Modelling of CO<sub>2</sub> Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions

Ali Alkhazrajie; Ali Ibrahim Neamah

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Modelling of CO₂ Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions

Ali Alkhazrajie

, Ali Ibrahim Neamah^*

Published in Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering (Volume 9, Issue 2)

Received: 21 April 2024 Accepted: 27 May 2024 Published: 14 June 2024

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Since there currently are no financially feasible sources of renewable electricity and since they are readily available and inexpensive, such as coal, fossil fuels; that will remain the primary energy source for decades. Consequently, it is imperative to create technologies that allow for the continued use of fossil fuels whilst reducing the amount of CO₂ released into the environment. In order to lower atmospheric emissions, CO₂ should be captured from sources of emissions. Increased oil recovery, ocean or subsurface storage, or perhaps both, might be accomplished using the recovered CO₂. Extracting high-purity CO₂ from flue gas, which is present in low concentrations (about 15 percent), is the most difficult step in the CO₂ capture process. The process of a selected separation approach will then be thoroughly examined by modeling it utilizing the Aspen Plus program while employing three solvents, including MEA, DEA, and NH3. Additionally, based on the simulation results provided by Aspen Plus, the present research intends to assess the environmental and economic implications of every solvent in order to choose the solvent with the minimum environmental impact and the best economic performance. Also, look at how the final CO₂ removal efficacy is affected by the pressure and temperature of the chosen solvents and absorber. According to the findings, DEA solvent outperformed NH3 and MEA in terms of CO₂ extraction effectiveness. Additionally, employing NH3 as a chemical solvent does not affect temperature or pressure, but using MEA and DEA negatively influences CO₂ extraction efficiency when the temperature is raised. However, when utilizing DEA and MEA as chemical solvents, the pressure of the solvent enhances the rate of CO₂ collecting.

Published in	Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering (Volume 9, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12
Page(s)	56-69
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Carbon Capture, Chemical Absorption, MEA, DEA, NH₃

1. Introduction

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose from approximately 280 ppm to slightly over 400 ppm during the previous 150 years due to the continued usage of fossil fuels

[1]

. The endeavour to create Negative Emissions Technologies, which allow for the direct removal of CO₂ from the atmosphere, has increased since worries about the impact of the rise on the global climate

[2-4]

. Recent research suggests that widespread adoption of negative emission technology is likely necessary to stop the rise in global temp to roughly 2 degrees centigrade over the pre-industrial period by the end of this century

[5]

Natural gas, a readily accessible and environmentally friendly energy source, is crucial in supplying the rising worldwide demand for several industries, including transportation, industrial, and electricity

[6]

. International Energy Outlook 2019 predicts that between 2018 and 2050, the world's natural gas consumption will increase by 40 percent, achieving around 200 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu)

[7]

. According to Figure 1

[8]

, natural gas's share of all energy sources climbed to 24 percent in 2018, representing one of the highest growth rates since 1984

[8]

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 1. Shares of Global Primary Energy Consumption by Fuel.

USA, Iran, Iraq, and Russia were the four most wasteful countries in 2018, flaring almost 70000000000 m³ of natural gas, depending on Offshore Energy

[9, 10]

. Iraq is ranked second amongst some of the top flaring nations. According to the Global Carbon Atlas, in 2018 Russia and Iraq each emitted 29000000 tons and 28000000 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, respectively

[11]

. Iraq's emissions of carbon dioxide from 2000 to 2018 are seen in Figure 2.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 2. The Iraqi electrical sector's 1990–2017 CO₂ emissions through the use of crude oil, natural gas, and fuel oil

[11]

In addition to the issues with global warming brought on by the excessive levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it influences individuals, and over time, various health issues start to appear. Chronic infections, bone atrophy, renal failure, loss of cognitive function, and a higher risk of cancer are a few of these

[12]

The direct capture of

{CO}_{2}

from the air (DAC) by chemical or physical processes has garnered significant interest among all suggested negative emissions technologies

[3, 5]

because of its benefits. For instance, DAC technology may be implemented on the rooftops of buildings in crowded places or isolated locations where the land is unsuitable and could be placed near storage/utilization sites. In comparison to other techniques for removing

{CO}_{2}

from the atmosphere, it may also provide a higher removal capacity

[13]

. Furthermore, it was asserted that DAC could capture dispersed fugitive emissions, permanently lower atmospheric

{CO}_{2}

concentrations (it can actually capture 100 percent of

{CO}_{2}

emissions), and be used directly in a variety of industries, including those that produce beverages, greenhouses, and synthetic fuels

[14, 15]

Numerous amine types, including piperazine (heterocyclic amine, PZ)

[16]

, aminomethyl propanol (sterically hindered primary amine, AMP)

[17]

, methyl diethanolamine (tertiary amine, MDEA)

[18]

, diethanolamine (secondary amine, DEA), monoethanolamine (main amine, MEA), and others, were investigated in the

{CO}_{2}

capture process. MEA is still recognized as the main solvent in aqueous alkanolamine-based capturing processes because of its minimal requirement for regeneration temperature, low cost of solvent, and high absorption rate

[19]

. Nevertheless, the high heat of interaction with

{CO}_{2}

when employing MEA (about 85 kJ/mol

{CO}_{2}

) means that there is still a considerable energy demand for stripping. In low-pressure applications, DEA could be taken into consideration because of its lower reaction temp with

{CO}_{2}

(approximately 70 kJ/mol

{CO}_{2}

). Like DEA, secondary amines react with sulfur-containing compounds in much lower amounts, and the by-products are not very corrosive. All these reasons make DEA an attractive

{CO}_{2}

collecting technique. Nevertheless, DEA's poor kinetics are a disadvantage

[20-22]

By utilizing Aspen Plus software to conduct numerical simulations on the selected solvents, the present research may achieve the following goals: reducing

{CO}_{2}

emissions caused by fossil fuel usage to improve oil recovery. In order to discover the most cost effective and environmentally friendly solvent, it is also important to optimize the operating factors for the process and then assess the results of the simulation model.

2. Study Area

East of Amarah, Iraq, there is an oil field called Halfaya Field. Halfaya is known to have a recoverable resource of 4.1 billion barrels (650,000,000 m³) and can produce between 200,000 and 535,000 barrels/day (31,800 and 85,100 m³/d). The consortium headed by the China National Petroleum Company completed the first phase in June 2012, 15 months ahead of plan, and raised output from three thousand barrels/day (480 m³/d) to hundred-thousand barrels/day (16,000 m³/d). The study area coordinates are southern-east 32°10’37.37”, 47°26’11.77”. The field is 332.43 km away southeast of Baghdad.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 3. The location of the study area.

3. Methodology

A sample of feed gas was taken from the Al-Halfaya site in Maysan, Iraq, in May 2018. Tables 1 and 2 illustrate the outlet Figure 4 and the gas compositions from the power plant depict the power plant. To conform to the product standards and environmental regulations, processing gas should meet market limits of 100 ppm CO₂ and 1 ppm Hydrogen Sulfide.

Table 1. The outcomes of gas compositions from the power plant.

Components	Mole percent	Site: Maysan- Al-Halfaya
Methane (CH₃)	86.431	Testing date	2018
Ethane (C₂H₆)	4.675	Sample type	Natural gas
Propane (C₃H₈)	0.361	Operation situations
i-Butane (C₄H₁₀)	0.053	Operation situations
n-Butane (C₄H₁₀)	0.054	Temperature	35-degree centigrade
i-Pentane (C₅H₁₂)	0.015	Pressure	60 bars
n-Pentane (C₅H₁₂)	0.011	Flow	250 tons/hr
Hexane (C₆H₁₄)	0.019	Gas Density [kg/m³]	49.433
CO₂	4.332	Molar Flow [MMSCFD]	389
H₂S	3.851
Nitrogen N₂	0.198

Table 2. Gas feeding situations and compositions.

Components	Mole percentage
H₂O	71×10^-3
CO₂	85×10^-3
N₂	743×10^-3
O₂	101×10^-3

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 4. Power plant graphical plan.

3.1. Model Design Basis

The absorption of gases in liquids while being coupled with chemical processes appears to be one of the basic phases in numerous gas purification processes (commonly called reactive absorption). It combines interactions with mass transfer in two stages when interacting

[23]

. A loosely bound reaction product is created when a liquid phase component and the absorbed gaseous constituents mix. Chemical operations may speed up the absorption rate, enhance the absorption capacity for solvents, and raise the selectivity only to dissolve certain chemicals. Carbon dioxide is absorbed into amine solutions by a process called reactive absorption.

The phrase "amine absorption techniques" refers to a method that uses an aqueous amine solution to eliminate CO₂ from gas compositions. It is a common process unit found in petrochemical plants, refineries, and other establishments that handle natural gas. Amines that have significant commercial significance for the gas purification process are monoethanolamine (MEA) and diethanolamine (DEA)

[24]

. The absorber, which operates at great pressure, and the stripper, which operates at great temp and low pressure, are the two essential parts of the amine absorption processes. A simplified process flow diagram for the amine absorption procedures is demonstrated in Figure 5.

As the flue gas moves counter-currently toward the absorber’s bottom, the amine solution comes into contact with it, as depicted in Figures 5-8. CO₂ is taken up by the amine solutions, which then react with it to form a loosely connected molecule. Once the amine solution takes up carbon dioxide, a cleaner, treated gas rises to the top of the absorption tower. The stripper's bottom is where the warm lean amine solution enters the heat exchanger, and the absorber’s bottom is the rich amine solution that is rich with CO₂ and leaves the absorber unit. After that, the solution will be moved to the top of the stripper, in which it would be heated with steam once again to start the desorption process, a type of opposite absorption process utilized to eliminate carbon dioxide from amine solutions. Lean amine solution was discharged back into the absorber, while CO₂ was expelled from the top of the stripper.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 5. NH₃ process scheme.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 6. DEA process scheme.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 7. MEA process scheme.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 8. Flow sheet for MEA solvent.

3.1.1. Amine Absorption Capacity

Once an organic radical replaces one or more atoms of hydrogen, the result is an amine, which includes derivatives of ammonia

[24]

. Monoethanolamine (MEA) and diethanolamine (DEA) are the two amines frequently used in cleaning applications. Amines' capacity to absorb CO₂ is quickly diminished in the existence of SO₂, NO₂, HCl, HF, or O₂ in the gas stream. These chemicals create irreversible by-products which complicate the solvent recovery process while also slowing the response rate during the absorption process. The removing or absorbing effectiveness (η, defined in equation (1), in which

y_{o}

and

y_{i}

were the pollutant quantity reported as a molar fraction at the outflow and intake, respectively) may be used to describe the scrubber performance. Some publications have wrongly referred to absorption efficacy as a solvent property even though it might vary across two scrubbers that employ identical solvents.

[24]

η = \frac{y_{i} - y_{o}}{y_{i}}

(1)

The solvent’s absorption capacity is defined as the maximal molar amount of a contaminant, which could be absorbed/solvent mole. This feature is utilized to set the proper loading (pollutant/solvent molar proportion) in scrubber designs. Low loading creates columns with inefficient absorption rates, whereas high loading leads to increased solvent demands and operational expenses. How successfully amines can absorb carbon dioxide depends on the quantity of the solvent, the gas stream’s composition, and the operational temp

[25]

. Amines may chemically and physically absorb carbon dioxide. Physical absorptions are governed by Henry's hypothesis that explains how carbon dioxide molecules in the aqueous and gaseous phases are in thermodynamic equilibrium

[26, 27]

P_{A} = y_{A} P = H_{A} x_{A}

(2)

Where, in the gas phase equilibrium of component A,

P_{A}

is a partial pressure, P is the total pressure,

H_{A}

is Henry’s theory constant in the gas phase,

y_{A}

is the equilibrium concentration (stated as a fractional molar), and in the liquid phase of equilibrium of component A (also stated as a fractional molar).

3.1.2. NH₃ and DEA Flow Sheet Process

The solvent equipment was built under appropriate conditions after the substances utilized in the process were described, the estimation technique for the NH₃ process was established, and the chemical formula was set. The utilized equipment, in this case, was two flash tank separators, one of which served as an absorber and the other as a stripper.

In contrast to DEA, where each solvent's equipment has been built under suitable conditions after the material utilized in the process was described, the determination technique for the process has been established, and the chemical formula was set, here the used equipment consisted of two separators, one of which served as an absorber (Rad-Frac), and the other as a stripper (Rad-Frac). Nevertheless, the DEA and NH₃ solvents have been tested using the current ENRTL-RK technique with the composites listed in Table 3.

3.1.3. For MEA Process

The elements of typical MEA absorption operations, including absorbers, strippers, and a cross-heating exchanger, are shown in Figure 8. As shown in Figures 7-8, a storage (buffer) tank is a distinct operational element in the MEA absorption processes considered in this study. This component is placed in front of the absorber column. This storage tank with a large volume of liquid solvent was included in the pilot plant to minimize any disruption from the stripper column

[28]

. The storage tank permits any fluctuations in composition coming from the stripping column to be attenuated to maintain the optimal amount of lean loading into the absorber column. The absorber-packed column provides intimate contact between the amine solvent and flue gas to remove CO₂ molecules from the gas form to the solvents' liquid state. The stripper-packed column acts as a regenerator by removing carbon dioxide from the solvent so that it may be regenerated back into the absorbent. The solvent tools were built in the appropriate situations after the substances utilized in the process were described, the determination technique for the process was established, and the chemical formula was established. The tools utilized in this case were two separators, one of which served as an absorber (Rad-Frac) and a stripper (Rad-Frac). Nevertheless, the MEA solvent with the composites listed in Table 3 has been studied using the ELECNRTL technique.

Table 3. Components of NH₃, DEA, and MEA solvents.

ENRTL-RK Technique		ELECNRTL Technique
NH₃	DEA	MEA
WATER
AMMONIA	DIETHANOLAMINE	MONOETHANOLAMINE
CARBON-DIOXIDE
H₃O⁺
OH-
NH₄⁺	DEA⁺	${HCO}_{3}^{-}$
HCO₃^-	HCO₃^-	MEA⁺
CO₃^--
	HS^-	MEACOO-
NITROGEN	S^--	NITROGEN
AMMONIUM-HYDROGEN-CARBONATE	HYDROGEN-SULFIDE	HYDROGEN-SULFIDE
OXYGEN
CARBON-MONOXIDE
HYDROGEN
CARBAMATE	PROPANE	HS^-
-	NITROGEN	S^--
-	DEACOO-
-	METHANE
-	ETHANE

{CO}_{2} (aq) + H_{2} O \underset{k_{- 1}}{\overset{k_{1}}{⇌}} H_{2} {CO}_{3}

(3)

{CO}_{2} (aq) + {OH}^{-} \underset{k_{- 2}}{\overset{k_{2}}{⇌}} {HCO}_{3}^{-}

(4)

{CO}_{3}^{2 -} + H^{+} \overset{K_{3}}{⇄} {HCO}_{3}^{-}

(5)

{HCO}_{3}^{-} + H^{+} \overset{K_{4}}{⇄} H_{2} {CO}_{3}

(6)

{OH}^{-} + H^{+} \overset{K_{5}}{⇄} H_{2} O

(7)

{NH}_{3} + H^{+} \overset{K_{6}}{⇄} {NH}_{4}^{+}

(8)

{CO}_{2} (aq) + {NH}_{3} \underset{k_{- 7}}{\overset{k_{7}}{⇄}} {NH}_{2} COOH

(9)

{NH}_{2} {COO}^{-} + H^{+} \underset{K_{8}}{⇄} {NH}_{2} COOH

(10)

The DEA chemical reactions formulas

DEAH++H₂O

⇄

DEA+H₃O+(11)

DEACOO-+H₂O

⇄

DEA+

{HCO}_{3}^{-}

(12)

2 H₂O

⇄

H₃O++OH-(13)

CO₂+2 H₂O

⇄ {HCO}_{3}^{-}

+H₃O⁺(14)

{HCO}_{3}^{-}

+H₂O

⇄ {CO}_{3}^{- 2}

+H₃O⁺(15)

H₂S+H₂O

⇄

HS-+H₃O⁺(16)

HS-+H₂O

⇄ S^{- 2}

+H₃O⁺(17)

The MEA chemical reactions formulas

2.0 H₂O

⇄

H₃O++OH^-(18)

CO₂+2.0 H₂O

⇄

HCO₃^-+H₃O⁺(19)

{HCO}_{3}^{-}

+H₂O

⇄ {CO}_{3}^{- 2}

+H₃O⁺(20)

MEAH⁺+H₂O⇄MEA+H₃O⁺(21)

MEACOO^-+H₂O

⇄

MEA+

{HCO}_{3}^{-}

(22)

H₂S+H₂O

⇄

HS^-+H₃O⁺(23)

HS^-+H₂O

⇄

S^-2+H₃O⁺(24)

3.2. CO₂ Capturing Cost—Standard Design

The Aspen Capital Cost Estimation and standard chemical engineering design criteria were used to calculate the CO₂ capturing cost for air capture, which came to $1,691/tonne of CO₂. It is important to note that this computation depends on a particular capture amount of 0.291 tCO₂.h^-1. Greater economies of scale

[29]

would result in lower costs per ton of CO₂ collected for larger-scale systems. Table 4 displays the costs of significant equipment, overall investment costs, operating costs, and a breakdown of CO₂-capturing costs. A illustrates the distribution of capture costs across capital, operational, and energy costs. Heating consumption accounts for the least amount of the cost of CO₂ capture at 7%, followed by O&M at 23% and electricity at 9%. The capital component makes up 61% of the cost of CO₂ capture. The percentage of heating and electricity to total cost may be significantly reduced when more accessible, and reasonably priced heating and energy sources are available. The sensitivity analysis of numerous economic factors, such as the price of energy and heating, is included in the following section.

Table 4. The estimated cost of air capture.

Main apparatus	Cost, Million $	Operation expenses	Cost, Million $
Washing column	4.38	Annual O&M cost	0.757
Absorbers	4.22	Annual heat cost	0.213
Desorbers	0.13	Annual electrical cost	0.286
Fans and Blowers	1.66	Capture cost	$/ton CO₂
Heating-exchanger	0.39	Capital	1.033
Pump	0.3	O&M	396
Tank	0.4	Heat	111
Other apparatus	0.22	Electricity	150
Total direct cost	11.7	Total	1691
Total indirect cost	2.27

This research compares the effectiveness and costs of post-combustion CO₂ collecting with amine and ammonia approaches. It does this by using the station derating of a CO₂ capturing on the power plant and the Levelized revenue required as two essential parameters. The "energy penalty," also known as the plants' derating for CO₂ collecting, is shown as a declining percentage in the net station output for given energy input.

Station Derating (%) = \frac{Plant Efficacy without Capturing - Plant Efficacy with Capturing}{Plant Efficacy without Capturing}

(25)

Revenue Required ($ / MWh) = \frac{Total Plant Costs x Fixed Charge Factor + O&M Costs}{8760 * Capacity Factor x MWh Produced}

(26)

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Feeding Flow Influence

Comparing (MEA, DME, and NH₃) solvents by determining the CO₂% capturing rate for each solvent:

0.085 * 72 =

6.12 kg.h^-1 CO₂ feed

CO₂ amount released from MEA absorber=1.67474 (kg.h^-1)

CO 2 % = \frac{6.12 - 1.67474}{6.12} \times 100 % = 72.6 w / wt %

CO₂ amount released from DEA absorber=0.0056 (kg.h^-1)

CO 2 % = 99.9 w / wt %

CO₂ amount released from NH₃ absorber=2.28082 (kg/h)

CO 2 % = 62.7 w / wt %

DEA solvent showed the greatest Carbon dioxide capturing rate with 99.9% for the majority of the randomly chosen feeding flow, according to the feeding flow for the solvents that utilized MEA, DEA, and NH₃ that are identified in Figure 9, in which the rate of capture for the solvents increased with enhancing the feeding flow from 30-80 kg/hr. The large quantity of CO₂ released from the absorber once employed by NH₃ and MEA also causes an increase in feeding flow when the CO₂ removal rate for NH₃ and MEA is improved. The measured absorption rate rises when the gas-liquid amount, temp, solvent amount, and flow rate of the gas all go up. MEA has a higher capacity for absorption than NH₃ and DEA, however MEA has a lower absorption efficiency. The best capacity for absorption belongs to NH₃. In the presence of carbon dioxide

[30]

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 9. The association between CO₂ Capturing rate and feeding flow.

4.2. Effect of Temperature

To clear up the uncertainty around the phase Vapour Liquid Equilibrium (VLE) data, constants of Henry's laws for the binaries DEA- CO₂, MEA- CO₂, NH₃- CO₂, and H₂O- CO₂ have been altered (often lowered or increased by 20 to 50%). The whole pressure range and temp were then used to vary the variables. Additionally, the impact of altering the interfacial area on absorption efficiency was examined. Along with variable modification, a small assessment of the effect of discretization film on the simulation results was made. Since the performance of the absorption column frequently sets the standards for the plant’s rest, it was thought desirable to examine the absorber performance in this research. Figures 10, and 11 show the influence of temperature on the absorption capacity. Figures 10 and 11 demonstrate that as solvent temperatures rise, the effectiveness of CO₂ removal decreases. For example, Figure 10 shows that the DEA capturing rate decreased from 0.25 to 0.2 kg/hr as the temp rose to 44-degree centigrade, whereas Figure 11 shows that the MEA capturing rate decreased from 4 kg/hr to 3.2 kg/hr. Since the NH₃ reaction is carried out in the absence of temp, as illustrated in Figure 12, the solvent temperature does not affect the effectiveness of CO₂ removal when employing NH₃. Based on

[31]

rise the temperature for more than 20 degree centigrade cause a reduction in CO₂ capturing amount for all selected solvents.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 10. The temperature influence on removal efficiency of DEA.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 11. The temperature influence on removal efficiency of MEA.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 12. The temperature influence on removal efficiency of NH₃.

Figure 12 depicts the connection between temp (Kelvin) and the rate of CO₂ adsorption utilizing NH₃, showing that the natural interaction between CO₂ and NH₃ ensures that temp increases do not affect the effectiveness of CO₂ removal. The compounds of ammonium carbonate progressively break down in the presence of air at air temp to ammonia, whereas ammonium bicarbonate breaks down into carbon dioxide, water, and ammonia when heated over 60 degrees Celsius

[32]

4.3. Pressure Influence

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 13. The Pressure influence on removal efficiency of the DEA.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 14. The Pressure influence on removal efficiency of MEA.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 15. The Pressure influence on removal efficiency of NH₃.

The pressure effect on CO₂ capture rate changes based on the solvents used. For example, when employing NH₃ as a solvent, a change in pressure does not affect CO₂ capture, as is seen in Figure 13. However, as seen in figures 14 and 15, higher pressure increases the capture rate for both MEA and DEA, although DEA operates more effectively under the greatest pressure. According to

[33, 34]

increasing the pressure lead to increasing the capturing efficiency and this results are compatible with the obtained results in the current study.

4.4. Energy Requirements

The power required for regeneration Once a natural gas sweetening plant is built, the processing is one of the most important factors. However, rising energy consumption will result in higher operating costs. The results show that increasing the AM solution volume increases the need for re-boiler energy to recover the lean AM. The size of the regeneration unit grows along with an increase in circulation rate, necessitating more re-boiler energy. Consequently, using the ideal operating conditions of 50-degree centigrade and 405000 Kg/hr from the study, a comparative analysis of the required energy was carried out. In conclusion, it was shown that increasing the AM quantity raises the energy needed because more heating is required to re-boil the AM solution.

Table 5. The required energy for CO₂ Capturing by NH₃, DEA, and MEA solvents.

Power plant’s Duty	Magnitude [Watt]
Separator Heating-duty	6.3978773409E-07
Compressors Net-work necessary	-7806088.8
Determined heating duty reactor	-3420872054.0604
Duty of NH₃
Absorber	-15027.4072 (absorbing heat)
Stripper	34314.9876
Duty of stripper re-boiler
DEA	5502441.96
MEA	530040.925

DEA was rated as having the greatest prior energy use, but NH₃ had the lowest due to the boiler's absence. Nevertheless, in terms of energy needs, NH₃ is regarded as the best option since energy use results in the production of CO₂ and a return to the Carbone cycle.

4.5. Cost Evaluation

According to Table 6, labor costs for solvents, equipment costs, and operating costs, NH₃ may be provided at the lowest cost (1467 (€/m³)) compared to other chosen solvents, whereas DEA seems to have the greatest supply cost (1720 (€/m3)). Consequently, NH₃ is regarded as the most suitable solvent based on the cost of the solvents, followed by DEA and MA as the last option. Based on increasing CO₂ amount lead to decrease investment costs

[35, 36]

As is well knowledge, CO₂ capture by NH₃ does not need the use of a heat exchanger; as a result, the heating-exchanger cost as just a cost of apparatus is not included once estimating that the operation would be more cost-effective owing to reduced costs for electricity and heating. According to the anticipated cost value shown in Table 4, NH₃ has the lowest operating and apparatus cost, followed by DEA and MEA, which have the greatest costs. Consequently, NH₃ is regarded as the most suitable solvent, followed by MEA and DEA, based on the cost of operation and equipment

[38]

Table 6. The chemical solvents costs

[37]

Solvents	Cost (€/m³)
NH₃	1467
DEA	1720
MEA	1650

5. Conclusion

A rate-base model in Aspen Plus assessed the technical and economic aspects of a traditional absorption process-based MEA, DEA, and NH3 for collecting CO₂ straight from the air. Following its establishment, a benchmark situation was further examined, utilizing a sensitivity analysis considering several variables. The simulation model's output may be used to derive the following conclusions:

NH3 seems to have the lowest cost with the least expensive operating end equipment, despite DEA having the greatest energy needs, which results in DEA emitting CO₂ as a result of electricity production. As a result, it is regarded as the best option; however, when compared to MEA or DEA, its removal effectiveness for NH3 is the lowest.

DEA is the best option in two situations, with the lowest feeding ratio and a 99.9% elimination effectiveness. The capture method only needed a tiny quantity of DEA compared to MEA and NH3, which raised two issues: the first connected to removing effectiveness and the second to the expense of the solvent.

Abbreviations

MA	Ammonia
DEA	Diethanolamine
MEA	Monoethanolamine
CC	Carbon Capture

Author Contributions

Ali Alkhazrajie: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Ali Ibrahim Neamah: Funding acquisition, Investigation, Resources, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Guides: Citation Styles: APA, MLA, Chicago, Turabian, IEEE: APA 7th Edition. https://pitt.libguides.com/citationhelp/apa7R
[2]	Lindsey, “Climate change: global sea level,” Clim. Mag., 2019.
[3]	N. McGlashan, N. Shah, B. Caldecott, and M. Workman, “High-level techno-economic assessment of negative emissions technologies,” Process Saf. Environ. Prot., vol. 90, no. 6, pp. 501–510, 2012.
[4]	D. McLaren, “A comparative global assessment of potential negative emissions technologies,” Process Saf. Environ. Prot., vol. 90, no. 6, pp. 489–500, 2012.
[5]	C. Pritchard, A. Yang, P. Holmes, and M. Wilkinson, “Thermodynamics, economics and systems thinking: what role for air capture of CO₂?,” Process Saf. Environ. Prot., vol. 94, pp. 188–195, 2015.
[6]	T. Gasser, C. Guivarch, K. Tachiiri, C. D. Jones, and P. Ciais, “Negative emissions physically needed to keep global warming below 2 C,” Nat. Commun., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2015.
[7]	M. Mesbah, M. Momeni, E. Soroush, S. Shahsavari, and S. A. Galledari, “Theoretical study of CO₂ separation from CO₂/CH₄ gaseous mixture using 2-methylpiperazine-promoted potassium carbonate through hollow fiber membrane contactor,” J. Environ. Chem. Eng., vol. 7, no. 1, p. 102781, 2019.
[8]	P. Poretti, “Transparency of government revenues from the sale of natural resources: pursuing the international course through EITI,” J. World Energy Law Bus., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 199–215, 2015.
[9]	D. Spencer, “BP statistical review of world energy statistical review of world,” Ed. BP Stat. Rev. World Energy, vol. 68, pp. 1–69, 2019.
[10]	D. J. Jasim, T. J. Mohammed, and M. F. Abid, “Natural Gas in Iraq, Currently and Future Prospects: A Review”.
[11]	D. J. Jasim, T. J. Mohammed, and M. F. Abid, “Review on the natural gas in Iraq, currently and future prospects for improving the economic and environmental situation,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, AIP Publishing LLC, 2022, p. 30041.
[12]	G. C. Atlas, “Available online: http://www. globalcarbonatlas. org/en,” CO₂-emissions (accessed 1 July 2020), 2021.
[13]	P. N. Bierwirth, “Carbon dioxide toxicity and climate change: a major unapprehended risk for human health,” Web Publ. Res., vol. 10, 2018.
[14]	R. Baciocchi, G. Storti, and M. Mazzotti, “Process design and energy requirements for the capture of carbon dioxide from air,” Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif., vol. 45, no. 12, pp. 1047–1058, 2006.
[15]	D. W. Keith, “Why capture CO₂ from the atmosphere?,” Science (80-.)., vol. 325, no. 5948, pp. 1654–1655, 2009.
[16]	D. W. Keith, G. Holmes, D. S. Angelo, and K. Heidel, “A process for capturing CO₂ from the atmosphere,” Joule, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 1573–1594, 2018.
[17]	H. Li, P. T. Frailie, G. T. Rochelle, and J. Chen, “Thermodynamic modeling of piperazine/2-aminomethylpropanol/CO₂/water,” Chem. Eng. Sci., vol. 117, pp. 331–341, 2014.
[18]	H. Li, L. Li, T. Nguyen, G. T. Rochelle, and J. Chen, “Characterization of piperazine/2-aminomethylpropanol for carbon dioxide capture,” Energy Procedia, vol. 37, pp. 340–352, 2013.
[19]	Y. Zhang and C.-C. Chen, “Thermodynamic modeling for CO₂ absorption in aqueous MDEA solution with electrolyte NRTL model,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 163–175, 2011.
[20]	D. Aaron and C. Tsouris, “Separation of CO₂ from flue gas: a review,” Sep. Sci. Technol., vol. 40, no. 1–3, pp. 321–348, 2005.
[21]	J. Gabrielsen, M. L. Michelsen, E. H. Stenby, and G. M. Kontogeorgis, “A model for estimating CO₂ solubility in aqueous alkanolamines,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 3348–3354, 2005.
[22]	P. Galindo, A. Schäffer, K. Brechtel, S. Unterberger, and G. Scheffknecht, “Experimental research on the performance of CO₂-loaded solutions of MEA and DEA at regeneration conditions,” Fuel, vol. 101, pp. 2–8, 2012.
[23]	S. S. Warudkar, K. R. Cox, M. S. Wong, and G. J. Hirasaki, “Influence of stripper operating parameters on the performance of amine absorption systems for post-combustion carbon capture: Part I. High pressure strippers,” Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, vol. 16, pp. 342–350, 2013.
[24]	P. V. Danckwerts, “Gas-liquid reactions,” 1970.
[25]	A. L. Kohl and R. Nielsen, Gas purification. Elsevier, 1997.
[26]	R. E. Dugas, Carbon dioxide absorption, desorption, and diffusion in aqueous piperazine and monoethanolamine. The University of Texas at Austin, 2009.
[27]	R. E. Treybal, “Mass transfer operations,” New York, vol. 466, 1980.
[28]	T. Hvitved-Jacobsen, Sewer processes: microbial and chemical process engineering of sewer networks. CRC press, 2001.
[29]	R. E. Dugas, “Pilot plant study of carbon dioxide capture by aqueous monoethanolamine,” MSE Thesis, Univ. Texas Austin, 2006.
[30]	K. Blok and E. Nieuwlaar, Introduction to energy analysis. Routledge, 2016.
[31]	C. H. Hsu, H. Chu, and C. M. Cho, “Absorption and reaction kinetics of amines and ammonia solutions with carbon dioxide in flue gas,” J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 246–252, 2003.
[32]	J. Liu, S. Wang, B. Zhao, H. Tong, and C. Chen, “Absorption of carbon dioxide in aqueous ammonia,” Energy Procedia, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 933–940, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2009.01.124
[33]	L. Meng, “Development of an analytical method for distinguishing ammonium bicarbonate from the products of an aqueous ammonia CO₂ scrubber and the characterization of ammonium bicarbonate,” 2004.
[34]	M. Mehdipour, P. Keshavarz, A. Seraji, and S. Masoumi, “Performance analysis of ammonia solution for CO₂ capture using microporous membrane contactors,” Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, vol. 31, pp. 16–24, 2014.
[35]	S. Nii and H. Takeuchi, “Removal of CO₂ and/or SO₂ from gas streams by a membrane absorption method,” Gas Sep. Purif., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 107–114, 1994.
[36]	J. Husebye, A. L. Brunsvold, S. Roussanaly, and X. Zhang, “Techno economic evaluation of amine based CO₂ capture: impact of CO₂ concentration and steam supply,” Energy Procedia, vol. 23, pp. 381–390, 2012.
[37]	H. Li, G. Haugen, M. Ditaranto, D. Berstad, and K. Jordal, “Impacts of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) on the natural gas combined cycle integrated with chemical absorption CO₂ capture technology,” Energy Procedia, vol. 4, pp. 1411–1418, 2011.
[38]	G. Schnitkey, N. Paulson, C. Zulauf, K. Swanson, J. Colussi, and J. Baltz, “Nitrogen Fertilizer Prices and Supply in Light of the Ukraine-Russia Conflict,” farmdoc Dly., vol. 12, no. 45, 2022.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Alkhazrajie, A., Neamah, A. I. (2024). Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions. Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering, 9(2), 56-69. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Alkhazrajie, A.; Neamah, A. I. Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions. J. Energy Environ. Chem. Eng. 2024, 9(2), 56-69. doi: 10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Alkhazrajie A, Neamah AI. Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions. J Energy Environ Chem Eng. 2024;9(2):56-69. doi: 10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12,
  author = {Ali Alkhazrajie and Ali Ibrahim Neamah},
  title = {Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions
},
  journal = {Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {56-69},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jeece.20240902.12},
  abstract = {Since there currently are no financially feasible sources of renewable electricity and since they are readily available and inexpensive, such as coal, fossil fuels; that will remain the primary energy source for decades. Consequently, it is imperative to create technologies that allow for the continued use of fossil fuels whilst reducing the amount of CO2 released into the environment. In order to lower atmospheric emissions, CO2 should be captured from sources of emissions. Increased oil recovery, ocean or subsurface storage, or perhaps both, might be accomplished using the recovered CO2. Extracting high-purity CO2 from flue gas, which is present in low concentrations (about 15 percent), is the most difficult step in the CO2 capture process. The process of a selected separation approach will then be thoroughly examined by modeling it utilizing the Aspen Plus program while employing three solvents, including MEA, DEA, and NH3. Additionally, based on the simulation results provided by Aspen Plus, the present research intends to assess the environmental and economic implications of every solvent in order to choose the solvent with the minimum environmental impact and the best economic performance. Also, look at how the final CO2 removal efficacy is affected by the pressure and temperature of the chosen solvents and absorber. According to the findings, DEA solvent outperformed NH3 and MEA in terms of CO2 extraction effectiveness. Additionally, employing NH3 as a chemical solvent does not affect temperature or pressure, but using MEA and DEA negatively influences CO2 extraction efficiency when the temperature is raised. However, when utilizing DEA and MEA as chemical solvents, the pressure of the solvent enhances the rate of CO2 collecting.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions

AU  - Ali Alkhazrajie
AU  - Ali Ibrahim Neamah
Y1  - 2024/06/14
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12
T2  - Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering
JF  - Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering
JO  - Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering
SP  - 56
EP  - 69
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2637-434X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12
AB  - Since there currently are no financially feasible sources of renewable electricity and since they are readily available and inexpensive, such as coal, fossil fuels; that will remain the primary energy source for decades. Consequently, it is imperative to create technologies that allow for the continued use of fossil fuels whilst reducing the amount of CO2 released into the environment. In order to lower atmospheric emissions, CO2 should be captured from sources of emissions. Increased oil recovery, ocean or subsurface storage, or perhaps both, might be accomplished using the recovered CO2. Extracting high-purity CO2 from flue gas, which is present in low concentrations (about 15 percent), is the most difficult step in the CO2 capture process. The process of a selected separation approach will then be thoroughly examined by modeling it utilizing the Aspen Plus program while employing three solvents, including MEA, DEA, and NH3. Additionally, based on the simulation results provided by Aspen Plus, the present research intends to assess the environmental and economic implications of every solvent in order to choose the solvent with the minimum environmental impact and the best economic performance. Also, look at how the final CO2 removal efficacy is affected by the pressure and temperature of the chosen solvents and absorber. According to the findings, DEA solvent outperformed NH3 and MEA in terms of CO2 extraction effectiveness. Additionally, employing NH3 as a chemical solvent does not affect temperature or pressure, but using MEA and DEA negatively influences CO2 extraction efficiency when the temperature is raised. However, when utilizing DEA and MEA as chemical solvents, the pressure of the solvent enhances the rate of CO2 collecting.

VL  - 9
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Ali Alkhazrajie

Advanced Chemical Engineering, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen City, UK

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0008-6033-536X
Ali Ibrahim Neamah

Chemical Engineering Department, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, USA

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4980-0650

Download PDF

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Alkhazrajie, A., Neamah, A. I. (2024). Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions. Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering, 9(2), 56-69. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Alkhazrajie, A.; Neamah, A. I. Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions. J. Energy Environ. Chem. Eng. 2024, 9(2), 56-69. doi: 10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Alkhazrajie A, Neamah AI. Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions. J Energy Environ Chem Eng. 2024;9(2):56-69. doi: 10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12,
  author = {Ali Alkhazrajie and Ali Ibrahim Neamah},
  title = {Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions
},
  journal = {Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {56-69},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jeece.20240902.12},
  abstract = {Since there currently are no financially feasible sources of renewable electricity and since they are readily available and inexpensive, such as coal, fossil fuels; that will remain the primary energy source for decades. Consequently, it is imperative to create technologies that allow for the continued use of fossil fuels whilst reducing the amount of CO2 released into the environment. In order to lower atmospheric emissions, CO2 should be captured from sources of emissions. Increased oil recovery, ocean or subsurface storage, or perhaps both, might be accomplished using the recovered CO2. Extracting high-purity CO2 from flue gas, which is present in low concentrations (about 15 percent), is the most difficult step in the CO2 capture process. The process of a selected separation approach will then be thoroughly examined by modeling it utilizing the Aspen Plus program while employing three solvents, including MEA, DEA, and NH3. Additionally, based on the simulation results provided by Aspen Plus, the present research intends to assess the environmental and economic implications of every solvent in order to choose the solvent with the minimum environmental impact and the best economic performance. Also, look at how the final CO2 removal efficacy is affected by the pressure and temperature of the chosen solvents and absorber. According to the findings, DEA solvent outperformed NH3 and MEA in terms of CO2 extraction effectiveness. Additionally, employing NH3 as a chemical solvent does not affect temperature or pressure, but using MEA and DEA negatively influences CO2 extraction efficiency when the temperature is raised. However, when utilizing DEA and MEA as chemical solvents, the pressure of the solvent enhances the rate of CO2 collecting.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Modelling of CO2 Removal and Capturing Process Using Different Solvents for Al-Halfaya Oil Field to Reduce the Total Emissions

AU  - Ali Alkhazrajie
AU  - Ali Ibrahim Neamah
Y1  - 2024/06/14
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12
T2  - Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering
JF  - Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering
JO  - Journal of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering
SP  - 56
EP  - 69
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2637-434X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jeece.20240902.12
AB  - Since there currently are no financially feasible sources of renewable electricity and since they are readily available and inexpensive, such as coal, fossil fuels; that will remain the primary energy source for decades. Consequently, it is imperative to create technologies that allow for the continued use of fossil fuels whilst reducing the amount of CO2 released into the environment. In order to lower atmospheric emissions, CO2 should be captured from sources of emissions. Increased oil recovery, ocean or subsurface storage, or perhaps both, might be accomplished using the recovered CO2. Extracting high-purity CO2 from flue gas, which is present in low concentrations (about 15 percent), is the most difficult step in the CO2 capture process. The process of a selected separation approach will then be thoroughly examined by modeling it utilizing the Aspen Plus program while employing three solvents, including MEA, DEA, and NH3. Additionally, based on the simulation results provided by Aspen Plus, the present research intends to assess the environmental and economic implications of every solvent in order to choose the solvent with the minimum environmental impact and the best economic performance. Also, look at how the final CO2 removal efficacy is affected by the pressure and temperature of the chosen solvents and absorber. According to the findings, DEA solvent outperformed NH3 and MEA in terms of CO2 extraction effectiveness. Additionally, employing NH3 as a chemical solvent does not affect temperature or pressure, but using MEA and DEA negatively influences CO2 extraction efficiency when the temperature is raised. However, when utilizing DEA and MEA as chemical solvents, the pressure of the solvent enhances the rate of CO2 collecting.

VL  - 9
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download