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.

CLECO / Brame Energy Center Madison 3 Unit

CoalFEED· Cleco Power· 2025-03-25
CO₂ captured
4,280,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
95.0%
Utilization
80.0%
Parasitic load
MW
CO₂ concentration
14.1%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringSargent & Lundy
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration14.1% vol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate
Compression stages
Compression inlet
Compression discharge2,015 psia
Description
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.

CEMEX / Balcones Cement Plant

Cementpre-FEED· Sargent and Lundy· 2026-01-01Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
2,400,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
95.0%
Utilization
74.0%
Parasitic load
MW
CO₂ concentration
12.8%mol%
Facility scope
EngineeringSargent and Lundy
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration12.8% mol%
Flue gas pressure14 psia
Compressor nameplate46 MW
Compression stages5
Compression inlet
Compression discharge2,215 psia
Description
The CEMEX Balcones Carbon Capture project is a DOE-supported Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) study evaluating commercial-scale deployment of RTI International’s non-aqueous solvent (NAS) technology at the Balcones cement plant in New Braunfels, Texas. The study assessed capture of approximately 2.4 million tonnes of CO₂ per year at roughly 95% capture efficiency from cement kiln flue gas and an associated natural gas–fired boiler, developing an AACE Class 3 cost estimate and detailed engineering design to support future investment decisions. Led by RTI International with KBR as EPC engineering contractor and SLB Capturi as owner’s engineer and technology licensor, the project evaluated integration challenges such as limited cooling water availability, resulting in a hybrid air- and water-cooling configuration. The FEED estimated total project capital costs of about $849 million and annual operating costs of approximately $109 million, providing a techno-economic basis for large-scale cement decarbonization and future project execution planning.

Nutrien Redwater Nitrogen Operations

AmmoniaFEED· Nutrien· 2024-11-01Project page ↗
CO₂ captured
1,778,645t/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
Studied the replacement of the SMR units with auto-thermal reforming (ATR) technology. ATRs produce a high concentration CO₂ stream, instead of low concentration combustion flue gases, that is more efficient to capture for sequestration. H₂ production from the unit may also be oversized to provide H₂ as a fuel source for the ATR if target overall CO₂ recovery of the facility is not achieved with the replacement of the SMR alone. The facility capacity is based on the total H₂ production requirements of the existing Plant 01 and Plant 09 ammonia synthesis units. 3 | P a g e Public – Approved for external distribution The scope for the study involves the SMR unit replacement with an integrated ATR and downstream syngas purification including CO₂ capture. The project scope also includes an Air Separation Unit (ASU) to supply oxygen to the ATR unit.