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.
Prairie State Generating
CO₂ captured
7,676,700t/yr
Capture efficiency
95.0%
Utilization
90.0%
Parasitic load
—MW
CO₂ concentration
11.4%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringKiewit, Sargent & Lundy
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration11.4% vol%
Flue gas pressure15 psia
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages—
Compression inlet—
Compression discharge—
Description
Prairie State Generating Company is conducting a FEED study for a carbon capture facility on its 816 MWe Unit #2 in Illinois, using Mitsubishi Heavy Industries’ KM CDR Process™ with KS-21™ solvent. Designed to treat all flue gas from the unit, it would be the world’s largest post-combustion capture plant, compressing CO₂ for off-site sequestration. The project will leverage engineering support from Kiewit, Sargent & Lundy, and MHI.
Mustang Station Power Plant
CO₂ captured
853,644t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
52.0%
Parasitic load
46MW
CO₂ concentration
3.8%vol%
Facility scope
EngineeringAECOM
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration3.8% vol%
Flue gas pressure14 psia
Compressor nameplate—
Compression stages3
Compression inlet75 psia
Compression discharge2,015 psia
Description
The University of Texas at Austin, with AECOM Technical Services and Trimeric Corporation, is conducting a FEED study for the Piperazine Advanced Stripper (PZAS) CO₂ capture process at Golden Spread Electric Cooperative’s Mustang Station in Denver City, Texas. Designed for two GE gas turbines with HRSGs and a steam turbine totaling 464 MWe, the PZAS process uses 30 wt% piperazine for higher efficiency, solvent stability, smaller absorber size, and cost savings compared to conventional amine systems. The project will deliver a 30–60% complete design package and a capital cost estimate with ±15% accuracy.
Finnish Market Pulp Mill / Capture of CO2 in both Kraft Boiler & Lime Kiln
Pulp and Paperpre-FEED· VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland· 2016-12-01Project page ↗Cost report ↗
CO₂ captured
1,675,922t/yr
Capture efficiency
90.0%
Utilization
95.9%
Parasitic load
26.9MW
CO₂ concentration
15.5%mol%
Facility scope
Engineering—
Point source approachPost-Combustion Capture
CO₂ concentration15.5% 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 both Kraft Boiler & Lime Kiln