Conference article

In this work, several sets of experimental data from the amine based CO₂ capture process at CO₂ Technology Centre Mongstad (TCM) have been compared with simulations of different equilibrium based models and a rate-based model. The equilibrium models (in Aspen Plus and Aspen HYSYS) were fitted by adjusting the Murphree efficiency for each stage and the rate-based model (in Aspen Plus) was fitted by adjusting the interfacial area factor. Aspen Plus (using the Electrolyte-NRTL model) and Aspen HYSYS (using Kent-Eisenberg and Li-Mather models) gave almost identical results for the capture rate and small deviations for the temperature profiles. There are however deviations both between the measured temperatures at a specified column height and between measured temperatures and the simulated temperatures. Equilibrium based models are less fundamental than rate-based models, but for the conditions in this study, the rate-based models still lack accurate input parameters like the interfacial area. The results from this study show that equilibrium and rate-based models perform equally well in both fitting performance data and in predicting performance at changed conditions.

CO2, amine, absorption, simulation