01Apr 2019

MARINIZATION OF A TWO-STAGE MIXED STRUCTURED PACKING SCRUBBER FOR SOX ABATEMENT AND CO2 CAPTURE.

  • Institut Maritime du Quebec, Department of applied sciences, Rimouski, Canada.
  • Universite du Quebec a Rimouski, department of engineering, Rimouski, Canada.
  • Institut Technologique de Maintenance Industrielle (ITMI), Sept-Iles, Canada.
Crossref Cited-by Linking logo

  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

In this paper, a practical investigation to evaluate the impact of a two-stage mixed structured packing scrubber for SOx abatement and CO2 capture using amine solutions is presented. The practical test consists to connect the two-stage packing column to the diesel engine (DE) exhaust outlet. The first stage of the scrubber, fed with a sodium hydroxide solution, served as a SOX absorber, where the liquid flow rate and the sodium concentration are the operating variables. Gasses are then transported from the first stage to the second stage, where they encounter an amine solution that can be recycled in a closed loop to absorb residual CO2 streams. Tests are conducted with a 250kW diesel generator (DG) filled with a 0,5% Sulphur content fuel. Results revealed a significant decrease of SOX by an amount of 89% while CO2 capture has shown a decrease by an amount of 49%. However, drop pressure was detected when DG operates at high loads due to the fouling structured packing.

  1. Smith, T. W. P., Jalkanen, J. P., Anderson, B. A., Corbett, J. J., Faber, J., Hanayama, S., ... &Raucci, C. (2015). Third IMO GHG Study.
  2. Lindstad, H. E., &Eskeland, G. S. (2016). Environmental regulations in shipping: Policies leaning towards globalization of scrubbers deserve scrutiny.?Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment,?47, 67-76.
  3. Lindstad, H., Sandaas, I., &Str?mman, A. H. (2015). Assessment of cost as a function of abatement options in maritime emission control areas.?Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment,?38, 41-48.
  4. American Bureau of Shipping (2018). ABS Advisory on Exhaust Gas Scrubber Systems. https://ww2.eagle.org/content/dam/eagle/advisories-and-debriefs/exhaust-gas-scrubber-systems-advisory.pdf (accessed 29 January 2019).
  5. International Maritime Organization. Air Pollution, Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Default.aspx (2018, accessed 22 January 2019).
  6. Elgohary, M. M., Seddiek, I. S., & Salem, A. M. (2015). Overview of alternative fuels with emphasis on the potential of liquefied natural gas as future marine fuel.?Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment,?229(4), 365-375.
  7. Reynolds, K. J. (2011). Exhaust gas cleaning systems selection guide.?Ship operations cooperative program. The Glosten Associates.
  8. Wang, C., Corbett, J. J., &Winebrake, J. J. (2007). Cost-effectiveness of reducing sulfur emissions from ships.
  9. Caiazzo, G., Di Nardo, A., Langella, G., & Scala, F. (2012). Seawater scrubbing desulfurization: A model for SO2 absorption in fall‐down droplets.?Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy,?31(2), 277-287.
  10. Yang, Z. L., Zhang, D., Caglayan, O., Jenkinson, I. D., Bonsall, S., Wang, J., ... & Yan, X. P. (2012). Selection of techniques for reducing shipping NOx and SOx emissions.?Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment,?17(6), 478-486.
  11. Jiang, L., Kronbak, J., & Christensen, L. P. (2014). The costs and benefits of sulphur reduction measures: Sulphur scrubbers versus marine gas oil.?Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment,?28, 19-27.
  12. Ciatteo, V., Giacchetta, G., &Marchetti, B. (2014). Dynamic model for the economical evaluation of different technical solutions for reducing naval emissions.?International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management,?14(3), 314-335.
  13. Andersson, K., Baldi, F., Brynolf, S., Lindgren, J. F., Granhag, L., &Svensson, E. (2016). Shipping and the Environment. In Shipping and the Environment (pp. 3-27). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  14. Ibrahim, S. E. R. W. A. H. (2016). Process evaluation of a SOx and NOx exhaust gas cleaning concept for marine application. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg Google Scholar.
  15. Lloyd?s Register (2012). Understanding exhaust gas treatment systems: Guidance for shipowners and operators. London, United Kingdom, 2012.
  16. Reynolds, K. J. (2011). Exhaust gas cleaning systems selection guide.?Ship operations cooperative program. The Glosten Associates.
  17. MEPC (2008). 58/23 Annex 16, Report of the Marine Environment Protection committee on its fifty-eight session, International Maritime Organization.
  18. Eelco den Boer &Marten ?tHoen. Scrubbers- An economic and ecological assessment. Report, Delft, CE Delft, March 2015. Publication code: 15.4F41.20. https://www.nabu.de/downloads/150312-Scrubbers.pdf
  19. Cariou P. Is slow steaming a sustainable means of reducing CO2 emissions from container shipping? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment (2011); 16(3):260-264
  20. Kuiken K. Diesel engines: for ship propulsion and power plants from 0 to 100,000Kw. In: Regulations for propulsion engines, classification, repair and damage. Third ed. Netherlands: Onnen Target Global Energy Training, 2017, pp. 398-424.
  21. Yeh, J. T., Pennline, H. W., &Resnik, K. P. (2001).?Study of CO2Absorption and Desorption in a Packed Column. Energy & Fuels, 15(2), 274?278.

[Mohamad Issa, Philippe Beaulac, Hussein Ibrahim and Adrian Ilinca. (2019); MARINIZATION OF A TWO-STAGE MIXED STRUCTURED PACKING SCRUBBER FOR SOX ABATEMENT AND CO2 CAPTURE. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 7 (Apr). 73-82] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com

Mohamad Issa
Institut Maritime du Quebec, Department of applied sciences, Rimouski, Canada

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/8793      
DOI URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/8793

Download Full Paper

Download PDF No. of Downloads: 76 | No. of Views: 198