Carbon dioxide capture and transportation options in the Illinois Basin; Task 2, Assess carbon capture options for Illinois Basin carbon dioxide sources

This report describes carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) capture options from large stationary emission sources in the Illinois Basin, primarily focusing on coal-fired utility power plants. The CO{sub 2} emissions data were collected for utility power plants and industrial facilities over most of Illinois,... Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Online Access: Get full text
Authors:Rostam-Abadi, M.; Chen, S.S.; Lu, Y.
Source:119p.
Publication Date:2004
Note:In English. Topical report. 72 refs.
Subjects:Absorption; Carbon dioxide; Carbon sequestration; Computer programs; Data processing; Geologic hazards; Natural hazards; Pipelines; Power plants; Storage; Illinois; Illinois Basin; Indiana; Kentucky; United States; CHEMCAD
Record ID:2020052550
Copyright Information:GeoRef, Copyright 2020 American Geosciences Institute.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
This report describes carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) capture options from large stationary emission sources in the Illinois Basin, primarily focusing on coal-fired utility power plants. The CO{sub 2} emissions data were collected for utility power plants and industrial facilities over most of Illinois, southwestern Indiana, and western Kentucky. Coal-fired power plants are by far the largest CO{sub 2} emission sources in the Illinois Basin. The data revealed that sources within the Illinois Basin emit about 276 million tonnes of CO2 annually from 122 utility power plants and industrial facilities. Industrial facilities include 48 emission sources and contribute about 10% of total emissions. A process analysis study was conducted to review the suitability of various CO{sub 2} capture technologies for large stationary sources. The advantages and disadvantages of each class of technology were investigated. Based on these analyses, a suitable CO{sub 2} capture technology was assigned to each type of emission source in the Illinois Basin. Techno-economic studies were then conducted to evaluate the energy and economic performances of three coal-based power generation plants with CO{sub 2} capture facilities. The three plants considered were (1) pulverized coal (PC) + post combustion chemical absorption (monoethanolamine, or MEA), (2) integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) + pre-combustion physical absorption (Selexol), and (3) oxygen-enriched coal combustion plants. A conventional PC power plant without CO2 capture was also investigated as a baseline plant for comparison. Gross capacities of 266, 533, and 1,054 MW were investigated at each power plant. The economic study considered the burning of both Illinois No. 6 coal and Powder River Basin (PRB) coal. The cost estimation included the cost for compressing the CO{sub 2} stream to pipeline pressure. A process simulation software, CHEMCAD, was employed to perform steady-state simulations of power generation systems and CO{sub 2} capture processes. Financial models were developed to estimate the capital cost, operations and maintenance cost, cost of electricity, and CO{sub 2} avoidance cost. Results showed that, depending on the plant size and the type of coal burned, CO{sub 2} avoidance cost is between