Carbon Capture Costs: FEED & pre-FEED Cost Reports

A Front End Engineering and Design (FEED) study was undertaken to design an advanced CO2 Capture Unit (CCU) to produce 1000 tonnes per day of CO2 from the exhaust of three Once-Through Steam Generators (OTSG’s) at Devon Energy’s Jackfish 1 thermal in-situ operations and estimate the capital expenditure for the facilities within +/-15% accuracy. The process utilizes HTC Purenergy Carbon Capture Technology to capture CO2 from the OTSG exhaust gas using an aqueous chemical solvent in an absorber tower, after which the CO2-loaded solvent is passed to a stripper tower where the CO2 is released and the solvent regenerated. The study excludes downstream CO2 compression, dehydration, transportation and storage.

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign is leading a FEED study for a commercial-scale CO₂ capture system at Holcim’s Ste. Genevieve cement plant in Missouri, targeting 95% capture efficiency. Using Air Liquide’s Cryocap™ technology, which combines PSA pre-concentration with cryogenic purification, the system will produce high-purity CO₂ for storage near the Prairie State Generating Company in Illinois. UIUC will manage the project and perform economic and impact analyses, while Air Liquide, Kiewit, Visage Energy, and Holcim will contribute to design, safety, environmental, and site integration efforts.

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 directly to 2,050 psig