Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • order CMX001 br Acknowledgements This work is

    2018-11-03


    Acknowledgements This work is supported by National Natural Science Fund of China, China (Grant no. 61375079).
    Data Data shared in this article concern the validation of a model for evaluating the performances of a post-combustion CO2 capture membrane system. Data consist of molar fractions of permeate stream, membrane area and specific energy requirement of membrane system. Data were obtained by varying the CO2 separation degree from 0 to 100% and the feed pressure from 4bar to 10bar.
    Experimental design, materials and methods With the aim to validate a model for simulating the gas separation in polymeric hollow-fiber membrane modules [1], the related simulation data were compared with those obtained in a previous published paper by Low et al. [2], based on the same membrane system layout and operating conditions. Specifically, a single-stage configuration with feed order CMX001 only was simulated (Fig. 1). Gas separation in the membrane module was mimicked using the proprietary simulation tool M3PRO [3]; the latter was integrated in Aspen Plus environment [4], with the aim to simulate the energy behavior of the whole membrane separation system. Table 1 summarizes the simulation operating conditions, including the membrane separation properties and the thermodynamic conditions of flue gas to be treated. Fig. 2 compares the permeate composition evaluated with the model proposed (Fig. 2a and c) and that obtained by Low et al. [2] (Fig. 2b and d), varying the CO2 separation degree and the feed pressure. It is noted that the trend of simulated data varying the CO2 separation degree fits very well with the literature data. For instance, setting a feed pressure of 10bar and increasing the CO2 separation degree from 20% to 100%, Fig. 2a shows that in the proposed model CO2 molar fraction reduces from around 70% to 30% and N2 molar fraction increases from around 20% to 60%. Almost the same values are observed in Fig. 2b, depicting the trend of permeate molar fractions evaluated in [2] with the same operating conditions. Additionally, both models show that CO2 and N2 molar fractions attain the same values (≈45%) for a CO2 separation degree of around 90%. The good agreement is also confirmed at a lower feed pressure (4bar), where both models show that CO2 and N2 molar fractions pass from 50% to 25% and from 40% to less than 70% respectively, for a corresponding increase of CO2 separation degree up to 95% (Fig. 2c and d). Fig. 3 compares the membrane area evaluated with the model proposed, for a feed pressure of 8bar (Fig. 3a) and that obtained by Low et al. [2] (Fig. 3b) at the same operating conditions. The trend of membrane area evaluated with the proposed model fit well with that obtained in [2]. In this regards, it is noted that for both models membrane area has an exponential increase, stating at around 20m2 for a CO2 separation degree of 90%. Finally, Fig. 4 allows to compare the model proposed and that in [2] in terms of specific energy requirement for CO2 separation, assuming feed pressures values of 4bar and 10bar. Specific energy requirement exhibits an exponential decreasing trend in both models; values evaluated by the model proposed are comparable or slightly lower than that in [2], due to a slight difference in membrane system layout. Indeed, in the configuration proposed, the feed compression system is thermally integrated with the dual stage turboexpander. This aspect allows to concurrently reduce the power consumption for compression and increase the energy production from the retentate expansion, thus positively affecting the net power consumption and the specific energy requirement. As a result, setting a CO2 separation degree of 90%, specific energy requirement for a feed pressure of 4bar states at less than 150kWh/tonne CO2 separated in both models; increasing feed pressure to 10bar, specific energy states at less than 250kWh/tonne in [2], while it reduces to around 200kWh/tonne in the proposed membrane system.