Aspen Plus v8.8 was used to perform techno-economic analysis (TEA) of a CO₂ capture process from a typical fuel gas stream in a 543-MW pre-combustion power plant using five different physical solvents (Selexol, PEGPDMS-1, NMP, [aPy][Tf₂N] and [hmim][Tf₂N]). The process included a countercurrent packed-bed absorber operating under high-pressure over a wide range of temperatures and three pressure-swing flash drums for solvent regeneration. Two packings, Mellapak 250Y and IMTP50, were used and the Levelized costs of CO₂ captured (LCOC) were calculated.

The simulation results indicated that using Mellapak 250Y exhibited lower LCOC values than those when using IMTP50 for the five solvents under all conditions used as it offered better mass transfer. The CO₂ capture process carried out at low temperatures showed lower LCOC values than those at higher temperatures due to the increased CO₂ solubility in the solvents at lower temperatures, requiring smaller absorber diameter and lower solvent circulation rates, which offset the cooling requirements. Comparing the lowest LCOC values for the five solvents, the hydrophobic PEGPDMS-1 solvent was the most promising one compared to the other four solvents, due to its lowest capital and operating costs and noncorrosive, which enabled using less expensive materials for the process equipment.

Aspen Plus软件v8.8用于进行一个CO的技术经济分析（TEA）₂从典型的燃料气体流中使用5种不同的物理溶剂（SELEXOL，PEGPDMS-1 543-MW的预燃烧发电厂捕获过程， NMP，[aPy] [Tf ₂ N]和[hmim] [Tf ₂ N]）。该工艺包括一个逆流填充床吸收器，该吸收器在高压下在很宽的温度范围内运行，并配备三个变压闪蒸鼓以再生溶剂。使用了两种填料，即Mellapak 250Y和IMTP50，并计算了捕集到的CO ₂的平均成本（LCOC）。

模拟结果表明，在所有使用的条件下，对于所有五种溶剂，使用Mellapak 250Y表现出的LCOC值均低于使用IMTP50时的LCOC值，因为它提供了更好的质量传递。由于在较低温度下在溶剂中的CO ₂溶解度增加，需要较小的吸收塔直径和较低的溶剂循环速率，这抵消了冷却要求，因此在低温下进行的CO ₂捕获过程显示出比较高温度下更低的LCOC值。比较这五种溶剂的最低LCOC值，与其他四种溶剂相比，疏水性PEGPDMS-1溶剂是最有前途的，这是因为其最低的投资成本和运营成本以及无腐蚀性，这使得使用较便宜的材料制造工艺设备成为可能。