is then separated from hydrogen in a CO2 separation unit. The purity of the captured CO2 is high so that typical systems can capture 85%e100% of the produced CO2 [86]. The only drawback of this method is that CO2 can be captured only from fuel; it cannot be captured from emissions released by the calcination of limestone [83].

1006 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

Postcombustion CO2 capture technology involves separating CO2 from flue gases leaving the clinker kiln by an amine-based solvent. This technique offers the advantage of CO2 capture from both fuel and calcination. Amine-based recovery systems have been proven to have the ability to recover 85%e95% of CO2 with a purity of 99.9% [86]. Oxy-combustion is a technology that uses purified oxygen for combustion in the cement kiln to produce nitrogen free flue gas consisting mainly of CO2 and H2O. Condensation of this flue gas gives a pure CO2 stream. The main drawback of this technique is that it requires major modifications to the burner design, kiln, and plant configuration [83]. Another approach that has been considered for the capture of CO2 involves the use of the Solvay process, in which CO2 in the flue gas is reacted with ammoniated high-salinity water. The aim of this process is to capture CO2 and reduce the salinity of high-salinity water such as desalination reject brine [87,88]. One of the main drawbacks of this process, however, is the recovery of ammonia, which is an energyintensive process. Because the main role of ammonia in the Solvay process is to raise the pH, a study proposed a modified Solvay process in which ammonia is replaced with calcium hydroxide to sustain a high pH. A carbon capture efficiency of 99% can be obtained; the captured CO2 is sequestered in the form of a solid product, namely sodium bicarbonate [89].

4.2 IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY The iron and steel industry is another major source of CO2 emissions; it contributes 4%e7% of total CO2 emissions [90]. The industry is considered to be the largest energy-consuming industrial sector, accounting for the consumption of 5% of the world’s total energy and resulting in the emission of about 6% of total emitted CO2 [91]. This is because of factors such as the energy intensiveness of the process, its reliance on carbon-based fuels, and the large amounts of steel produced [92]. Iron and steel plants possess different CO2 emission points; 70% of emissions come from flue gas produced in the blast furnace hot stoves and in the power plant [93], whereas 9% and 7% of CO2 emissions are produced in coke oven gas and basic oxygen furnace gas, respectively [94]. However, carbon intensity varies considerably among the production routes as shown in Table 4. CO2 emissions from iron and steel dust-making processes can be reduced through several approaches, including CO2 capture and underground storage; changing the fuel and reducing agent with ones that provide lower CO2 factor; and improving the energy efficiency of the process toward minimizing energy consumption [92]. In addition, the steel-making process generates considerable amounts of waste by-products such as steel slag and steel-making dust that can be used to sequester CO2. Studies have shown that these solid wastes contain a high content of CaO that can react with CO2

Table 4 Carbon Intensity for Different Iron and Steel Production Routes [94] Production Processes

Ton CO2/Ton Crude Steel

Electric arc furnaces Blast furnace; basic oxygen furnace Coal-based direct reduced iron

0.4 1.7e1.8 2.5

4. CARBON CAPTURE FOR INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS 1007

to form a stable solid, namely calcium carbonate [95]. Both direct and indirect carbonation are often used in the waste treatment process; the direct process is more favorable because it does not require the separation of mineral components before reaction with CO2. A direct carbonation of pretreated electric arc furnace steel-making bag house dust resulted in a CO2 sequestration of 0.66 kg/kg of dust, based on the total calcium content [95].

4.3 WATER DESALINATION PROCESSES Water desalination is an important source of potable water for most nations, and it is estimated that 1% of the world’s population relies heavily on desalination for its daily water use. Meanwhile, it is estimated that two-thirds of the world population will experience a water shortage by 2025 [96]. Therefore, the desalination of seawater may provide an additional viable source of water to be used for drinking or irrigation. Water desalination is an energy-intensive process and it requires more energy per volume than most other water supply and treatment technologies. The average energy demand in a typical desalination plant was reported to be about 15,000 kWh per million gallons of water produced, which is equivalent to 4.0 kWh per cubic meter [97]. This energy demand is often distributed among different stages of the desalination process, such as water intake, pretreatment, posttreatment, and the desalination step itself, as shown in Fig. 5 for a reverse osmosis (RO) desalination process [98]. This high-energy requirement translates into considerable economic and environmental challenges to society. In terms of the economic burden, the cost of desalinated water from a typical desalination plant is estimated to be about US $2000 per acre foot, which is equivalent to US $1.6 per cubic meter of desalinated water [99]. The major environmental impact of water desalination is attributed to the release of considerable amounts of CO2 [100], which is mainly owing the use of fossil fuel as the main energy source for desalination plants [101]. CO2 emissions in desalination plants, however, depend on the type of desalination process, whether it is RO, multiple effect distillation (MED), or multistage flash (MSF).

7%

13%

13%

RO Process

67%

Pre-treatment

Intake

Post-treatment

FIGURE 5 Distribution of energy consumption of different steps of a reverse osmosis (RO) desalination process. Adapted from Consultants KJ. Energy white paper perspectives on water supply energy use [Prepared for the City of Santa Cruze and Soquel Creek Water District Desalination Program]. 2011.

1008 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

Table 5 CO2 Emissions for Operation Stage of United Arab Emirates Desalination Plants [100] Desalination Process

Capacity (m3/day)

Thermal Energy (kWh/m3)

Electricity (kWh/m3)

CO2 Emissions (ton/day)

Footprint (kg CO2/m3)

Multistage flash Multiple effect distillation Reverse osmosis

5,032,133

12

3.5

13,667.27

2.716

621,674

6

1.5

723.63

1.164

625,035

e

3

1455.08

2.238

An estimation of the carbon footprint (kg CO2 per cubic meter of desalinated water) of the operation of desalination plants in the United Arab Emirates indicated CO2 productions of 2.716, 1.164, and 2.238 for MSF, MED, and RO, respectively, as shown in Table 5 [100]. In another estimate, annual CO2 emissions in operational and currently installed desalination plants were 76 million tons of CO2 per year [101]. It is believed that the demand for water desalination will increase as the world population rises, which in turn is expected to increase emissions of CO2 by at least 218 million tons of CO2 per year in 2040 [101]. Most postcombustion carbon capture techniques can deal with the CO2 emission of desalination plants. Most notably, the modified Solvay process described earlier can have dual benefits for desalination plants: CO2 capture and brine management [89].

4.4 OIL REFINERY Oil refining is an essential process for transforming crude oil into marketable products such as fuels, lubricants, and kerosene. A typical oil-refining process consists of several processing units such as distillation, cracking, coking, reforming, and posttreatment and refining of the products. The operation of these processes requires large amounts of thermal energy and results in the release of significant amounts of CO2 from different sources in the refinery, as shown in Table 6. Table 6 CO2 Emission Sources in Typical Refinery [81,102] Emission Source

Description

Process furnaces

Combustion of fossil fuels for heat generation for distillation columns and reactors Combustion of fossil fuels to generate process steam Burn-up of petroleum coke Reforming of hydrocarbons to H2 and CO2

Steam generators Catalytic crackers Hydrogen production

Share of CO2 Emissions (%)

CO2 Concentration in Off-Gas Flow (Vol. %)

30e60

8e10

20e50

4e15

20e50 5e20

10e20 20e99

4. CARBON CAPTURE FOR INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS 1009

In general, petroleum refineries generate about 1 billion tons of CO2 annually, which represents around 4% of global CO2 emissions. Depending on the complexity of the refinery, around 1.5%e8% of the fuel is used in the refining process. A typical refinery generates about 0.8e4.2 million tons of CO2 per year [102]. Several strategies could be employed to reduce CO2 emissions by the oil-refining process; the most economical way is to reduce energy consumption. However, the nature of the refining processes implies that a refinery will still consume a substantial amount of energy, which in turn would result in the production of a considerable amount of CO2 emissions. Thus, CCS as per the approaches described in the previous sections is the best strategy to avoid significant CO2 emissions [102].

4.5 GAS-TO-LIQUID PROCESS The GTL process converts natural gas into liquid and ultraclean hydrocarbons such as gasoline, light oils, naphtha, diesel, and wax [103]. Most GTL plants worldwide operate through Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) synthesis technology, which represents the chemical conversion of natural gas into a stable liquid and in turn allows products to be obtained that can be directly consumed as fuel (diesel, kerosene, and gasoline) or special products such as lubricants [104]. The GTL process consists of three main steps, starting with the production of syngas, in which natural gas is converted into a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen in various ratios. Syngas is then directed to the F-T reactor, where a wide range of hydrocarbons are produced, called syncrude. A recycle stream is usually introduced in the F-T stage to enhance the overall conversion of feedstock. The last step is the upgrading of liquids and the hydrocracking of waxes [105]. A typical GTL plant with an annual production of approximately 34,300 barrels of oil/day liquid products generates around 1.6 million metric tons CO2/year [106]. CO2 emissions from a GTL plant are generated from five individual point sources, including [107]: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

CO2 CO2 CO2 CO2 CO2

entering with inlet natural gas formed during syngas generation formed in the F-T reactor formed in a hydrogen plant formed in the process heating furnaces

An interesting approach was proposed to capture the generated CO2 and neutralize the alkaline wastewater generated by the GTL process. The CO2 produced from reforming and F-T is used as a wastewater treatment chemical instead of sulfuric acid to reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere, which in turn minimizes the environmental impact of the GTL process. In addition, the use of CO2 instead of conventional sulfuric acid (H2SO4) for pH control of the effluent improves the process economics by lowering the operating cost of the GTL plant. Another advantage of this technology is the elimination of process and design problems associated with recycling CO2 as either feed or lowenergy fuel to the reformer [104].

4.6 ETHYLENE OXIDE PRODUCTION Ethylene oxide is produced by the direct oxidation of ethylene over suitable catalysts at a temperature of around 200 C to 300 C and a pressure of 10 bar. It is considered to be one of the most versatile

1010 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

chemical intermediates owing to its high reactivity. It is the base material for the production of several important products such as ethylene glycol, ethanol amines, organic insulating materials, and textile fibers. Besides the main reaction, several side reactions take place, all of which result in the production of carbon dioxide, which is then separated in a subsequent process [81]. In the separation step, the adsorption process, a stream of gas that consists of 30%e100% CO2 by volume is removed and vented. The exact amount of CO2 emissions associated with the ethylene oxide production is not easily available in the literature. However, it is estimated that around 0.3 units of carbon dioxide are produced for every unit of ethylene oxide [108]. Annual global CO2 emissions caused by the ethylene oxide industry are estimated to be around 5.1 Mt [109]. As per the stoichiometry of the process, CO2 is produced at a ratio of 6 to 2 (ethylene oxide to CO2). This suggests that the ethylene oxide production process emits around 6.2 Mt of high-purity CO2 annually [86].

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS CO2 is a key contributor to global warming, which is one of the most serious environmental challenges facing societies. CO2 is believed to cause approximately 55% of global warming and hence has the most adverse impact on the dreaded greenhouse effect. Research indicated that the rise in the average temperature of the earth’s surface correlates well with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Over the past 300 years, the concentration of CO2 is estimated to have risen from 280 parts per million (ppm) in the 1700s to about 400 ppm today. The predominate source of carbon dioxide emissions is the combustion of fossil fuels, which are often used as sources of energy in many industries. Contributing industries include iron and steel production facilities, natural gas sweetening, hydrogen production for ammonia and ethylene oxide, oil refineries, desalination and power plants, and cement and limestone manufacturing plants. A considerable amount of attention has been focused on CCS to reduce CO2 industrial emissions and store the CO2 so that it will not reenter the atmosphere. One of the most common CCS options is to capture CO2 and then inject it into the underground rock layers in oil and gas reservoirs that have been depleted or are approaching depletion, to sequester the CO2 and exploit it for enhanced oil recovery. CO2 capture technologies have relied mainly on such processes as precombustion, postcombustion, oxy-fuel combustion, and chemical looping combustion. Among the postcombustion capture techniques, the most promising and effective are adsorption using solid sorbents, solvent absorption, cryogenic fractionation technology, and membrane separation. Studies have shown that approaches such as carbonation of alkaline solid wastes and reactions with ammoniated high-salinity water based on the Solvay process can offer viable options for CO2 capture. The main feature of these approaches is the stabilization of solid wastes such as steel-making dust and the management of high-salinity wastewater such as desalination reject brine. Carbon capture is a major environmental challenge that holds the attention of many researchers, and it will continue to do so for many years to come. Future carbon capture technologies should focus on the use of common solid and liquid wastes for the capture of CO2. More focus should also be directed toward developing new options for the employment of CO2 in the development of more useful products.

REFERENCES 1011

NOMENCLATURE CCS CLC EAFs F-T GHG GTL MED MOF MSF OTM PSA RO

Carbon capture and storage Chemical looping combustion Electric arc furnaces Fischer-Tropsch Greenhouse gas Gas-to-liquid Multiple effect distillation Metal organic framework Multi stage flash Oxygen transport membrane Pressure swing adsorption Reverse osmosis

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support from Open Fund of Key Laboratory of Low-Grade Energy Utilization Technologies and Systems, Ministry of Education of China (LLEUTS-201708, LLEUTS201307), Scientific Research Fund of Chongqing University of Technology (2016ZD07) and Scientific and Technological Research Program of Chongqing Municipal Education Commission (KJ1709193, KJ1500940).

REFERENCES [1] Boot-Handford ME, Abanades JC, Anthony EJ, Blunt MJ, Brandani S, Mac Dowell N, Ferna´ndez JR, Ferrari MC, Gross R, Hallett JP, Haszeldine RS, Heptonstall P, Lyngfelt A, Makuch Z, Mangano E, Porter RTJ, Pourkashanian M, Rochelle GT, Shah N, Yao JG, Fennell PS. Carbon capture and storage update. Energy and Environmental Science 2014;7(1):130e89. [2] Feng K, Davis SJ, Sun L, Hubacek K. Drivers of the US CO2 emissions 1997e2013. Nature Communications 2015;6:7714. [3] Koronaki IP, Prentza L, Papaefthimiou V. Modeling of CO2 capture via chemical absorption processes an extensive literature review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015;50:547e66. [4] Thitakamol B, Veawab A, Aroonwilas A. Environmental impacts of absorption-based CO2 capture unit for post-combustion treatment of flue gas from coal-fired power plant. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2007;1(3):318e42. [5] Sieminski A. International energy outlook 2016. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA); 2016. https://doi.org/DOE/EIA-0484(2014). [6] Zhu L. China’s carbon emission report 2016: Harvard Kennedy School. Cambridge, MA, USA: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; 2016. [7] Bai HL, Yeh AC. Removal of CO2 greenhouse gas by ammonia scrubbing. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 1997;36(6):2490e3. [8] Li Q, Yu YS, Jiang J, Zhang ZX. CO2 capture by chemical absorption method based on heat pump technology. Journal of Chemical Engineering of Chinese Universities 2010;24(1):29e34. [9] Nakagawa K, Ohashi T. A novel method of CO2 capture from high temperature gases. Journal of the Electrochemical Society 1998;145(4):1344e6.

1012 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

[10] Zhang Z. Comparisons of various absorbent effects on carbon dioxide capture in membrane gas absorption (MGA) process. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2016;31:589e95. [11] Cormos CC. Integrated assessment of IGCC power generation technology with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Energy 2012;42(1):434e45. [12] Haszeldine RS. Carbon capture and storage: how green can black be? Science 2009;325(5948):1647e52. [13] Pires JCM, Martins FG, Alvim-Ferraz MCM, Simo˜es M. Recent developments on carbon capture and storage: an overview. Chemical Engineering Research and Design 2011;89(9):1446e60. [14] Leung DYC, Caramanna G, Maroto-Valer MM. An overview of current status of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2014;39:426e43. [15] Papadopoulos AI, Seferlis P. Process systems and materials for CO2 capture: modelling, design, control and integration. Wiley; 2017. [16] Maroto-Valer MM. Developments and innovation in carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage technology. CRC Press; 2010. [17] Figueroa JD, Fout T, Plasynski S, McIlvried H, Srivastava RD. Advances in CO2 capture technologydthe U.S. Department of Energy’s carbon sequestration Program. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2008;2(1):9e20. [18] Yang H, Xu Z, Fan M, Gupta R, Slimane RB, Bland AE, Wright I. Progress in carbon dioxide separation and capture: a review,. Journal of Environmental Sciences 2008;20(1):14e27. [19] MacDowell N, Florin N, Buchard A, Hallett J, Galindo A, Jackson G, Adjiman CS, Williams CK, Shah N, Fennell P. An overview of CO2 capture technologies. Energy and Environmental Science 2010;3(11): 1645e69. [20] Theo WL, Lim JS, Hashim H, Mustaffa AA, Ho WS. Review of pre-combustion capture and ionic liquid in carbon capture and storage. Applied Energy 2016;183:1633e63. [21] Jansen D, Gazzani M, Manzolini G, Dijk EV, Carbo M. Pre-combustion CO2 capture. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2015;40:167e87. [22] Rubin ES, Mantripragada H, Marks A, Versteeg P, Kitchin J. The outlook for improved carbon capture technology. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 2012;38(5):630e71. [23] Smith K, Anderson CJ, Tao W, Endo K, Mumford KA, Kentish SE, Qader A, Hooper B, Stevens GW. Precombustion capture of CO2dresults from solvent absorption pilot plant trials using 30 wt% potassium carbonate and boric acid promoted potassium carbonate solvent. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2012;10:64e73. [24] Romano MC, Chiesa P, Lozza G. Pre-combustion CO2 capture from natural gas power plants, with ATR and MDEA processes. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2010;4(5):785e97. [25] Martı´n CF, Sto¨ckel E, Clowes R, Adams DJ, Cooper AI, Pis JJ, Rubiera F, Pevida C. Hypercrosslinked organic polymer networks as potential adsorbents for pre-combustion CO2 capture. Journal of Materials Chemistry 2011;21(14):5475e83. [26] Schell J, Casas N, Blom R, Spjelkavik AI, Andersen A, Cavka JH, Mazzotti M. MCM-41, MOF and UiO67/MCM-41 adsorbents for pre-combustion CO2 capture by psa: adsorption equilibria. Adsorption 2012; 18(3):213e27. [27] Casas N, Schell J, Joss L, Mazzotti M. A parametric study of a PSA process for pre-combustion CO2 capture. Separation and Purification Technology 2013;104:183e92. [28] Jiang G, Huang Q, Kenarsari SD, Hu X, Russell AG, Fan M, Shen X. A new mesoporous amine-TiO2 based pre-combustion CO2 capture technology,. Applied Energy 2015;147:214e23. [29] Kang Z, Peng Y, Hu Z, Qian Y, Chi C, Yeo LY, Tee L, Zhao D. Mixed matrix membranes composed of twodimensional metaleorganic framework nanosheets for pre-combustion CO2 capture: a relationship study of filler morphology versus membrane performance. Journal of Materials Chemistry A 2015;3(41): 20801e10.

REFERENCES 1013

[30] Park SH, Lee SJ, Lee JW, Chun SN, Lee JB. The quantitative evaluation of two-stage pre-combustion CO2 capture processes using the physical solvents with various design parameters. Energy 2015;81:47e55. [31] Dai Z, Deng L. Membrane absorption using ionic liquid for pre-combustion CO2 capture at elevated pressure and temperature. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2016;54:59e69. [32] Zheng J, Zhang P, Linga P. Semiclathrate hydrate process for pre-combustion capture of CO2 at near ambient temperatures. Applied Energy 2016;194:267e78. [33] Said A, Eloneva S, Fogelholm CJ, Fagerlund J, Nduagu E, Zevenhoven R. Integrated carbon capture and storage for an oxyfuel combustion process by using carbonation of Mg(OH)2 produced from serpentinite rock. Energy Procedia 2011;4(1):2839e46. [34] Stanger R, Wall T. Sulphur impacts during pulverised coal combustion in oxy-fuel technology for carbon capture and storage. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 2011;37(1):69e88. [35] Vellini M, Gambini M. CO2 capture in advanced power plants fed by coal and equipped with OTM. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2015;36:144e52. [36] Falkenstein-Smith R, Zeng P, Ahn J. Investigation of oxygen transport membrane reactors for oxy-fuel combustion and carbon capture purposes. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 2017;36(3):3969e76. [37] Agarwal A, Biegler LT, Zitney SE. A superstructure-based optimal synthesis of PSA cycles for postcombustion CO2 capture. AIChE Journal 2010;56(7):1813e28. [38] Wappel D, Gronald G, Kalb R, Draxler J. Ionic liquids for post-combustion CO2 absorption. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2010;4(3):486e94. [39] Savile CK, Lalonde JJ. Biotechnology for the acceleration of carbon dioxide capture and sequestration. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2011;22(6):818e23. [40] Fauth DJ, Gray ML, Pennline HW, Krutka HM, Sjostrom S, Ault AM. Investigation of porous silica supported mixed-amine sorbents for post-combustion CO2 capture. Energy and Fuels 2012;26(4):2483e96. [41] Scholes CA, Ho MT, Wiley DE, Stevens GW, Kentish SE. Cost competitive membranedcryogenic postcombustion carbon capture. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2013;17:341e8. [42] Zhang Z, Yan Y, Zhang L, Chen Y, Ju S. CFD investigation of CO2 capture by methyldiethanolamine and 2(1-piperazinyl)-ethylamine in membranes: Part B. Effect of membrane properties. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2014;19:311e6. [43] Jayakumar A, Gomez A, Mahinpey N. Post-combustion CO2 capture using solid K2CO3: discovering the carbonation reaction mechanism. Applied Energy 2016;179:531e43. [44] Wang M, Yao L, Wang J, Zhang Z, Qiao W, Long D, Ling L. Adsorption and regeneration study of polyethylenimine-impregnated millimeter-sized mesoporous carbon spheres for post-combustion CO2 capture. Applied Energy 2016;168:282e90. [45] Nwaoha C, Supap T, Idem R, Saiwan C, Tontiwachwuthikul P, AL-Marri MJ, Benamor A. Advancement and new perspectives of using formulated reactive amine blends for postecombustion carbon dioxide (CO2) capture technologies. Petroleum 2017;3(1):10e36. [46] Wahby A, Silvestre-Albero J, Sepu´lveda-Escribano A, Rodrı´guez-Reinoso F. CO2 adsorption on carbon molecular sieves. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials 2012;164(4):280e7. [47] Nwaoha C, Saiwan C, Tontiwachwuthikul P, Supap T, Rongwong W, Idem R, AL-Marri MJ, Benamor A. Carbon dioxide (CO2) capture: absorption-desorption capabilities of 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP), piperazine (PZ) and monoethanolamine (MEA) tri-solvent blends. Journal of Natural Gas Science & Engineering 2016;33:742e50. [48] Song C, Kitamura Y, Li S. Optimization of a novel cryogenic CO2 capture process by response surface methodology (RSM). Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 2014;45(4):1666e76. [49] Arias AM, Mussati MC, Mores PL, Scenna NJ, Caballero JA, Mussati SF. Optimization of multi-stage membrane systems for CO2 capture from flue gas. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2016;53:371e90.

1014 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

[50] Stu¨nkel S, Drescher A, Wind J, Brinkmann T, Repke JU, Wozny G. Carbon dioxide capture for the oxidative coupling of methane process e a case study in mini-plant scale. Chemical Engineering Research and Design 2011;89(8):1261e70. [51] An CY, Bai H. Comparison of ammonia and monoethanolamine solvents to reduce CO2 greenhouse gas emissions. Science of the Total Environment 1999;228(2e3):121e33. [52] Salazar J, Diwekar U, Joback K, Berger AH, Bhown AS. Solvent selection for post-combustion CO2 capture. Energy Procedia 2013;37:257e64. [53] Sema T, Naami A, Fu K, Edali M, Liu H, Shi H, Liang Z, Idem R, Tontiwachwuthikul P. Comprehensive mass transfer and reaction kinetics studies of CO2 absorption into aqueous solutions of blended MDEAeMEA. Chemical Engineering Journal 2012;209(41):501e12. [54] El-Naas MH, Mohammad AF, Suleiman MI, Al Musharfy M, Al-Marzouqi AH. Evaluation of a novel gasliquid contactor/reactor system for natural gas applications. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2017;39:133e42. [55] Borhani TNG, Akbari V, Afkhamipour M, Hamid MKA, Manan ZA. Comparison of equilibrium and nonequilibrium models of a tray column for post-combustion CO2 capture using DEA-promoted potassium carbonate solution. Chemical Engineering Science 2015;122:291e8. [56] Borhani TNG, Akbari V, Hamid MKA, Manan ZA. Rate-based simulation and comparison of various promoters for CO2 capture in industrial DEA-promoted potassium carbonate absorption unit. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 2015;22:306e16. [57] Al-Marzouqi M, El-Naas M, Marzouk S, Abdullatif N. Modeling of chemical absorption of CO2 in membrane contactors. Separation and Purification Technology 2008;62(3):499e506. [58] El-Naas MH, Al-Marzouqi M, Marzouk SA, Abdullatif N. Evaluation of the removal of CO2 using membrane contactors: membrane wettability. Journal of Membrane Science 2010;350(1e2):410e6. [59] Zhang Z, Yan Y, Zhang L, Chen Y, Ran J, Pu G, Qin C. Theoretical study on CO2 absorption from biogas by membrane contactors: effect of operating parameters. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 2014; 53(36):14075e83. [60] Joel AS, Wang M, Ramshaw C, Oko E. Process analysis of intensified absorber for post-combustion CO2 capture through modelling and simulation. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2014;21:91e100. [61] Wang M, Joel AS, Ramshaw C, Eimer D, Musa NM. Process intensification for post-combustion CO2 capture with chemical absorption: a critical review. Applied Energy 2015;158:275e91. [62] Lampe M, Stavrou M, Schilling J, Sauer E, Gross J, Bardow A. Computer-aided molecular design in the continuous-molecular targeting framework using group-contribution PC-SAFT. Computers and Chemical Engineering 2015;81:278e87. [63] Zarogiannis T, Papadopoulos AI, Seferlis P. Systematic selection of amine mixtures as post-combustion CO2 capture solvent candidates. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;136:159e75. [64] Papadopoulos AI, Badr S, Chremos A, Forte E, Zarogiannis T, Seferlis P, Papadokonstantakis S, Galindo A, Jackson G, Adjiman CS. Computer-aided molecular design and selection of CO2 capture solvents based on thermodynamics, reactivity and sustainability. Molecular Systems Design and Engineering 2016;1(3): 313e34. [65] Matsuda H, Yamamoto H, Kurihara K, Tochigi K. Computer-aided reverse design for ionic liquids by QSPR using descriptors of group contribution type for ionic conductivities and viscosities. Fluid Phase Equilibria 2007;261(1):434e43. [66] Venkatraman V, Gupta M, Foscato M, Svendsen HF, Jensen VR, Alsberg BK. Computer-aided molecular design of imidazole-based absorbents for CO2 capture. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2016;49:55e63. [67] Chong FK, Foo DCY, Eljack FT, Atilhan M, Chemmangattuvalappil NG. Ionic liquid design for enhanced carbon dioxide capture by computer-aided molecular design approach. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 2015;17(5):1301e12.

REFERENCES 1015

[68] Mac Dowell N, Galindo A, Jackson G, Adjiman C. Integrated solvent and process design for the reactive separation of CO2 from flue gas. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 2010;28:1231e6. [69] Bardow A, Steur K, Gross J. A continuous targeting approach for integrated solvent and process design based on molecular thermodynamic models. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 2009;27:813e8. [70] Stavrou M, Lampe M, Bardow A, Gross J. Continuous molecular targetingecomputer-aided molecular design (CoMTeCAMD) for simultaneous process and solvent design for CO2 capture. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 2014;53(46):18029e41. [71] Burger J, Papaioannou V, Gopinath S, Jackson G, Galindo A, Adjiman CS. A hierarchical method to integrated solvent and process design of physical CO2 absorption using the SAFT-g Mie approach. AIChE Journal 2015;61(10):3249e69. [72] Stanger R, Wall T, Spo¨rl R, Paneru M, Grathwohl S, Weidmann M, Scheffknecht G, McDonald D, Myo¨ha¨nen K, Ritvanen J, Rahiala S, Hyppa¨nen T, Mletzko J, Kather A, Santos S. Oxyfuel combustion for CO2 capture in power plants. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2015;40:55e125. [73] Borhani TNG, Afkhamipour M, Azarpour A, Akbari V, Emadi SH, Manan ZA. Modeling study on CO2 and H2S simultaneous removal using MDEA solution. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 2016; 34:344e55. [74] Elwell LC, Grant WS. Technology options for capturing CO2. Power 2006;150(8):60e5. [75] Wang M, Lawal A, Stephenson P, Sidders J, Ramshaw C. Post-combustion CO2 capture with chemical absorption: a state-of-the-art review. Chemical Engineering Research and Design 2011;89(9):1609e24. [76] Borhani TNG, Azarpour A, Akbari V, Alwi SRW, Manan ZA. CO2 capture with potassium carbonate solutions: a state-of-the-art review,. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2015;41:142e62. [77] Pfaff I, Kather A. Comparative thermodynamic analysis and integration issues of CCS steam power plants based on oxy-combustion with cryogenic or membrane based air separation. Energy Procedia 2009;1(1): 495e502. [78] Adjiman CS, Galindo A, Jackson G. Molecules matter: the expanding envelope of process design. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Foundations of Computer-Aided process design. Amsterdam; 2014. [79] Bardow A, Steur K, Gross J. Continuous-molecular targeting for integrated solvent and process design. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 2010;49(6):2834e40. [80] Adanez J, Abad A, Garcia-Labiano F, Gayan P, Luis F. Progress in chemical-looping combustion and reforming technologies. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 2012;38(2):215e82. [81] Markewitz P, Bongartz R. Carbon capture technologies, carbon capture, storage and use. Springer; 2015. p. 13e45. [82] IEA. Tracking industrial energy efficiency and CO2 emissions. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2007. [83] IEA. CO2 capture in the cement industry. 2008. [84] Vatopoulos K, Tzimas E. Assessment of CO2 capture technologies in cement manufacturing process. Journal of Cleaner Production 2012;32:251e61. [85] Barker DJ, Turner SA, Napier-Moore PA, Clark M, Davison JE. CO2 capture in the cement industry. Energy Procedia 2009;1:87e94. [86] Coninck HCD, Mikunda T, Schreck B, Gielen D, Zakkour P, Barker D, Brown J, Birat JP, Carbo MC. Carbon capture and storage in industrial applications: technology synthesis report. Policy Studies 2013; 2012:2011. [87] El-Naas MH, Al-Marzouqi AH, Chaalal O. A combined approach for the management of desalination reject brine and capture of CO2. Desalination 2010;251(1e3):70e4. [88] Mohammad AF, El-Naas MH, Suleiman MS, Al Musharfy M. Optimization of a solvay-based approach for CO2 capture. International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications 2016;7(4):230e4.

1016 CHAPTER 4.5 CARBON CAPTURE

[89] El-Naas MH, Mohammad AF, Suleiman MI, Al Musharfy M, Al-Marzouqi AH. A new process for the capture of CO2 and reduction of water salinity. Desalination 2017;411:69e75. [90] Pardo N, Moya JA. Prospective scenarios on energy efficiency and CO2 emissions in the European iron & steel industry. Energy 2013;54:113e28. [91] Quader MA, Ahmed S, Ghazilla R, Ahmed RAS, Dahari M. Evaluation of criteria for CO2 capture and storage in the iron and steel industry using the 2-tuple DEMATEL technique. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016;120:207e20. [92] Carpenter A. CO2 abatement in the iron and steel industry. IEA Clean Coal Centre; 2012. [93] Arasto A, Tsupari E, Ka¨rki J, Pisila¨ E, Sorsama¨ki L. Post-combustion capture of CO2 at an integrated steel millePart I: technical concept analysis. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 2013;16:271e7. [94] Kuramochi T, Ramı´rez A, Turkenburg W, Faaij A. Comparative assessment of CO2 capture technologies for carbon-intensive industrial processes. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 2012;38(1):87e112. [95] El-Naas MH, El Gamal M, Hameedi S, Mohamed AMO. CO2 sequestration using accelerated gas-solid carbonation of pre-treated EAF steel-making bag house dust. Journal of Environmental Management 2015;156:218e24. [96] Karagiannis IC, Soldatos PG. Water desalination cost literature: review and assessment. Desalination 2008; 223(1e3):448e56. [97] Cooley H, Ajami N. Key issues for seawater desalination in California [The World’s Water]. 2014. [98] Consultants KJ. Energy white paper perspectives on water supply energy use [Prepared for the City of Santa Cruze and Soquel Creek Water District Desalination Program]. 2011. [99] Rogers P. Nation’s largest ocean desalination plant goes up near San Diego. Future of the California coast, San Jose Mercury News, 29. 2014. [100] Liu J, Chen S, Wang H, Chen X. Calculation of carbon footprints for water diversion and desalination projects. Energy Procedia 2015;75(2):2483e94. [101] Masdar. Global CO2 emissions of water desalination plants, Internal report. 2015. [102] van Straelen J, Geuzebroek F, Goodchild N, Protopapas G, Mahony L. CO2 capture for refineries, a practical approach. Energy Procedia 2009;1(1):179e85. [103] Velasco JA, Lopez L, Vela´squez M, Boutonnet M, Cabrera S, Ja¨ra˚s S. Gas to liquids: a technology for natural gas industrialization in Bolivia,. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2010;2(5):222e8. [104] Enyi GC, Nasr GG, Burby M. Economics of wastewater treatment in GTL plant using spray technique. International Journal of Energy and Environment 2013;4(4):561e72. [105] Moen K. Modelling and optimization of a GTL plant. Norwegian University of Science and Technology; 2014. [106] Lowe C, Heimel S, Reddy S, Vyas S. Greenhouse gas mitigation for a gas-to-liquids plant. World Petroleum Congress; 2008. [107] Heimel S, Lowe C. Technology comparison of CO2 capture for a gas-to-liquids plant. Energy Procedia 2009;1(1):4039e46. [108] Carbo M. Global technology roadmap for CCS in industry. 2011. [109] Ausfelder F, Bazzanella A. Verwertung und Speicherung von CO2: Diskusionspapier, Dechema eV. 2008.