Techno-economic study of CO2 capture from an existing coal-fired power plant: MEA scrubbing vs. O2/CO2 recycle combustion

By D. Singh, E. Croiset, P. Douglas, M. Douglas. 2003

517 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Global and Planetary Change, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/01e3b49eae836ea1669dd8c22793d66b965ded98

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

1. Craig A. Grimes
2. Mazen Abu-Khader
3. Somnath C. Roy
4. M. Paulose
5. Oomman K. Varghese

In Mechanical Engineering

1. Mazen Abu-Khader

Citations in the corpus

• Toward solar fuels: photocatalytic conversion of carbon dioxide to hydrocarbons. (2010, background): “To maintain a constant power output given carbon capture and storage (CCS), studies have estimated that CCS equipped power plants would require an additional fuel input of 25 to 80%.(11) 14 House and coworkers(15) report that the energy cost of capturing and storing 80% of the CO2 *Address correspon”
• Parametric study on the regeneration heat requirement of an amine-based solid adsorbent process for post-combustion carbon capture (2016, unknown): “[10] modelled the MEA process for a 400 MWe coal fired power plant and estimated the specific thermal energy requirement to be 3.”
• Recent Progress in CO2 Capture/Sequestration: A Review (2006, background): “A techno-economic comparison study was conducted (Singh et al., 2003), and showed that the CO2 capture cost for the MEA case is 3.3¢/kWh.”
• Assessing economically viable carbon reductions for the production of ammonia from biomass gasification (2014, methodology): “Materials data is collected from Crawford et al. (2007), Singh et al. (2003), DECC (2011), Phillips et al. (2007), and Sinnott (2005).”