2 ▁captured ▁ ▁First ly , ▁Ca - loop ing ▁offers ▁greater ▁cost ▁advantage ▁compared ▁to ▁conventional ▁am ine - scr ub bing ▁techn ologies . ▁The ▁cost / metric ▁ton ▁for ▁CO 2 ▁captured ▁through ▁Ca - loop ing ▁is ▁~ $ 2 3 . 7 0 ▁whereas ▁that ▁for ▁CO 2 ▁captured ▁through ▁am ine ▁scr ub bing ▁is ▁about ▁$ 3 5 – $ 9 6 . ▁ ▁This ▁can ▁be ▁attributed ▁to ▁the ▁high ▁avail ability ▁and ▁low ▁cost ▁of ▁the ▁Ca O ▁sor b ent ▁( der ived ▁from ▁lim estone ) ▁as ▁compared ▁to ▁ME A . ▁Also , ▁as ▁discussed ▁in ▁section ▁ 2 , ▁Ca - loop ing ▁impos es ▁a ▁lower ▁energy ▁penalty ▁than ▁am ine ▁scr ub bing , ▁resulting ▁in ▁lower ▁energy ▁costs . ▁The ▁am ine ▁scr ub bing ▁process ▁is ▁energy ▁int ensive , ▁with ▁approximately ▁ 6 7 % ▁of ▁the ▁operating ▁costs ▁going ▁into ▁steam ▁requirements ▁for ▁sol vent ▁reg ener ation . ▁A ▁more ▁detailed ▁comparison ▁of ▁Ca - loop ing ▁and ▁am ine ▁scr ub bing ▁is ▁shown ▁below . ▁ ▁Cost ▁of ▁CO 2 ▁em issions ▁avoided ▁through ▁Ca - loop ing ▁ ▁In ▁addition , ▁the ▁cost ▁of ▁CO 2 ▁em issions ▁avoided ▁through ▁Ca - loop ing ▁is ▁lower ▁than ▁the ▁cost ▁of ▁em issions ▁avoided ▁via ▁an ▁o xy f uel ▁comb ust ion ▁process ▁( ~ US $ 2 3 . 8 / t ). ▁This ▁can ▁be ▁explained ▁by ▁the