Process modelling for CO2 capture The process modelling of the CO2 capture plant is conducted using an open-source MEA model funded by the US Department of Energy and developed by the Carbon Capture Simulation for Industry Impact (CCSI) in ASPEN PLUS . This model is validated against pilot-scale data from the US National Carbon Capture Centre (NCCC) . The reader is referred to Mullen et al. for a detailed description of the process modelling. However, the process does not notably differ from that of a traditional amine CO2 capture plant. Three distinct CO2 capture applications covering a range of CO2 flue gas concentrations have been considered for this work. A GE H-Class 1 X 1 combined cycle gas turbine (GE 9HA.01) with a rated thermal efficiency of 63.5% (LHV) serving a CCGT application, A 500 t/day of municipal solid waste (MSW) moving grate plant serving as the energy from waste (EfW) application and a 1000 MWhth (HHV) steam methane reformer (SMR) for hydrogen production as the final case. Two CO2 capture fractions were considered for each case, 95% (gross) and 100% (added), and two lean loadings of 0.1 and 0.2 mol/mol. Intercooling was included since it was found to be effective in counteracting oxidative degradation even when not required to avoid absorber 'pinching'. An additional CCGT case was considered where 95% CO2 capture was achieved at low lean loading and increased absorber packing to illustrate the energy-saving potential of these design modifications irrespective of CO2 capture fractions. This leads to a total of 11 cases assessed in this work (see Table ). A 35% wt. MEA solution was used in all cases. Flue gas compositions and flow rates were extracted from previously completed works by Mullen et al. and Su et al. . For each of the cases described in Table , the stripper pressure is modified to ensure that the inflection point described in Michailos and Gibbins is not passed. This leads to variable desorber operational pressures and, by extension, solvent regeneration temperature. Plated heat exchangers were assumed for all heat exchangers within the system, with holdup volume and residence time calculated using Eq 2.