Tools
Carbon Capture Costs: FEED & pre-FEED Cost Reports
Carbon capture costs from pre-FEED and FEED studies across power, cement, steel, natural gas, hydrogen and other industrial sectors. Browse capital (capex) and operating (opex) cost estimates from publicly available engineering reports, drill down into cost buckets and line items, and compare up to three projects side-by-side.
Comparing 3 reports — tab selection applies to every column.
Mustang Station Power Plant
CO₂ captured
853,644t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
52.0%
Parasitic load
46MW
CO₂ concentration
3.8%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringAECOM
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration3.8% vol%
Flue gas pressure14 psia
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages3
Compression inlet75 psia
Compression discharge2,015 psia
Description
The University of Texas at Austin, with AECOM Technical Services and Trimeric Corporation, is conducting a FEED study for the Piperazine Advanced Stripper (PZAS) CO₂ capture process at Golden Spread Electric Cooperative’s Mustang Station in Denver City, Texas. Designed for two GE gas turbines with HRSGs and a steam turbine totaling 464 MWe, the PZAS process uses 30 wt% piperazine for higher efficiency, solvent stability, smaller absorber size, and cost savings compared to conventional amine systems. The project will deliver a 30–60% complete design package and a capital cost estimate with ±15% accuracy.
Southern Company / Plant Barry
CO₂ captured
2,400,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
—
Utilization
95.0%
Parasitic load
—MW
CO₂ concentration
99.0%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringTrimeric
Point source approachCompression and Dehydration
CO₂ concentration99.0% vol%
Flue gas pressure—
Compressor nameplate24.8 MW
Compression stages8
Compression inlet30 psia
Compression discharge1,515 psia
Description
This report summarizes Trimeric’s Phase II work under the SSEB ECO2S project in Kemper County, Mississippi, focused on Task 7 – Infrastructure Development. Trimeric evaluated CO₂ compression and dehydration costs, compared pumping versus compression for dense phase CO₂, and developed pipeline transport cost estimates. Using experience from past projects, screening-level designs and cost estimates were prepared for a nominal 1 MTPY case and scaled to site-specific conditions. Results showed that increasing discharge pressure modestly raises costs, with pumping offering slight savings and operational flexibility but added complexity. Pipeline costs were estimated using NPC benchmarks, while compression and dehydration costs were scaled for Plant Daniel, Plant Miller, and Kemper. Overall, capital costs were roughly three times equipment costs, with electricity for compression as the dominant operating expense. The costs are associated with 8-stage compression to 1,500 psig
Peterhead Power Station (Aberdeenshire)
CO₂ captured
1,000,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
—
Parasitic load
—MW
CO₂ concentration
—
Facility scope
Engineering—
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration—
Flue gas pressure—
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages—
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge1,754 psia
Description
The Peterhead CCS Project in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, was designed to demonstrate the world’s first commercial-scale post-combustion CO₂ capture from a gas-fired power station. Using amine-based CANSOLV technology, it aimed to capture around one million tonnes of CO₂ annually from one turbine at SSE’s Peterhead Power Station, compress and condition it, and transport it via a new offshore pipeline for injection into the depleted Goldeneye gas reservoir over 2 km beneath the North Sea. The FEED study defined project scope, refined CAPEX and OPEX estimates, and assessed cost uncertainties, providing a basis for the Execute phase while also documenting budget performance and emergent costs during FEED.