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.
Linde Hydrogen Plant
CO₂ captured
1,360,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
95.0%
Utilization
—
Parasitic load
—MW
CO₂ concentration
18.3%mol%
Facility scope
EngineeringLinde Engineering
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration18.3% mol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages—
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge—
Description
Linde Inc., with Linde Engineering Americas and BASF, is conducting an initial engineering design for a 3,500 tonnes/day CO₂ capture plant using Linde-BASF’s advanced aqueous amine technology at a Linde-owned steam methane reforming facility. The project will define integration options, establish project requirements, optimize process design, and develop engineering, cost, and schedule packages. BASF will provide the technology design, LEA will deliver detailed engineering and constructability assessments, and Linde will lead techno-economic, environmental, and safety analyses in coordination with the SMR plant operators.
Southern Company / Plant Barry
CO₂ captured
1,000,000t/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 nameplate8.7 MW
Compression stages8
Compression inlet30 psia
Compression discharge1,514 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.
Gerald Gentleman Station
CO₂ captured
4,316,020t/yr
Capture efficiency
89.8%
Utilization
85.0%
Parasitic load
—MW
CO₂ concentration
—
Facility scope
EngineeringSargent & Lundy
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration—
Flue gas pressure—
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages6
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge2,115 psia
Description
ION Clean Energy, with Nebraska Public Power District, is conducting a FEED study to retrofit a CO₂ capture system on Unit 2 of the 700 MWe Gerald Gentleman Station in Nebraska. Using ION’s low-aqueous ICE-21 solvent, proven in prior DOE-funded projects to reduce energy use, solvent degradation, and emissions, the design will feature two parallel 350 MWe capture units. The project aims to decarbonize most of Unit 2 while maintaining maximum operational flexibility for the plant.