Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Steam
Acid gases
Methane-rich tailgas
H2-rich tailgas
Back to compression
Demethanizer
Ali Vatani
University of Tehran
Deethanizer
lthough gas flaring is necessary at some chemical process industries (CPI) plants
or facilities, more and more
efforts are underway to reduce flaring,
not only to help reduce emissions of
air pollutants, noise and light, but also
to save both energy and raw materials, which translates into money
potentially millions of dollars.
Today, plant operators are becoming more conscientious about reducing the release of greenhouse gases
(GHGs), especially carbon dioxide, in
an attempt to prevent further global
warming. In some countries, existing
or pending regulations on the release
of GHGs, or the imposition of carbon
taxes are forcing operators to rethink
the simple option of gas flaring.
In some cases, however, it can
make good economic sense to recover rather than burn the flare
gases, which are often valuable hydrocarbons that can be used as fuel
or even feedstock. The investment
costs for adding a flare-gas recovery unit (FGRU) can thus be offset by
utilizing the energy or the resources
(or both) recovered by the FGRU.
The environment benefits by reducing the volume of flare gases that are
actually flared.
In this article, we investigate methods to recover flare gases and thus
reduce gas flaring in olefin plants. As
an example, the benefits of installing
an FGRU after the cold flare drum at
an ethylene plant are presented.
The article examines flare-gas
recovery methods and the advantages of applying them to olefin
plants. The case study presented
here concludes that significant
amounts of ethylene and fuel gas
66
Feed
TLE
C2
splitter
Water
Ethylene
Depropanizer
Gas
C3 splitter
Debutanizer
TLE
Recycle
Quench and
fractionation section
Compressor and
condensate section
Hydrocarbon-separation section
Gasoline
Propylene
Olefin plants
Olefin units (Figure 1) are among the
most profitable plants in the petrochemicals industry. Due to the nature
of these units, there is a good potential for using FGRUs during startups
to reduce emissions and recover
capital. Given the expanding number of olefin units in the world today,
with flaring an integral part of the factories, large amounts of energy and
capital are lost. Therefore, it makes
good sense to consider more deeply
the use of FGRUs with such units.
essential [24].
Flares are classified according to
different viewpoints, for example in
terms of the following:
Height elevated (according to
the support, which can be self
supported, guyed wire, derrick)
and ground flares
Assisted fluid for smokeless operation steam-assisted or airassisted flares
Combustion chamber open,
semi-open or closed flares
Number of tips multipoint or
matrix flares
Flare-gas pressure high-,
medium- or low-pressure flares
Special areas storage areas or
terminals can have dedicated flares
MAY 2015
Flare header
To flare
Carbon bed for C5+ recovery
To flare
(downstream
of water
seal)
Water seal
Compressor
suction
scrubber
Filter
Blower
C5+ separator
Vacuum
pump
Vacuum
pump
C5+
stream
Propylene-rich stream
Compressor
WWW.CHEMENGONLINE.COM
MAY 2015
Bursting disc
Flareopening
valve
(FOV)
Ethylene/ethane
to quench
tower
Flare
Flare
gas
WF drum
Cooler
To flare
Separator
Fresh caustic
Liquid-ring compressor
Spent caustic
FIGURE 3. This proposed FGRU can be used on the outlet of the wet flare drum to return C2 components
to the quench tower
Bursting disc
Flareopening
valve
Flare
Flare gas
Compressor
C3 to refrigeration cycle
or C3+ storage
To flare
FIGURE 4. This proposed FRGU can be used on the outlet from the dry and cold flare drum for the recovery of C3 components
Bursting disc
H2 and CH4
Flareopening
valve
Ethylene
Flare
Olefin
unit
Cooler
Flare
Separator
Compressor
FIGURE 5. The design for a FGRU used on the outlet of the cold flare drum to recover ethylene, methane
and fuel gas
simpler components
Regardless of which method is
used, the recovery of some or all of
the flare gases will decrease combustion products and the release of pollutants into the atmosphere, reduce
fuel requirements and minimize flare68
MAY 2015
Without FGRU
(lb/h)
With FGRU
(lb/h)
NOx
9.90
6.65
CO
71.42
48.01
CO2
75.50
50.76
Distance (m)
Without FGRU
With FGRU
Without FGRU
With FGRU
10
5.66
3.46
86.30
85.00
20
5.87
3.44
86.19
84.89
30
6.04
3.40
86.02
84.72
40
6.14
3.32
85.78
84.49
50
6.17
3.23
85.50
84.21
60
6.14
3.12
85.18
83.89
70
6.04
2.99
84.83
83.54
80
5.88
2.85
84.46
83.17
90
5.67
2.71
84.08
82.78
100
5.42
2.56
83.68
82.39
tion of the capacity of the compressor system that is used [9, 10].
Where:
Q = production rate
Ex = emissions of pollutant x, lb/h
EFx = emission factor of x (from the
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's compilation of emission
factors, AP-42 [11]
Table 1 shows the results of the
calculation for the emissions of NOx,
CO and CO2 before and after the installation of a FGRU.
Noise and radiation. The thermal
radiation and noise level as a function of distance from the flare can be
calculated using commercial software for flare systems. The results
of these calculations are presented
in Table 2.
It is also possible to make quick
estimates of the thermal radiation
released during flaring of gases by
using Equation (3):
(3)
Where:
Q = production rate
H = heating value
V = volume of gas
A simple calculation for noise emissions can also be performed using
Equation (4), which is based on the
VDI 3732 Guidelines for an elevated
flare [12]:
(1)
Of course, complete combustion
is not normally achieved in flares,
so there will also be carbon monoxide, NOx and other hydrocarbons
released during flaring. A simpler
way to calculate the effluent of pollutants during flaring is to use Equations (2):
WWW.CHEMENGONLINE.COM
(2)
MAY 2015
(4)
Where
LWA = weighted average sound
power of the total noise emitted, dB
q = gas mass flowrate, ton/h
q0 = reference mass flowrate, ton/h
For a flare that burns a gas stream
of 90 m.t./h with a heat of combustion of 2,390 kJ/kg, Equations (3)
69
Payback
Table 3 shows that the total investment costs for the FGRU proposed
in Figure 5, which is capable of handling a flare-gas stream of 90 m.t./h,
is about $30 million [13, 14].
Based on the installation of such a
FGRU after the cold flare drum, we
have calculated that 43.3 m.t./h of
ethylene and 10.8 m.t./h of fuel gas
can be recovered and returned to
the olefin plant. The value of the recovered gases is roughly equivalent
to about $52,000/h.
According to monitoring studies,
this olefin plant has about 185 hours
of flaring per year during planned or
Item
$16,900,000
Equipment
$3,890,000
Instrumentation
$997,000
Piping
$797,000
Electrical
$5,980,000
Operation
$26,300
$29,800,000
Total
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank
Najem Beg and Sacha Sarshar from
Caltec Co., and Gholamreza Jokar
Refrences
1. Process Analytics in Ethylene Production Plants, Oil &
Gas Industry, 2007.
2. Ghadyanlou, F., Flare Design, 1st ed., Andishesara
Publishing Co., March, 2011.
3. Shahini, M.,Flare Gas Management, Jahanno Publishing Co., 2th Ed., March 2011.
4. Baukal, C.E. and Schwartz, R. E., The John zink Combustion Handbook, 1st ed., CRC Press,March 27, 2001.
5. Falaqi, F. H., "The Miracle of Petrochemicals-Olefin Industry: An In-Depth Look at Steam Crackers, Universal
Publishers, Fla., 2009.
6. Liu, C., and Xu, Q., Emission Source Characterization
for Proactive Flare Minimization during Ethylene Plant
Start-ups, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 49, 2010, pp. 5,734
5,741.
7. Yang, X, Xu, Q. and Li, K., Flare Minimization Strategy
for Ethylene Plants, Chem. Eng. Technology, 33, No. 7,
2010, pp. 1,0591,065.
8. Page, J. E., Reduction of Hydrocarbon Losses to Flare
Systems,1st Industry Technology Conference, Houston,
April 2225,1979.
9. Zadakbar, O., Vatani, A. and Karimpour, K. Flare Gas Recovery in Oil and Gas Refineries, Oil and Gas Science
and Technology, Rev. IFP, Vol. 63, No. 6, 2008, pp.
705711.
10. Blanton, R. E., Environmentally and Economically Benefical Flare Gas Recovery Projects in Petrochemical Facilities,
National Petroleum Refiner's Assn. Environmental Conference West, San Antonio, Tex., September 2010.
11. AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors,
5th ed., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42.
12. VDI 3732 Characteristic Noise Emissions Values of
Technical Sound Sources Flares, VDI Guideline, Verein
Deutscher Ingenieure, Dsseldorf, Germany, 1990.
13. Trambouze, P., Petroleum Refining Material and
Equipment, Vol. 4,Technip Editions, Paris, 1994.
14. M. Peters, M., Timmerhaos, K. and West, R. E., Plant
Design and Economic for Chemical Engineers, 5th ed.,
McGraw-Hill Co. New York, December 2002.
Authors
Technology Metals | Advanced Ceramics
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
MAY 2015