Imperial College London
Alternate

DrTomHills

Faculty of Engineering, Department of Chemical Engineering

Academic Visitor
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

thomas.hills07 Website CV

 
 
//

Location

 

Bone BuildingSouth Kensington Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Hills:2016:10.1021/acs.est.5b03508,
author = {Hills, T and Leeson, D and Florin, N and Fennell, P},
doi = {10.1021/acs.est.5b03508},
journal = {Environmental Science & Technology},
pages = {368--377},
title = {Carbon capture in the cement industry: technologies, progress, and retrofitting},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03508},
volume = {50},
year = {2016}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - Several different carbon-capture technologies have been proposed for use in the cement industry. This paper reviews their attributes, the progress that has been made toward their commercialization, and the major challenges facing their retrofitting to existing cement plants. A technology readiness level (TRL) scale for carbon capture in the cement industry is developed. For application at cement plants, partial oxy-fuel combustion, amine scrubbing, and calcium looping are the most developed (TRL 6 being the pilot system demonstrated in relevant environment), followed by direct capture (TRL 4–5 being the component and system validation at lab-scale in a relevant environment) and full oxy-fuel combustion (TRL 4 being the component and system validation at lab-scale in a lab environment). Our review suggests that advancing to TRL 7 (demonstration in plant environment) seems to be a challenge for the industry, representing a major step up from TRL 6. The important attributes that a cement plant must have to be “carbon-capture ready” for each capture technology selection is evaluated. Common requirements are space around the preheater and precalciner section, access to CO2 transport infrastructure, and a retrofittable preheater tower. Evidence from the electricity generation sector suggests that carbon capture readiness is not always cost-effective. The similar durations of cement-plant renovation and capture-plant construction suggests that synchronizing these two actions may save considerable time and money.
AU  - Hills,T
AU  - Leeson,D
AU  - Florin,N
AU  - Fennell,P
DO  - 10.1021/acs.est.5b03508
EP  - 377
PY  - 2016///
SN  - 0013-936X
SP  - 368
TI  - Carbon capture in the cement industry: technologies, progress, and retrofitting
T2  - Environmental Science & Technology
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03508
UR  - https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.5b03508
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/28937
VL  - 50
ER  -
Download