4.8 Article

Molecular-Level Overhaul of γ-Aminopropyl Aminosilicone/Triethylene Glycol Post-Combustion CO2-Capture Solvents

期刊

CHEMSUSCHEM
卷 13, 期 13, 页码 3429-3438

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cssc.202000724

关键词

amines; CO2 capture; gas purification; molecular dynamics; solvents

资金

  1. Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy [FWP 65872]
  2. US Department of Energy [DE-AC05-76RL01830]
  3. National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), a U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science User Facility [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Capturing carbon dioxide from post-combustion gas streams is an energy-intensive process that is required prior to either converting or sequestering CO2. Although a few commercial 1st and 2nd generation aqueous amine technologies have been proposed, the cost of capturing CO2 with these technologies remains high. One approach to decrease costs of capture has been the development of water-lean solvents that aim to increase efficiency by reducing the water content in solution. Water-lean solvents, such as gamma-aminopropyl aminosilicone/triethylene glycol (GAP/TEG), are promising technologies, with the potential to halve the parasitic load to a coal-fired power plant, albeit only if high solution viscosities and hydrolysis of the siloxane moieties can be mitigated. This study concerns an integrated multidisciplinary approach to overhaul the GAP/TEG solvent system at the molecular level to mitigate hydrolysis while also reducing viscosity. Cosolvents and diluents are found to have negligible effects on viscosity and are not needed. This finding allows for the design of single-component siloxane-free diamine derivatives with site-specific incorporation of selective chemical moieties for direct placement and orientation of hydrogen bonding to reduce viscosity. Ultimately, these new formulations are less susceptible to hydrolysis and exhibit up to a 98 % reduction in viscosity compared to the initial GAP/TEG formulation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据