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.

Calpine / Deer Park Energy Center

Natural GasFEED· Calpine· 2023-05-03Project page ↗Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
500,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
95.0%
Utilization
85.0%
Parasitic load
30.4MW
CO₂ concentration
5.2%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringSargent & Lundy
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration5.2% vol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate
Compression stages5
Compression inlet
Compression discharge2,215 psia
Description
Calpine Texas CCUS Holdings LLC, with Electricore Inc., is conducting a FEED study for a modular post-combustion CO₂ capture system at the Deer Park Energy Center NGCC plant in Texas. Using Shell’s commercial-scale amine technology, the system will capture 95% of emissions—about 5 MTPA—while maintaining low energy use and fast reaction rates. The study will include business case, techno-economic, life cycle, environmental, and public policy analyses, including environmental justice and job creation impacts.

Phillips 66 / Rodeo Refinery

Hydrogenpre-FEED· Phillips 66 Company· 2023-08-09Project page ↗Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
190,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
95.0%
Utilization
94.5%
Parasitic load
MW
CO₂ concentration
18.0%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringWorley
Point source approachPre-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration18.0% vol%
Flue gas pressure20 psia
Compressor nameplate
Compression stages5
Compression inlet25 psia
Compression discharge2,250 psia
Description
Phillips 66, with Worley Group Inc., is developing the initial design for a commercial-scale CCS system at the Rodeo Refinery hydrogen plant, targeting over 90% capture efficiency and storage of about 190,000 tonnes of CO₂ annually. The project will evaluate three capture configurations—flue gas plus PSA tail gas, syngas plus flue gas, and flue gas only—selecting the most cost-effective option through a techno-economic analysis. The chosen design will be advanced to a level suitable for the next engineering phase, concluding with a final TEA for the selected CCS configuration.

Finnish Market Pulp Mill / Capture of CO2 in the Kraft Recovery Boiler only

Pulp and Paperpre-FEED· VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland· 2016-12-01Project page ↗Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
1,478,700t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
95.9%
Parasitic load
23.5MW
CO₂ concentration
14.7%mol%
Facility scope
Engineering
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration14.7% 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 Kraft Recovery Boiler only