The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of techno-economic models for the retrofitting of conventional pulverised-coal power plants for post-combustion capture (PCC) of CO2
Abstract
In this paper, we compare and contrast the four most promising (i.e. commercially viable in the near future) technologies for the post-combustion capture (PCC) of CO2 that can be retrofitted to a conventional pulverised-coal power plant. These are CO2 capture using: (i) chilled ammonia, (ii) alkali-metal carbonates, (iii) membranes and (iv) calcium looping. These four technologies are compared to the benchmark monoethanolamine (MEA) scrubbing process in terms of efficiency penalty and cost indicators. We first review the relevant CO2 capture chemistry and typical process flow schematics, and then discuss energy- and mass-balance considerations. We consider 18 published techno-economic studies on these technologies and highlight the key measures, including net CO2 capture rate, net power output, net plant efficiency, capital costs, cost of electricity and cost of CO2 avoided. Calcium looping technology results in the lowest efficiency penalty (4.6%-points) and cost of PCC (36.3% increase in levelised cost of electricity). In addition, the cost of CO2 avoided by employing calcium looping for PCC can be as low as 29 USD2010 per tCO2. On all three of these criteria, calcium looping performs more than twice as well as the benchmark MEA PCC process.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Robeson, L. M. (2008) · Journal of Membrane Science · doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2008.04.030 · Cited by 5,917
IPCC special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage
Metz, B., Davidson, O. R., de Coninck, H., Loos, M., & Meyer, L. (2021) · Cited by 4,875
Advances in CO2 capture technology—The U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Sequestration Program
Figueroa, J. D., Fout, T., Plasynski, S., McIlvried, H., & Srivastava, R. D. (2008) · International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control · doi:10.1016/s1750-5836(07)00094-1 · Cited by 2,281
Post-Combustion CO 2 Capture Using Solid Sorbents: A Review
Samanta, A., Zhao, A., Shimizu, G. K. H., Sarkar, P., & Gupta, R. (2012) · Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · doi:10.1021/ie200686q · Cited by 1,889
An overview of CO2 capture technologies
MacDowell, N., Florin, N., Buchard, A., Hallett, J., Galindo, A., Jackson, G., Adjiman, C. S., Williams, C. K., Shah, N., & Fennell, P. (2010) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c004106h · Cited by 1,636
Post-combustion CO2 capture with chemical absorption: A state-of-the-art review
Wang, M., Lawal, A., Stephenson, P., Sidders, J., & Ramshaw, C. (2011) · Chemical Engineering Research and Design · doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2010.11.005 · Cited by 1,458
Worldwide innovations in the development of carbon capture technologies and the utilization of CO2
Markewitz, P., Kuckshinrichs, W., Leitner, W., Linssen, J., Zapp, P., Bongartz, R., Schreiber, A., & Müller, T. E. (2012) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c2ee03403d · Cited by 1,202
The calcium looping cycle for large-scale CO2 capture
Blamey, J., Anthony, E. J., Wang, J., & Fennell, P. S. (2010) · Progress in Energy and Combustion Science · doi:10.1016/j.pecs.2009.10.001 · Cited by 1,044
Pushing the limits on possibilities for large scale gas separation: which strategies?
Koros, W. J., & Mahajan, R. (2000) · Journal of Membrane Science · doi:10.1016/s0376-7388(00)00418-x · Cited by 868
Abu-Zahra, M. R. M., Niederer, J. P. M., Feron, P. H. M., & Versteeg, G. F. (2007) · International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control · doi:10.1016/s1750-5836(07)00032-1 · Cited by 857
Cited by
Recycling of carbon dioxide to methanol and derived products – closing the loop
Goeppert, A., Czaun, M., Jones, J.-P., Surya Prakash, G. K., & Olah, G. A. (2014) · Chem. Soc. Rev. · doi:10.1039/c4cs00122b · Cited by 1,528
Deep Eutectic Solvents: Physicochemical Properties and Gas Separation Applications
García, G., Aparicio, S., Ullah, R., & Atilhan, M. (2015) · Energy & Fuels · doi:10.1021/ef5028873 · Cited by 1,112
Biomass-based chemical looping technologies: the good, the bad and the future
Zhao, X., Zhou, H., Sikarwar, V. S., Zhao, M., Park, A.-H. A., Fennell, P. S., Shen, L., & Fan, L.-S. (2017) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c6ee03718f · Cited by 558
Self-citationCarbon dioxide capture using biochar produced from sugarcane bagasse and hickory wood
Creamer, A. E., Gao, B., & Zhang, M. (2014) · Chemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2014.03.105 · Cited by 432
Calcium looping sorbents for CO2 capture
Erans, M., Manovic, V., & Anthony, E. J. (2016) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.07.074 · Cited by 369
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhao, M., Minett, A. I., & Harris, A. T.
- Venue
- Energy Environ. Sci.
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25-40
- ISSN
- 1754-5692 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-5706
- OpenAlex
- W2129804024
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 64
- FWCI
- 29.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review of techno-economic models for the retrofitting of conventional pulverised-coal power plants for post-combustion capture (PCC) of CO2. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c2ee22890d
- The paper
- Zhao, M., Minett, A. I., & Harris, A. T. (2013). A review of techno-economic models for the retrofitting of conventional pulverised-coal power plants for post-combustion capture (PCC) of CO2. Energy Environ. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2ee22890d
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
