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.

3 of 3 selectedClear selection46 reports
Comparing 3 reports — tab selection applies to every column.

Holcim / Portland Cement Plant

Cementpre-FEED· Electricore· 2023-01-31Project page ↗Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
1,733,750t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
Parasitic load
76MW
CO₂ concentration
10.1%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringKiewit
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration10.1% vol%
Flue gas pressure
Compressor nameplate
Compression stages7
Compression inlet
Compression discharge2,230 psia
Description
Electricore Inc., with Svante Inc. and Kiewit Engineering Group Inc., is conducting a pre-FEED study for a 1 million tonnes/year VeloxoTherm™ carbon capture system at LafargeHolcim’s cement plant in Florence, Colorado. The system will capture CO₂ from both kiln flue gas (14% concentration) and a natural gas-fired steam generator (8.5% concentration), with storage options including saline formations, depleted oil reservoirs, and the Sheep Mountain CO₂ reservoir. The study will also evaluate expansion to 2 million tonnes/year and target DOE’s $30/tonne capture cost goal, progressing from design selection (FEL-1) to pre-FEED engineering (FEL-2).

Mustang Station Power Plant

Natural GasFEED· University of Texas at Austin· 2022-01-07Project page ↗Cost report ↗
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.

CRC / Elk Hills Power Plant

Natural GasFEED· Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)· 2020-09-01Project page ↗Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
1,460,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
95.0%
Parasitic load
35MW
CO₂ concentration
4.3%mol%
Facility scope
EngineeringFluor
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration4.3% mol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate
Compression stages7
Compression inlet
Compression discharge2,315 psia
Description
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), with Fluor Corporation and California Resources Corporation (CRC), conducted a FEED study to assess the feasibility of retrofitting Fluor’s solvent for post-combustion CO₂ capture at the 550 MW Elk Hills NGCC power plant. The system aims to capture approximately 4,000 tonnes of CO₂ per day (75% of total emissions, or 90% of an 83% slipstream), with the captured CO₂ intended for enhanced oil recovery. Deliverables include the full engineering design package—such as process flow diagrams, equipment datasheets, and capital cost estimates—optimized for site-specific performance, operations, and construction practices.