Table 4.
Advantages and limitations of carbon dioxide separation/capture technologies (Clausse et al. 2011; Leung et al. 2014; Canevesi et al. 2018)
| Technology | Advantages | Limitations | Purity and Recovery |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adsorption | Reusable adsorbents | In some cases, requires pretreatment for separating other impurities including H2S and water vapor | PSA, Purity: 50–99% & Recovery: 30–90% |
| High efficiency | Requires adsorbents with very specific characters | TSA, Purity: 95% & Recovery: 80% | |
| Mature technology | High energy consumption in terms of flue gas and TSA process | ESA, Purity: 20% & Recovery: 93% | |
| Environmentally friendly | |||
| Quick and simple installation | |||
| Chemical absorption (with a reagent) | High efficiency | Highly energy consumption | |
| The most matured technology | Corrosion effects | ||
| Environment problems | Purity: 99% & Recovery: 98% | ||
| Absorption highly depends on CO2 concentration | |||
| Physical absorption (with water) | High purity | Purified gas requires a further drying step | |
| H2S removal also occurs | Energy requirement for water cooling | Purity: 99% & Recovery: 98% | |
| Matured technology | Environment problems | ||
| Cryogenic | Large-scale applications are already available | Highly energy consumption | |
| Matured technology | Only viable for high CO2 concentration | Purity: 99.9% & Recovery: 90% | |
| Large equipment requirement | |||
| Membrane | High purity | Low capacity | |
| Low energy requirement | Fouling | ||
| Simple installation | Low selectivity | Purity: higher than 95% & Recovery: 90% | |
| Compact structure | High cost | ||
| Well knowledge on technology | H2S removal requirement before CO2 adsorption |
PSA, pressure swing adsorption; TSA, temperature swing adsorption; ESA, electric swing adsorption; H2S, hydrogen sulfide; and CO2, carbon dioxide