Articles & Issues

Language: English

Conflict of Interest: In relation to this article, we declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Publication history: Received February 16, 2010
Accepted September 1, 2010

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

All issues

A comparative study of carbon dioxide capture capabilities between methanol solvent and aqueous monoethanol amine solution

Dong Min Kim Jungho Cho^1†

Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Hongik University, 300, Shinan, Jochiwon, Yongi, Chungnam 339-701, Korea ¹Department of Chemical Engineering, Kongju National University, 275, Budae-dong, Cheonan, Chungnam 330-717, Korea

jhcho@kongju.ac.kr

Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, January 2011, 28(1), 22-26(5), 10.1007/s11814-010-0419-9

Download PDF

Abstract

Simulations have been performed to compare the performance of CO2 capture power between 98.5 wt% methanol solvent and 30 wt% MEA aqueous solution. A general purpose chemical process simulator, PRO/II with PROVISION release 8.3 was used for the modeling of CO2 capture process. For the simulation of CO2 capture process using methanol as a solvent, NRTL liquid activity coefficient model was used for the estimation of the liquid phase non-idealities, Peng-Robinson equation of state model was selected for the prediction of vapor phase non-idealities, and Henry’s law option was chosen for the prediction of the solubilities of light gases in methanol and water solvents. Amine special thermodynamic package built-in PRO/II with PROVISION release 8.3 was used for the modeling of CO2 capture process using MEA aqueous solution. We could conclude that the 30 wt% of MEA aqueous solution showed better performance than the 98.5 wt% methanol solvent in CO2 capture capability. Through this study, we tried to compare the_x000D_ differences between the two processes from the aspects of capital and operating costs using a commercial process simulator. This will guide the optimal process design in the carbon dioxide capture process.

Keywords

CO2 Capture Process Simulation Modeling,Thermodynamic Model

References

Mavroudi M, Kaldis SP, Sakellaropoulos GP, Fuel., 82(15-17), 2153 (2003)
Park SW, Choi BS, Lee BD, Park DW, Kim SS, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 10(6), 1033 (2004)
Park SW, Choi BS, Lee BD, Park DW, Kim SS, Sep. Sci. Technol., 41(5), 829 (2006)
Alie C, Backham L, Croiset E, Douglas PL, Energy Conv. Manag., 46(3), 475 (2005)
Ko MS, Park CI, Kim HY, J. Korean Inst. Gas., 7, 7 (2003)
Austgen DM, Rochelle GT, Chen CC, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 30, 543 (1991)
Li MH, Shen KP, Fluid Phase Equilibrium., 85, 129 (1993)
Jou FY, Otto FD, Mather AE, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 33(8), 2002 (1994)
Dawodu OF, Meisen A, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 39(3), 548 (1994)
Diao YF, Zheng XY, He BS, Chen CH, Xu XC, Energy Conv. Manag., 45(13-14), 2283 (2004)
Cho WI, Na YH, Shin DK, Rhim KK, Cho JH, J. Korean Inst. Gas., 10(2), 22 (2006)
Gabrielsen J, Svendsen HF, Michelsen ML, Stenby EH, Kontogeorgis GM, Chem. Eng. Sci., 62(9), 2397 (2007)
Sartori G, Savage DW, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam., 22, 239 (1983)
Lee BD, Kim DM, Cho JH, Park SW, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 26(3), 818 (2009)
Renon H, Prausnitz JM, AIChE J., 14, 135 (1986)
Simulation Science Inc., PRO/II user guide, Simulation Science Inc., South Lake Forest (2001)
Nelder JA, Mead RA, Comput. J., 7, 303 (1965)