Techno-economic assessment of CO2liquefaction for ship transportation

Greenhouse Gases: Science and TechnologyVolume 4, Issue 6 p. 734-749 Modeling and Analysis Techno-economic assessment of CO2 liquefaction for ship transportation Umer Zahid, Umer Zahid Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorJinjoo An, Jinjoo An Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorUng Lee, Ung Lee Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorSeung Phill Choi, Seung Phill Choi Korea Carbon Capture and Storage Association, Seoul, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorChonghun Han, Corresponding Author Chonghun Han Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaCorrespondence to: Chonghun Han, School of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 151–744, Republic of Korea. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author Umer Zahid, Umer Zahid Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorJinjoo An, Jinjoo An Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorUng Lee, Ung Lee Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorSeung Phill Choi, Seung Phill Choi Korea Carbon Capture and Storage Association, Seoul, Republic of KoreaSearch for more papers by this authorChonghun Han, Corresponding Author Chonghun Han Seoul National University, Republic of KoreaCorrespondence to: Chonghun Han, School of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 151–744, Republic of Korea. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 25 June 2014 https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1439Citations: 16Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a key technology for addressing global warming by capturing carbon dioxide and storing it somewhere, usually underground. The transportation of CO2 is required since storage sites are not necessarily present near the source sites. Ships can be used for long distance transport of CO2. However, CO2 sources are not always located near the coast; hence onshore transportation may be required in addition to ship for transportation of CO2 from source sites to storage site. Liquefaction is a vital component in ship transportation. In this study, a state-of-the-art CO2 liquefaction processes have been designed by taking CO2 capture facilities into account. The proposed processes require lower liquefaction energy compared to other processes found in the literature. Suitable thermodynamic conditions are required for economical transport of CO2. Therefore, three scenarios each for post-combustion and pre-combustion have been studied in order to explore the effect of thermodynamic conditions on the economics of CO2 transport. The considered scenarios are categorized on the basis of liquefaction plant location as: (i) the capture site, liquefaction plant and shipping terminal are located close to each other; (ii) the capture site and liquefaction plant are far from shipping terminal; (iii) the capture site is far from liquefaction plant and shipping terminal. The scenarios results were useful for deciding the optimum liquefaction plant location. Finally, an economic analysis is performed in order to evaluate the feasibility of CO2 transport from source sites to ship loading terminal.© 2014 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd References 1Wong S, CO2 compression and transportation to storage reservoir, in Building Capacity for CO2 Capture and Storage in the APEC region. A Training Manual for Policy Makers and Practitioners. APEC, Singapore ( 2005). Google Scholar 2Koukouzas N and Typou I, An assessment of CO2 transportation cost from the power plants to geological formations suitable for storage in North Greece. Energ Procedia 1(1): 1657–1663 ( 2009). 10.1016/j.egypro.2009.01.217 Web of Science®Google Scholar 3Zahid U, Lee U, An J, Lim Y and Han C, Economic analysis for the transport and storage of captured carbon dioxide in South Korea. Environ Prog Sust Energ DOI:10.1002/ep.11832 ( 2013). 10.1002/ep.11832 Google Scholar 4Zhang ZX, Wang GX, Massarotto P and Rudolph V, Optimization of pipeline transport for CO2 sequestration. Energ Convers Manage 47(6): 702–715 ( 2006). 10.1016/j.enconman.2005.06.001 CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 5Roussanaly S, Bureau-Cauchois G and Husebye J, Costs benchmark of CO2 transport technologies for a group of various size industries. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 12: 341–350 ( 2013). 10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.05.008 Web of Science®Google Scholar 6Yoo BY, Choi DK, Kim HJ, Moon YS, Na HS and Lee SG, Development of CO2 terminal and CO2 carrier for future commercialized CCS market. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 12: 323–332 ( 2013). 10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.11.008 CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 7Wildbolz C, Life cycle assessment of selected technologies for CO2 transport and sequestration, diplom thesis. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich ( 2007). Google Scholar 8Decarre S, Berthiaud J, Butin N and Guillaume-Combecave JL, CO2 maritime transportation. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 4(5): 857–864 ( 2010). 10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.05.005 CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 9Aspelund A and Jordal K, Gas conditioning—The interface between CO2 capture and transport. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 1(3): 343–354 ( 2007). 10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00040-0 CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 10, Preliminary feasibility study on CO2 carrier for ship-based CCS. Global CCS Institute (2011). Available at: http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/ Google Scholar 11, The Cost of CO2 Capture, Transport and Storage. Post-demonstration CCS in the EU. Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants, Brussels ( 2011). Google Scholar 12Seo Y, Chang D, Jung JY, Huh C and Kang SG, Economic evaluation of ship-based CCS with availability. Energy Procedia 37: 2511–2518 ( 2013). 10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.133 Web of Science®Google Scholar 13Roussanaly S, Jakobsen JP, Hognes EH and Brunsvold AL, Benchmarking of CO2 transport technologies: Part I – Onshore pipeline and shipping between two onshore areas. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 19: 584–594 ( 2013). 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.031 Web of Science®Google Scholar 14Duan L, Chen X and Yang Y, Study on a novel process for CO2 compression and liquefaction integrated with the refrigeration process. Int J Energy Res 37: 1453–1464 ( 2013). 10.1002/er.2951 CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 15Alabdulkarem A, Hwang Y and Radermacher R, Development of CO2 liquefaction cycles for CO2 sequestration. Appl Therm Eng 33: 144–156 ( 2012). 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.09.027 CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 16Dopazo JA and Fernández-Seara J, Experimental evaluation of a cascade refrigeration system prototype with CO2 and NH3 for freezing process applications. Int J Refrig 34(1): 257–267 ( 2011). 10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2010.07.010 CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 17Raja H, Anand AK, Muthaiah V, Ferguson JA and Scarboro PR, Carbon Dioxide Liquefaction System. US Patent Application 12/986, 085 (2011). Google Scholar 18Barrio MA, Aspelund T, Weydahl TE, Sandvik LR, Wongraven H Krogstad et al., Ship-based transport of CO2, in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologie, pp. 1655–1660 ( 2004). Google Scholar 19Lee U, Yang S, Jeong YS, Lim Y, Lee CS and Han C, Carbon dioxide liquefaction process for ship transportation. Ind Eng Chem Res 51(46): 15122–15131 ( 2012). 10.1021/ie300431z CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 20Barron RF, Cryogenic Systems, 2nd ed. Clarendon Press, Oxford, New York ( 1985). Google Scholar 21Doctor RD, Molburg JC and Thimmapuram PR, KRW Oxygen.Blown Gasification Combined Cycle: Carbon Dioxide Recovery, Transport, and Disposal, ANL-ESD-34. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL ( 1996). 10.2172/373835 Google Scholar 22Vermeulen TN, Knowledge Sharing Report – CO2 Liquid Logistics Shipping Concept (LLSC). Overall Supply Chain Optimization, Global CCS Institute (2011). Available at: http://cdn.globalccsinstitute.com/sites/default/files/publications/19011/co2-liquid-logistics-shipping-concept-llsc-overall-supply-chain-optimization.pdf Google Scholar 23FInkenrath M, Cost and Performance of Carbon Dioxide Capture from Power Generation, (No. 2011/5). International Energy Agency, OECD Publishing, Paris (2011). 10.1787/5kgggn8wk05l-en Google Scholar 24Peters M, Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5th ed. McGraw-Hill Companies Incorporated, New York (2003). Google Scholar 25Parker N, Using Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Costs to Estimate Hydrogen Pipeline Costs. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, CA ( 2004). Google Scholar 26Sinnott RK, Coulson & Richardson's Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Design, Volume 6, 4th ed. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford ( 2005). Web of Science®Google Scholar 27Erwin D, Industrial Chemical Process Design. McGraw-Hill Prof Med/Tech, New York ( 2002). Google Scholar 28Towler G and Sinnott RK, Chemical Engineering Design: Principles, Practice and Economics of Plant and Process Design. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford ( 2008). Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume4, Issue6December 2014Pages 734-749 ReferencesRelatedInformation