Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
• New framework methodology for enhanced comparison of decarbonization technologies. • Generalized methods and tools for quantitative and qualitative site-specific factors. • Method for quantifying opportunity costs associated with space utilization on site. • Case study: Steam cracker plant with annual emissions of 650 ktCO 2 . • Results: Impact on production; opportunity costs are primary cost escalation factors. Site-specific factors are expected to influence the indication of cost-optimal decarbonization technology for the carbon-intensive process industry. This work presents a framework methodology to enhance the comparative analysis of decarbonization alternatives using site-specific techno-economic analysis, incorporating pertinent site-specific factors to obtain an enhanced indication of the optimal decarbonization solution. Site-specific cost factors such as energy supply options, space availability, site-layout constraints, local CO 2 interconnections, forced downtime, and premature decommissioning are considered. Qualitative site-specific factors and technology-specific attributes are assessed via expert elicitation with a retrofitability assessment matrix, generalizable to other process industries considering their site-level conditions. The framework methodology is demonstrated with a steam cracker plant case study, considering post-combustion CO 2 capture and pre-combustion CO 2 capture with hydrogen-firing in the cracker furnaces as decarbonization options. Results complemented with factor-specific sensitivity analysis highlight the extent of cost-escalation due to site-specific factors. The primary cost-contributing factor to retrofitability was the impact on production in existing sites, followed by the opportunity cost of utilizing valuable space on-site. Finally, pre-combustion CO 2 capture was found to be the optimal solution, offering significant site-specific advantages, with the lowest CO 2 avoidance cost and reduced overall risk over the residual lifetime of the host plant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kumar et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: