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.
Milton R. Young Power Plant
CO₂ captured
4,297,145t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
85.0%
Parasitic load
83.3MW
CO₂ concentration
8.6%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringFluor
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration8.6% vol%
Flue gas pressure—
Compressor nameplate44.4 MW
Compression stages—
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge1,690 psia
Description
Milton R. Young Station Unit 2 is conducting a FEED study to add a post-combustion CO₂ capture system using Fluor’s Econamine FG Plus™ technology to its lignite-fueled power plant in North Dakota. The design targets 3.6 million tonnes of CO₂ captured annually—twice the scale of the largest existing facility—while integrating advanced heat recovery, aerosol and solvent degradation controls, and cold-climate optimization to achieve the lowest levelized cost of capture at world scale. The study will deliver detailed design, cost, and performance data for financing, permitting, and final project scheduling.
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
Devon Energy / Jackfish-1 Oil Sands
CO₂ captured
365,000t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
85.0%
Parasitic load
—MW
CO₂ concentration
8.6%mol%
Facility scope
EngineeringHTC Puretech
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration8.6% mol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages—
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge—
Description
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.