The degradation framework assumes that once the solvent exits the absorber packing and enters the sump it is no longer in contact with O2 from the flue gas. The authors consider this assumption optimistic as, in reality, the solvent in the absorber sump will still have some exposure to the flue gas or downcoming solvent, replacing the consumed O2 to some degree. To investigate the magnitude of this effect, a sensitivity analysis shows that when a continually O2-saturated sump is assumed, the magnitude of total MEA degradation within the system for the CCGT case with 100% added CO2 capture increases by 13.4%, placing an upper bound on the magnitude of this effect as it expected that dissolved O2 in the sump is unlikely to be entirely replaced by the stated mechanisms. Likewise, process modifications that remove dissolved O2 from the solvent solution, either prior to or post sump, i.e. flashing or sparging, should reduce indirect oxidative degradation proportional to its removal efficiency. Due to the increased temperatures seen in the cross-heat exchanger, by the time the solvent reaches the stripper column, the dissolved O2 is predicted to have been entirely consumed in all cases. Reduced O2 concentration in the export CO2 stream is a crucial CO2 pipeline specification due to downstream pipeline integrity concerns. As a result, deoxygenation systems are often included in the design downstream of the stripper at considerable capital expenditure. That being the case, should this be confirmed through pilot or operational studies, it may allow the omission or reduction in the capacity of the deoxygenation system, leading to a reduction in capital and operational expenditure. This may not be the case for alternative, less reactive, solvents. When considering thermal degradation, a pronounced effect is evident. Despite the decreased carbamate concentration in the leaner solvent reducing the rate of thermal degradation at a given temperature, the increased regeneration temperature required to achieve a lower lean loading outstrips this limiting effect, resulting in a 3 to 4-fold increase in thermal degradation when regeneration pressure (and temperature as a result) is increased to efficiently produce a solvent with a lean loading of 0.1mol/mol vs 0.2mol/mol. This appears to be an unavoidable consequence of operating at higher regeneration pressures and indicates that a designer should utilise the lowest regeneration pressure, and hence temperature, that will achieve the required trade-offs between solvent degradation, energy efficiency and CAPEX while being aware of the increased degradation rate and adjusting the solvent management regime accordingly. This work highlights stripper sump residence time as a key design variable for minimising thermal degradation. A buffer store of lean solvent can aid in operational flexibility by enabling the rapid response to changing absorber conditions without the delay of producing additional lean solvent. However, utilising the stripper sump to provide this storage capacity will lead to excessive thermal degradation. Storage of cold lean solvent after the cross-heat exchanger could mitigate this. Some key limitations apply to this study. The degradation framework used in this work does not consider the effect of longterm degradation compound accumulation and removal within the circulating solvent, interactions between the thermal and oxidative degradation compounds or the catalytic effect of corrosion compounds on solvent degradation. As such, the results presented in this manuscript should be considered predictive only for a perfectly clean solvent. Over an extended period of operation, actual MEA consumption rates are expected to diverge from those predicted by the framework, particularly as dissolved metals catalyse oxidative degradation, likely trending towards increasing consumption unless contaminants within the solvent are maintained at a low level via an effective solvent reclamation system. Also, we do not consider the effect any additional solvent degradation will have on atmospheric emissions or the associated control techniques, solvent management regimes or waste production. Additionally, the operational conditions proposed for 100% added CO2 capture operation would also provide a reduced energy penalty for lower CO2 capture fraction operation should the resulting solvent degradation rates be deemed economically acceptable. Likewise, if solvent degradation is more critical to a project than thermal efficiency, lean loadings sufficient to achieve high CO2 capture fractions can be achieved at lower temperature regeneration conditions. Finally, the intercooler arrangements presented here are not considered optimum, and it is likely that further benefits, both thermodynamic and degradation-related, could be achieved with a dedicated optimisation effort. This work aims to compare the solvent degradation rates at proposed design points for the considered CO2 capture fractions that the authors consider to be valid and viable, acknowledging that such design points are project-specific and do not represent an absolute economic optimum, as no such point can exist. Even so, this study serves as a first step towards quantifying the effect increasing CO2 capture fractions in post-combustion CO2 capture plants will have on solvent degradation. We identify key areas for further study and validation in test facilities as well as design considerations that may help mitigate solvent degradation. The learnings presented here can serve to advise project designs and researchers alike when considering operating at 100% added CO2 capture, a development the authors believe to be critical if post-combustion CO2 capture is to be compatible with a Net Zero world.