this work addresses the methodological challenges of undertaking techno-economic assessments of very early stage (technology readiness level 3–4) CO₂ capture technologies. It draws lessons from a case study on CO₂ capture from a natural gas combined cycle with exhaust gas recycle and electric swing adsorption technology. The paper shows that also for very early stage technologies it is possible to conduct techno-economic studies that give a sound first indication of feasibility, providing certain conditions are met. These conditions include the availability of initial estimates for the energy use of the capture technology, either from bench scale measurements, or from rigorous process models, and the possibility to draw up a generic (high level) equipment list. The paper shows that for meaningful comparison with incumbent technologies, the performance of very early stage technologies needs to be projected to a future, commercial state. To this end, the state of the art methods have to be adapted to control for the development and improvements that these technologies will undergo during the R&D cycle. We call this a hybrid approach. The paper also shows that CO₂ capture technologies always need to be assessed in sympathy with the CO₂ source (e.g. power plant) and compression plant, because otherwise unreliable conclusions could be drawn on their feasibility. For the case study, it is concluded that electric swing adsorption is unlikely to become economically competitive with current technologies, even in a highly optimised future state, where 50% of the regeneration duty is provided by LP steam and 50% by electricity: the net efficiency of an NGCC with EGR and optimised ESA (49.3%_LHV; min–max 45.8–50.4%_LHV) is lower than that of an NGCC with EGR and standard MEA (50.4%_LHV). Also, investment and operational costs are higher than MEA, which together with ESA’s lower efficiency leads to an unfavourable levelised cost of electricity: 103 €/MWh (min–max 93.89–117.31 €/MWh) for NGCC with ESA, versus 91 €/MWh for NGCC with MEA.

这项工作解决了在非常早期阶段（技术准备水平3-4）CO ₂捕集技术进行技术经济评估的方法学挑战。它从有关CO ₂的案例研究中吸取了教训利用废气再循环和电动回转吸附技术从天然气联合循环中捕集。本文表明，对于非常早期的技术，只要满足某些条件，就可以进行技术经济研究，从而对可行性进行合理的初步指示。这些条件包括从台式测量或严格的过程模型获得的捕集技术能耗的初步估计值，以及制定通用（高级）设备清单的可能性。本文表明，为了与现有技术进行有意义的比较，需要将非常早期阶段的技术的性能预测为未来的商业状态。为此，必须采用最先进的方法来控制这些技术在研发周期中的发展和改进。我们称其为混合方法。该文件还表明，CO₂捕获技术始终需要与CO ₂排放源（例如发电厂）和压缩工厂相提并论，因为否则可能无法得出可靠的结论。对于案例研究，得出的结论是，即使在高度优化的未来状态下，电摇摆吸附也不大可能与当前技术在经济上竞争，在这种情况下，再生蒸汽的50％由低压蒸汽提供，而50％的再生电力由电力提供：带有EGR和优化ESA的NGCC的效率（49.3％_LHV；最小-最大45.8-50.4％_LHV）比带有EGR和标准MEA的NGCC的效率（50.4％_LHV）低）。此外，投资和运营成本高于MEA，再加上ESA的效率较低，导致电费的平准化不利：带有ESA的NGCC的成本为103€/ MWh（最低-最高93.89-117.31€/ MWh），而91€/带有MEA的NGCC的MWh。