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.
Technology Centre Mongstad
CO₂ captured
5,658,960t/yr
Capture efficiency
70.0%
Utilization
85.0%
Parasitic load
182MW
CO₂ concentration
12.5%mol%
Facility scope
EngineeringTrimeric
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration12.5% mol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages6
Compression inlet6 psia
Compression discharge2,219 psia
Description
Membrane Technology and Research Inc., with Technology Centre Mongstad, Dresser-Rand, Trimeric Corporation, and WorleyParsons/Advisian, is scaling up its advanced Polaris™ membranes for post-combustion CO₂ capture and testing them at engineering scale at TCM in Norway. The Polaris membranes, about 20 times more permeable than prior commercial versions, use a patented selective recycle design to boost CO₂ concentration in flue gas and lower capture costs. The project will design, build, and operate a modular membrane system for a six-month field test, including performance verification, steady-state operation, techno-economic updates, and integration studies with advanced compression technology.
Finnish Market Pulp Mill / Capture of CO2 in the Multi-fuel Boiler only
Pulp and Paperpre-FEED· VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland· 2016-12-01Project page ↗Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
270,658t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
95.9%
Parasitic load
4.4MW
CO₂ concentration
16.8%mol%
Facility scope
Engineering—
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration16.8% mol%
Flue gas pressure—
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages4
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge1,595 psia
Description
Analysis sets the design and cost-estimating basis for evaluating pulp and board mills with and without CCS. Two base cases are considered: a market pulp mill and an integrated pulp and board mill. Six CCS cases are evaluated, capturing CO₂ from the recovery boiler, multi-fuel boiler, lime kiln, or their combinations. The mills are assumed to be energy independent, with black liquor and bark burned to produce steam and electricity, and excess electricity exported to the grid. The CO₂ capture system uses post-combustion MEA technology with a 90% capture rate, and if on-site electricity is insufficient, an auxiliary boiler firing forest residues will supply the additional energy. Capture of CO2 in the Multi-fuel Boiler only
Nutrien Redwater Nitrogen Operations
CO₂ captured
683,645t/yr
Capture efficiency
99.0%
Utilization
—
Parasitic load
—MW
CO₂ concentration
7.0%mol%
Facility scope
EngineeringHatch
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration7.0% mol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages—
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge2,614 psia
Description
Scope starts with the receipt of natural gas and fuel gas mixture from the existing Plant 01 and Plant 09 source and terminates with hydrogen (H₂) at the required specification and conditions to be used as fuel in the existing SMR unit. High concentration CO₂ from the ATR is captured and H₂ production from the proposed facility will replace the fuel gas feed to the primary reformer for heating. The facility capacity is based on the heating duty required to replace the current fuel source. The scope for the study involves the new ATR unit and associated downstream shift, CO₂ capture, and syngas purification unit. The project scope also includes an ASU to supply oxygen to the ATR unit.