4.6 Article

Process integration of a Ca-looping carbon capture process in a cement plant

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL
Volume 19, Issue -, Pages 530-540

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.10.009

Keywords

Carbon capture; Cement plant; Ca-looping process

Funding

  1. Turkish Ministry of Education
  2. EPSRC SI Award [EP/F034520/1]
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/F034520/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. EPSRC [EP/F034520/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An analysis of the integration of a Ca-looping process into a cement plant is presented. The capture process, based on selective absorption of CO2 by calcium oxide, has two interconnected reactors where the carbonator captures CO2 from the preheater flue gases and the calciner regenerates the CaCO3 into CaO by oxy-combustion. The study also considers the purge rate of part of the circulating CaO, given the tendency of the material to sinter and reduce its capture capacity. Fresh CaCO3 is added to maintain reactivity in the carbonator, while the purged sorbents are utilised as a cement kiln feed. The detailed carbonator model has been implemented using Matlab and incorporated into Unisim to provide a full flowsheet simulation for an exemplary dry-feed cement plant as a user-defined operation. The effect of molar flowrate ratio of lime make-up to feed CO2 (F-0/FCO2) between two operational limits has been investigated. This process configuration is capable of achieving over 90% CO2 capture with additional fuel consumption of 2.5-3.0 GJ(th)/ton CO2 avoided which depends on the F-0/F-CO2 ratio. It is found that a proper heat recovery system supplementary to the Ca-looping process makes the Ca-looping process more competitive than the traditional low temperature absorption process based on amine solvents. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available