https://www.mdu.se/

mdu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Technology selection for capturing CO2 from wood pyrolysis
Tianjin Univ Commerce, Tianjin, Peoples R China..
Mälardalen University, School of Business, Society and Engineering, Future Energy Center. Tianjin Univ Commerce, Tianjin, Peoples R China..
SINTEF Energy Res, Trondheim, Norway..
Mälardalen University, School of Business, Society and Engineering, Future Energy Center.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6279-4446
Show others and affiliations
2022 (English)In: Energy Conversion and Management, ISSN 0196-8904, E-ISSN 1879-2227, Vol. 266, article id 115835Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Emerging negative emission technologies (NETs) are considered as effective measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to achieve the climate goal set by the Paris Agreement, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is one of the most important NETs. Integrating CO2 capture with biomass pyrolysis (PyrCC) is attracting increasing interest, because biomass pyrolysis has been widely used to produce biooil to replace fossil fuel for decarbonizing the transport sector. In order to provide guidance to the selection of CO2 capture technologies, this paper evaluated the technical and economic performances of PyrCC when different CO2 capture technologies are integrated, including monoethanolamine-based chemical absorption (MEA-CA), temperature swing absorption (TSA), calcium looping (CaL), and chemical looping combustion (CLC). Generally speaking, CLC can realize the highest capture amount of CO2 with the lowest energy penalty. Meanwhile, CLC and CaL show the lowest levelized cost of CO2 (LCOC), which are around 56$/tCO(2); and on the contrary MEA-CA shows the highest one of 83 $/tCO(2). In addition, the key process parameter of pyrolysis, reaction time, has clear effects on the performance of CO2 capture as the longer reaction time leads to an increased amount of captured CO2 and reduced energy penalty. As a result, when the reaction time increases, the LCOCs of all assessed technologies decrease. Moreover, the net present value and the payback time are also estimated for different technologies. At the carbon price of 70.1$/tCO(2), MEA-CA and CLC show the longest and shortest payback time that are 5.9 years and 3.2 years respectively.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD , 2022. Vol. 266, article id 115835
Keywords [en]
Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), Negative emission technologies, Pyrolysis, Economic analysis, Energy efficiency, Levelized cost of CO2
National Category
Energy Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-59570DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115835ISI: 000817782300002Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85131604822OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-59570DiVA, id: diva2:1682970
Available from: 2022-07-13 Created: 2022-07-13 Last updated: 2022-08-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Dong, BeibeiLi, HailongThorin, Eva

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Dong, BeibeiLi, HailongThorin, Eva
By organisation
Future Energy Center
In the same journal
Energy Conversion and Management
Energy Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 136 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf