Development of Biomimetic Membranes for Near Zero PC Power Plant Emissions

The first objective of this project was to develop, evaluate and compare two different CO2 separation (capture) systems. The second was to carry the preferred solution to pre-pilot development and testing. To achieve these objectives we undertook several infrastructure enabling elements: (1) development of a preferred catalyst coupled with its immobilization onto a microporous polymer membrane, (2) design and development of a microporous membrane-based, contained liquid membrane permeator and a membrane-based absorber/desorber apparatus, (3) development of a resin-wafer electrodialytic absorber/desorber apparatus, (4) development and demonstration of a pre-treatment process to condition the feed gas stream, (5) and development of computer modeling of the components and of the integrated system. The first technology was an enzyme catalyzed, membrane supported, contained liquid membrane apparatus whose gas capture was pressure/vacuum and temperature driven. A first embodiment was as a permeator, i.e. a combined absorber/desorber in a single housing. The second embodiment was as discrete absorber and desorber units. The second technology was an enzyme catalyzed, ion exchange resin wafer electrodialytically-based separation. For each of these technologies the objective was to design, manufacture, test and demonstrate the apparatus, first in the laboratory and then at pre-pilot scale, and to run it for sufficient time at the pre-pilot scale to demonstrate stability even in the face of upset. Tests would include several ranks of coal, which had been appropriately pre-treated to remove NOx, SOx and particles, to a pre-determined acceptance level, as a basis for demonstrating efficient CO{sub 2} capture. The pre-pilot tests would be run at the Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) in North Dakota. A larger scale test (400m{sup 2} test unit) would later be run also at EERC. An economic goal was to compare the cost of CO{sub 2} capture by each of these methods with values obtained when using MEA (monoethanolamine) as a baseline case. Other metrics included capital and operating expense, parasitic loss and cost of electricity. A final goal was to carry out an initial examination of market forces to understand what barriers to entry for installation of CO{sub 2} capture equipment might exist and their relative importance