Carbon Capture Costs: FEED & pre-FEED Cost Reports

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.

Cleco Power (Cleco) performed a three-phase front-end engineering and design (FEED) study evaluating installation of a carbon dioxide (CO2) Capture System at Madison Unit 3 (MU3), Project Diamond Vault (DV) The work was performed under a Department of Energy (DOE) grant DE-FE0032165. The FEED study included three phases: (1) a feasibility phase which sought to define the scope of the project, (2) a pre-FEED phase which sought to develop a detailed cost estimate, and (3) a final FEED phase which sought to develop the project to be ready to move into execution. The FEED study was completed by Cleco, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America (MHIA), and Sargent & Lundy, LLC (S&L) with oversight provided by the Louisiana Economic Development (LED). The feasibility phase was completed in February 2023, which was followed by the pre-FEED phase which concluded in January 2024. The project subsequently entered the final FEED phase, during this phase Cleco made the decision to stop work on the FEED study due to market conditions which resulted in a project that was not economically viable at the time.

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 Six-stage compression to 1,500 psig, followed by pumping to 2,050 psig