1. A Life Cycle Assessment:
Carbon Capture Applications
in Thailand
Capstone Final : July 22, 2558
Nicole Frey
Connor Jarvis
Andrea Kopaskie
Oscar Menzer
Raymond Stanton

2. Climate Change and Carbon Capture
● 50-85% reduction in CO2
by 2050 to avoid major global climate change (IPCC)
● Predicted 45% increase in energy demand by 2030 - mostly by fossil fuels (IEA)
● Concrete is second only to water in total volume consumed annually by society and
global demand is rapidly growing (IEA)
○ Concrete production co-produces CO2
: ~5% of global CO2
emissions (7% of Thai
emissions)
Carbon Capture
● 80-90% reduction in CO2
emissions
● Application to nearly any industrial point source

3. Natural Gas and Cement in Thailand
● Power Development Plan 2010
(PDP) - “Energy Security”
● 830 MW increase/year to 2030
● Prioritize Combined Cycle NG
and Thermal Efficiency
● Gulf Coast Natural Gas Supply
● Established over a 100 years ago,
SCG’s corporate profile and
sustainable initiatives in Thailand
● Total Thailand Cement Output:
56.22 million metric tons cement
annually (48.52 Mta clinker)
● IEA Cement Technology Roadmap
○ WBCSD-CSI
Natural Gas Power Cement
33.1% Electricity from
Natural Gas

4. Reference Plants
● Bangpakong Plant
● Largest in Thailand: 4,400 MW
● 2009 Update
● 710 MW Combined Cycle Unit
(2 x 230 Gas + 250 Steam)
● CO2
concentration 3-6%
● Tha Luang Cement Plant
● BAT: Dry process, Tra Chang blend
● SCG Cement Mix
● 3.072 million metric tons of cement
annually (2.64 Mta Clinker)
● CO2
concentration ~30%
Natural Gas Power Cement

5. PHASE I: Goal & Scope
Goal: To delineate, quantify, and assess the environmental impacts associated
with the implementation of MEA amine scrubbers, oxyfuel combustion, and
calcium looping as applied carbon capture technologies to combined cycle
natural gas power plants and dry process cement plants in Thailand.
Audience: Government officials seeking to mitigate climate change and the
cement and power industries’ sustainable development coordinators.
Limitations: This study is not intended to account for any new potential
advances in carbon capture technology or plant operations, nor are these
results pertinent to outdated or substandard performance facilities.

6. System Boundaries: Natural Gas
Functional Unit: 1 MWh net electricity produced

7. System Boundaries: Cement
Functional Unit: 1 tonne of dry process cement

8. Technology: Amine Scrubbing
Sources: IPCC (2015), Wagen (2012), Imperial College (2014).
Amine-based molecules chemically bind CO2
separating it from the flue gas stream. The solution is
subsequently heated for solvent regeneration and CO2
release.

9. Technology: Oxyfuel Combustion
Sources: Cormos et al. (2014), IEAGHG (2014), IPCC (2015), Phumpradab et al. (2009), Rubin et al. (2007).
Air Separation Unit removes sulfur, nitrogen, and other components from ambient air in order to
combust fuels in an almost completely oxygen environment - simplifying purification of flue gas CO2
.
Cement
Natural Gas

10. Technology: Calcium Looping
Sources: Alonso et al. (2010), Abanades (2009), Cormos et al. (2014), Dean et al. (2011), IPCC (2015), Phumpradab et al. (2009), Rubin et al. (2007), Vatopolous & Tzimas (2012).
Calcium Looping takes advantage of the reversible reaction between calcium oxide (CaO) and carbon
dioxide (CO2
) to form Calcium Carbonate (CaCO3
). This process involves a carbonator and a calciner, both
of which operate at high temperatures.
CaO + CO2
→ CaCO3
ΔH = -170 kJ/mol
CaCO3
→ CaO + CO2
ΔH = 165 kJ/mol

11. Natural Gas “Energy Penalty”
Amine Scrubbing [3] [4] Calcium Looping [1] Oxyfuel Capture [2] [3]
Gross Output (MW) 710 710 710
Air Separation N/A -70 -90
Compressors -50 -52 -49
Chemical Looping N/A -10 N/A
Absorption/ Desorption -44 -7 N/A
Pumps and Blowers -18 N/A N/A
Auxiliary Requirements -20 -50 -20
Generator and Mech. Loss -12 -12 -11
Net Output (MW) 566 509 540
(MWh/tonne CO2 captured) 340 410 330
Sources: [1] Cormos (2014), [2] Dillon et al. (2005), [3] IPCC (2005), [4] Wagen (2012).

12. Cement “Energy Requirements”
System Unit Amine Scrubbing
[2] [4]
Calcium Looping
[3]
Oxyfuel
[1] [3] [5]
Air Separator Unit MJ/tonne cement - 88 138.2*
Heat Recovery System MJ/tonne cement - -105 -28*
Heating Requirement MJ/tonne cement 2068 1565 -
Purification MJ/tonne cement - 105 170
Compressors MJ/tonne cement 312.2* 208 35
Auxiliary Requirements MJ/tonne cement 51.3* 8.8 418
Total Energy demand MJ/tonne cement 2431.5 1370 761
Per CO2
ton captured MJ/ tonne CO2
4093 2374 1246
*Units converted to MJ/ton cement for comparison
Sources:[1] ECRA (2009), [2] Notz et. al (2011), [3] Vatopoulos & Tzimas (2012), [4] Volkart (2013), [5] Zeman (2009).

13. Life Cycle Inventory: Natural Gas Power Plant
Amine [1] [2]
-Nat Gas: 273.83
-Amines: 176.8 kg
Oxyfuel [1] [2]
-Nat Gas: 281.4 m3
Cal Looping [3]
-Nat Gas: 316.05 m3
-Limestone: 60 kg
-Coal: 60 kg
Combustion
-CO2
: 40.5 kg/MWh
-SO2
: 5.0 E-7 kg/MWh
-NOx
: 0.344 kg/MWh
-CO2
: 17.4 kg/MWh
-SO2
: 0.0039 kg/MWh
-NOx
: 0.194 kg/MWh
-CO2
: 24.3 kg/MWh
-SO2
: 0.0 kg/MWh
-NOx
: 1.08 kg/MWh
Sources: [1] Dillon et al. (2005), [2] IPCC (2005), [3] Sanchez-Biezma et al. (2011).
Output: 1 MWh net energy

14. Life Cycle Inventory: Cement Plant
Amine
-Nat Gas: 4.19*
-Lignite: 82.15
-Coal: 26.96
-Biogas: 32.97
-Elec: 101 kWh/t
cement
-Limestone: 750
-Clay: 190
-Sand: 30
-Gypsum: 20
-Laterite: 10
-Amines: 176.8
Oxyfuel
-Nat Gas: 2.89
-Lignite: 56.7
-Coal:18.6
-Biogas: 22.8
-Elec: 110 kWh/ t
cement
-Limestone: 770.03
-Clay: 195.4
-Sand: 30.9
-Gypsum: 20
-Laterite: 10.3
Cal Looping
-Nat Gas: 3.36
-Lignite: 65.97
-Coal: 21.65
-Biogas: 26.48
-Limestone: 700.7
-Clay: 195.4
-Sand: 30.9
-Gypsum:20
-Laterite:10.3
Processing
-CO2
: 84.9
-SO2
: 0.75 g/t cement
-NOx
: 784 g/t cement
-CO2
: 68.5
-SO2
: 15.3 g/t cement
-NOx
: 406 g/t cement
-CO2
: 74.7
-SO2
: 0.0 g/t cement
-NOx
: 804 g/t cement
*All units are kg/ tonne cement unless mentioned.
Sources: ECRA (2009), Monthip (2002), NREL (2015), SCG (2014), Vatopoulos & Tzimas (2012), Volkart (2013).
Output: 1 t cement

15. Phase III: Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Midpoint Categories:
Human Toxicity
Photochemical Oxidant Formation
Global Warming Potential
Acidification
Freshwater Aquatic Ecotoxicity
Eutrophication
Fossil Depletion
Endpoint Categories:
Human Health
Ecosystem
Resource Depletion

16. Midpoint Comparison: Natural Gas

17. Endpoint Comparison: Natural Gas

18. Midpoint Comparison: Cement

19. Endpoint Comparison: Cement

20. Phase IV: Implications
● Freshwater Eutrophication
○ Nutrient enrichment & oxygen
depletion
○ 8-109% increase in P-eq
● Global Warming Potential
○ Atmospheric radiative forcing
○ 70-85% reduction in CO2
-eq
● Human Toxicity
○ Acute human and aquatic carcinogens,
etc.
○ 8-138% increase in 1,4-DB-eq
● Terrestrial Acidification
○ Pollution of acidic components
○ SO2
-eq
● Fossil Fuel Depletion
○ Extraction & processing of raw
materials, additional energy demand
○ 9-96% increase in Oil-eq
● Photochemical Oxidant Formation
○ Tropospheric ozone formation
○ NMVOC-eq

21. Discussion: Storage & Utilization
Transportation: Pipeline, Container
Storage: Deep Ocean, Saline Aquifers
Utilization: Chemical, Food & Beverage, Electronics, Algae
ReCiPe Results for CO2
Transportation and Storage for 0.5 t CO2
over 100 km
Transportation Storage Total
GWP (kg CO2
-eq) 8.8 2.0*10-1
9.0
AP (kg SO2
-eq) 4.6*10-3
1.8*10-5
4.6*10-3
POFP (kg NMVOC-eq) 8.2*10-3
2.6*10-5
8.2*10-3
5-10% increase in GWP across plant scenarios

22. Discussion: Economics
Cement M$ Cap $/tonne cement $/tonne CO2
avoided
Reference $250 $56 -
Amine $600 $116 $60
C Looping $700 $100 $65
Oxyfuel $400 $80 $36
Natural Gas $/kW Cap c/KWh $/tonne CO2
avoided
Reference $570 3.7 -
Amine $890 4.93 $39
C Looping $1,400 10 $50
Oxyfuel $1,100 6.84 $45

23. Discussion: Economics
Natural Gas Power Plant Cement Plant
Economically Weighted Amine Scrubbing Oxyfuel Combustion
Environmentally Weighted Oxyfuel Combustion Calcium Looping
Our Recommendation Oxyfuel Combustion Oxyfuel Combustion
6%
$/tonne CO2
2x
$/tonne CO2
6-10%
Impact Diff.
40-60%
Impact Diff.

24. Conclusions
1. Carbon reduction at expense of other environmental impacts
2. Significant financial challenge depending on political support
3. Is it worth it for EGAT and SCG?
4. Potential for future advancements (hydrogen, algae)
● Thai Energy
○ Power Development Plan (PDP 2010)
○ National Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA 2020)
● Thai Cement
○ SCG - Sustainability 2015
○ World Business Council for Sustainable Development - Cement
Sustainability Initiative

25. Thank You
Next Steps:
● Journal Search
JGSEE - KMUTT
Ajarns: Shabbir Gheewala, Savitri Garivait, & Sebastian Bonnet
UNC Chapel Hill
Professors: Rich Kamens & Greg Gangi

26. Thank You