View
0
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
R lt f Pil t T ti fResults of Pilot Testing of Enzyme Accelerated CO2Capture Process
3rd Post Combustion Capture ConferenceRegina, SaskatchewanS b 8 2015September 8, 2015
© 2015 CO2 Solutions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
About CO2 Solutions Inc.2
• Leader in the field of enzyme‐based CO2 capture
B d i Q b C d• Based in Quebec, Canada
• $45 million invested to date
• 22 employees• 17 R&D, including 7 PhDs
• 47 issued and 39 pending patents
• Entering commercial phasete g co e c a p ase
• Publicly traded on TSX Venture Exchange (Symbol: CST)
2
g ( y )
Amine‐Based CO2 Capture is InefficientAmine Based CO2 Capture is Inefficient
• High costsHigh costs• Steam for solvent regeneration = high operating
costs• $60‐90/tonne of CO2 for flue gas application(1,2)
l b l d f d• Cost is critical issue to be resolved for EOR and other CO2 reuse and sequestration to be expanded(3,4)
• Operational and environmental problems(5)
D d ti d t bilit i t i fl• Degradation and stability issues; extensive flue gas pre‐treatment required
• Toxic aerosol emissions• Solvent losses• Waste products to handle
Sources:1) http://ccemc.ca/wp‐content/uploads/2012/12/C101033‐HTC‐DEV‐JA‐03‐001‐1‐R1‐+‐FEED‐REPORT‐CCEMC.pdf, Page 19 (~$70/tonne cost)
3
) p // / p / p / / / p , g ( / )2) https://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Events/2014/2014%20NETL%20CO2%20Capture/A‐Bhown‐EPRI‐CO2‐Capture‐RD‐EPRI.pdf, Page 63) http://www.ai‐ees.ca/media/10958/2010_barriers_to_co2_eor_report_final_june4‐13.pdf, Page 444) http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/Org/pdfs/CCS_Implementation.pdf, Page 105) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583614001777
Our Process – An ‘Industrial Lung’g
b l l• Aqueous carbonate salt solvent• Low temperature stripping using low‐grade (~80ᵒC) heat• Absent
• Solvent reclamation• Water wash• Intercooling
Carbonic Anhydrase EnzymeEnzyme
4
1 tonne/day Pilot Testing/ y g
• Conducted at Energy & Environmental ResearchConducted at Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), Jan. 2015
• Coal and natural gas flue gases
• Stripping heat was provided by hot water; steam never used
• Cost of capture incl. compression to 2250psi p p pestimated at $39/tonne by EERC• Use of low‐grade, nil value heat from outside power plant
steam cycle is the key
• Constant capture performance• Constant capture performance• No enzyme activity loss during the test
• No solvent make‐up
• Zero waste produced
• Detailed results presented April 29, 2015 at Pittsburgh CCUS conference
5
g(http://tinyurl.com/nkuabns)
10 tonne/day Pilot Testing/ y g
• Located in Salaberry de Valleyfield near• Located in Salaberry‐de‐Valleyfield, near Montreal
• CO2 capture from flue gases of natural gas firedCO2 capture from flue gases of natural gas fired boiler (~8.5% CO2 content)
• Uses enzyme accelerated aqueous carbonate;Uses enzyme accelerated aqueous carbonate; neat enzyme in solvent flowing freely throughout process, including in reboiler
• Capture operations began June, 2015
• 1,200 operation hours to date
• Stripping uses hot water (80‐85ᵒC)
6
• Open for visitation
Some Facts
• From sketches to operation in less than 14 monthsFrom sketches to operation in less than 14 months
• On schedule, on budget. • Built for 2.1 M$. (excluding engineering)Built for 2.1 M$. (excluding engineering)
• 1 week of extensive training for third‐party operators
• 3 weeks from power up to normal operation at design capacity
• Objective is to test drive the process• Execute start‐ups and shut‐downs, simulate power
failure and restart; determine time to resume normal ;operation
• Extended time with enzyme at high temperature; challenge enzyme stability in process conditions
7
• Determine impact of operating conditions on energy consumption and capture performance
Performance Observed ‐ Enzymey6
5
n (‐)
Performance observed
3
4
Acceleratio
n
Design curve from EERC testing
2
CO2Ca
pture A
1
C
pH = 9.5; L/G < 10; Heat source: hot water at 82.5oC
00.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Enzyme concentration (Relative to design basis)
8
• Reached unit capture capacity with enzyme dosing ~¼ of design value• Direct benefit to operating costs
Performance Observed – Enzyme Stabilityy y
1.4
1.6
y
0 8
1.0
1.2
e Ac
tivity
0 4
0.6
0.8
ve Enzym
e
0.0
0.2
0.4
Relativ
0.00 200 400 600 800 1000
Operation Time (h)
9
Enzyme activity measured from solvent samples in standardized kinetic measurement cell
Performance Observed ‐ Capturep100
90
95
80
85
pture (%
)
75
80
CO2Ca
p
65
70
pH = 9.5; L/G < 10; Heat source: hot water at 82.5 oC
600.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
Lean Solvent pH (Relative to Design )
10• Lower pH required than expected for longer enzyme stability
Environmental and Other Performance
• No solvent degradation observed
• No solvent makeup required
• No aste prod cts generated• No waste products generated
• Current operation with day shift onlyCurrent operation with day shift only• To support R&D activities• Normal operation does not require full‐ti t ti ti i 0 25 FTtime operators; estimation is 0.25 FT operator, even at large capacity
11
CO2 Produced2
• 99.5% CO2 purity achieved (dry basis) by independent lab verification with only O2and N2 remaining to be removed2
• Meets requirements for food and beverage use (ISBT)1 without expensive g ( ) pdownstream purification
• Exceeds Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) andExceeds Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) and other reuse application purity requirements
• Eliminates typical additional cost of post‐capture purification
12 1http://www.bevtech.org/
Sept/Oct. 2015 – Remaining Testingp / g g
O i i fi i lid• Optimize configuration to validate engineering improvements
• Testing of solvent additive for improved g pperformance in both absorption and stripping
• Additional stress testing• Additional stress testing
• Measurement of contaminants absorption kinetics
• Total work will bring operations to ~2,500 hours
• Detailed energy balance and techno‐economics being developed from operational data expected to confirm the lowest capture cost for solvent‐based
13
lowest capture cost for solvent based capture technology
Next: Rotating Packed Bed (RPB)
l i ll b i i h
Next: Rotating Packed Bed (RPB)
• Exclusive collaboration with GasTran Systems (GTS) of Cleveland (OH) ‐ leader in RPB technology
• Process intensification in action• Process intensification in action
• Enables maximum performance from enzyme
• RPB never used for CO2 capture previously because of slower kinetics of conventional amine solvents
G t t l f t G L i t f l• Generates extremely fast G‐L interface renewal
• Mass transfer is orders of magnitude than packed columncolumn
• RPB is proven commercially in other gas‐liquid applications at scale• Beverage deaeration RPBs in Use at Dow
14
• Beverage deaeration• Chemical production Chemical
RPB vs. Packed ColumnRPB vs. Packed Column90% CO2 Capture from Natural Gas-Fired Boiler Flue Gases; 300
t /d CO t dtonnes/day CO2 captured
Packed ColumnPacked Column
• Greatly reduced size of capture equipment better it d t t i d
Rotating Packed Bed
suited to space constrained industrial locations
• Reduced CAPEX
15Target CO2 capture cost <$30/tonne incl. compression
Intellectual Propertyp y
47BROAD PATENT PORTFOLIO FOR USE OF 3947 ISSUEDCARBONIC ANHYDRASE IN CANADA, U.S., EU, CHINA, AUSTRALIA AND OTHER MARKETS
39 PENDING*vs. 13 and 19 respectively in 2008
SOLVENTSCarbonates
PROCESSESPacked Tower
Areas of Carboni
Amino AcidsAminesCombinations
High‐Intensity ContactorSpray Scrubber
UniversalCarbonic AnhydraseCO2 Capture ApplicationINDUSTRIAL SECTORS ENZYMES AND INDUSTRIAL SECTORS
PowerSteam‘Drop‐in’ Applications
THEIR UTILIZATIONEnzyme Strains
SolubleParticle‐Based
16 *at March 31, 2015
Particle BasedAnalogs
Steps to Large Scale Applicationp g pp
1. Completion of Valleyfield testing and development of detailed mass and energy balances and techno‐economics (Q3‐Q4 2015)
2. Relocation of 10 tonne/day unit to commercial customer (in negotiations) for longer term operation (2016)operation (2016)
3. Pilot testing of RPB (Q1 2016)
4. 30 tonne/day commercial CO2 reuse project incorporating RPB (2016‐2017)
/d l d h5. 300 tonne/day commercial EOR and other CO2reuse project incorporating RPB (2016‐2017)
6 Large scale broader commercial rollout (2017+)
17
6. Large‐scale broader commercial rollout (2017+)
Overall Benefits of CSI Technology
• Solvent regeneration using heat outside of
gy
So e t ege e at o us g eat outs de osteam cycle• Low parasitic load; minimal boiler upgrade
• Smaller footprint of capture unitSmaller footprint of capture unit• Better suited to retrofit and space‐constrained
operations
• Environmentally benign solvent• Environmentally benign solvent• No degradation products or aerosols• Ease of environmental and waste management
operations
• Larger net GHG reductions than amines• Benefit of using low‐grade heat
• Low total cost of capture• Low total cost of capture• Economics more favourable relative to Enhanced
Oil Recovery opportunities• In line with carbon pricing
18
THANK YOUCO2 Solutions Inc.Jonathan A. CarleyVice‐President, Business Developmentj th l @ 2 l tijonathan.carley@co2solutions.comM: 905‐320‐6260www.co2solutions.com
© 2014 CO2 Solutions Inc. and CO2 Solution Technologies Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Recommended