Benjamin Rue Wood

A Computational Study of the Heats of Reaction of Substituted Monoethanolamine with CO2

Various amines have been considered as materials for chemical capture of CO(2) through liquid-phase reactions to form either carbamate or carbamic acid products. One of the main challenges in these CO(2)-amine reactions lies in tuning the heat of reaction to achieve the correct balance between the extent of reaction and the energy cost for regeneration. In this work, we use a computational approach to study the effect of substitution on the heats of reaction of monoethanolamine (MEA). We use ab initio methods at the MP2/aug-cc-pVDZ level, coupled with geometries generated from B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) density functional theory along with the conductor-like polarizable continuum model to compute the heats of reaction. We consider two possible reaction products: carbamate, having a 2:1 amine:CO(2) reaction stoichiometry, and carbamic acid, having a 1:1 stoichiometry. We have considered CH(3), NH(2), OH, OCH(3), and F substitution groups at both the α- and β-carbon positions of MEA. We have experimentally measured heats of reaction for MEA and both α- and β-CH(3)-substituted MEA to test the predictions of our model. We find quantitative agreement between the predictions and experiments. We have also computed the relative basicities of the substituted amines and found that the heats of reaction for both carbamate and carbamic acid products are linearly correlated with the computed relative basicities. Weaker basicities result in less exothermic heats of reaction. Heats of reaction for carbamates are much more sensitive to changes in basicity than those for carbamic acids. This leads to a crossover in the heat of reaction so that carbamic acid formation becomes thermodynamically favored over carbamate formation for the weakest basicities. This provides a method for tuning the reaction stoichiometry from 2:1 to 1:1.

Aminosilicone Solvents for CO2 Capture

This work describes the first report of the use of an aminosilicone solvent mix for the capture of CO(2). To maintain a liquid state, a hydroxyether co-solvent was employed which allowed enhanced physisorption of CO(2) in the solvent mixture. Regeneration of the capture solvent system was demonstrated over 6 cycles and absorption isotherms indicate a 25-50 % increase in dynamic CO(2) capacity over 30 % MEA. In addition, proof of concept for continuous CO(2) absorption was verified. Additionally, modeling to predict heats of reaction of aminosilicone solvents with CO(2) was in good agreement with experimental results.

Novel High Capacity Oligomers for Low Cost CO2 Capture

The novel concept of using a molecule possessing both physi-sorbing and chemi-sorbing properties for post-combustion CO2 capture was explored and mixtures of aminosilicones and hydroxyterminated polyethers had the best performance characteristics of materials examined. The optimal solvent composition was a 60/40 blend of GAP-1/TEG and a continuous bench-top absorption/desorption unit was constructed and operated. Plant and process models were developed for this new system based on an existing coal-fired power plant and data from the laboratory experiments were used to calculate an overall COE for a coal-fired power plant fitted with this capture technology. A reduction in energy penalty, from 30% to 18%, versus an optimized 30% MEA capture system was calculated with a concomitant COE decrease from 73% to 41% for the new aminosilicone solvent system.

Bench-Scale Silicone Process for Low-Cost CO{sub 2} Capture

This report presents system and economic analysis for a carbon capture unit which uses an amino-silicone solvent for CO{sub 2} capture and sequestration (CCS) in a pulverized coal (PC) boiler. The amino-silicone solvent is based on GAP-1 with tri-ethylene glycol (TEG) as a co-solvent. For comparison purposes, the report also shows results for a CCS unit based on a conventional approach using mono-ethanol amine (MEA). At a steam temperature of 395 °C (743 °F), the CCS energy penalty for amino-silicone solvent is only 30.4% which compares to a 35.9% energy penalty for MEA. The increase in COE for the amino-silicone solvent relative to the non-capture case is between 98% and 103% (depending on the solvent cost) which compares to an ~109% COE cost increase for MEA. In summary, the amino-silicone solvent has significant advantages over conventional systems using MEA.