HIGH-EFFICIENCY

DESIGN WITH CUSTOM

BACK-END WASTE
HEAT RECOVERY.

HIGH-PERFORMANCE
EMISSION CONTROLS –
FOR THE LOWEST LEVELS
OF CO AND NOX AS
LOW AS 2PPM.

COMPLETE SYSTEMS
CUSTOM DESIGNED
FOR THE MOST
STRINGENT CUSTOMER
SPECIFICATIONS.

RENTECH BOILERS.
AS TOUGH AS TEXAS.
PRODUCTS SOLUTIONS
Heat Recovery Steam Generators Refining and Petrochemical
Waste Heat Boilers Power Generation
Fired Packaged Watertube Boilers Manufacturing & Institutional
Specialty Boilers Food Processing
CHP
WWW.RENTECHBOILERS.COM

Select 53 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com

PROCESS
OPTIMIZATION
Calculate gasoline component properties

Setting refinery profitability goals

PROCESS CONTROL AND

INSTRUMENTATION
Mitigating corrosion challenges
from opportunity crudes

The benefits of automatic batch distillation

CATALYSTS
Novel semi-regenerative reforming catalyst
increases unit efficiency and productivity

BUSINESS TRENDS
Sustainability: Clean fuels—
The advancement to zero sulfur
Select 75 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 JUNE 2019 | Volume 98 Number 6
HydrocarbonProcessing.com

10

36

SPECIAL FOCUS: PROCESS OPTIMIZATION DEPARTMENTS

37 Set refinery profitability goals 4 Industry Perspectives
E. Johnson, A. Johnson and N. Lieberman 10 Business Trends
43 Linear vs. nonlinear: Calculate gasoline component properties 17 Industry Metrics
L. E. Curcio 19 Construction
85 Innovations
47 Air-cooled steam surface condenser case study: Retrofit vs. revamp
R. Pramanik and N. R. Srinath 88 Advertiser Index
89 Marketplace
CATALYSTS 90 Events
51 Novel semi-regenerative reforming catalyst
increases unit efficiency and productivity COLUMNS
A. Jawandhiya and R. Dieterich
9 Editorial Comment
HEAT TRANSFER The true essence of optimization

55 Welded plate heat exchangers cut refinery process costs—Part 2 23 Reliability

R. Broad and P. Kauders Know the pitfalls of excessively
high oil viscosity
PROCESS CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION
27 Petrochemicals
63 The benefits of automatic batch distillation DME market outlook impacted by
H. Ingham and G. Sverdlov clean fuels demand, diesel emissions

67 Mitigating corrosion challenges from opportunity crudes 29 Engineering Case Histories

Case 107: Weld failures
K. Wold
in vibrating equipment
71 Raman spectroscopy for the optimization of hydrogen usage in refineries 31 Risk
S. Sutherland Navigating energy volatility:
Understanding the principles of
MAINTENANCE AND RELIABILITY commodity risk management
77 Equipment life assessment—An exercise 33 Executive Viewpoint
A. Anwer Trends in the global process
furnace market
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
79 The new normal in petrochemical revamp projects
J. Prajapati, C. Sheth and N. Mangukia

ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY

83 Can nuclear power plant methodologies help improve
hydrocarbon processing reliability?—Part 2
S. A. Pradhan and A. Abdelkhaliq

GAS PROCESSING SUPPLEMENT

GP-1 Technology and Business Information for the Global Gas Processing Industry

Cover Image: The Gazprom Neft Omsk refinery is making capital-intensive investments to increase
the production of ultra-low-sulfur fuels. Photo courtesy of Gazprom Neft.

www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
P. O. Box 2608
Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA
Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301
Fax: +1 (713) 520-4433
Editors@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

PUBLISHER Catherine Watkins

Industry Perspectives EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER

EDITORIAL
Lee Nichols

Executive Editor Adrienne Blume

Managing Editor Mike Rhodes

What topics do you want Digital Editor

Technical Editor
Stephanie Bartels
Sumedha Sharma

to hear about?
Throughout Hydrocarbon Processing’s 97 yr of publishing
technical material for the refining and petrochemical indus-
tries, the journal has focused on numerous topics to optimize
downstream processing facility operations. These topics in-
clude process optimization, catalysts, maintenance and reli-
ability, environment and safety, heat transfer, project manage-
ment, and many more.
Over the past several years, new technologies and trends
have provided the publication with new topics to focus tech-
nical editorial to its global reach of subscribers. For example,
digital transformation has provided the industry with inventive
ways to monitor equipment, increase energy efficiency, opti-
mize supply chains and operations, and safeguard against cyber
threats, among other benefits, to ensure safe, reliable and prof-
itable operations. This drive for enhanced digital technology
adoption has provided Hydrocarbon Processing with a plethora
of new technical material within its Digitalization section.
The newest section, to be unveiled in the July issue, will
focus on sustainability. The HP Sustainability section will in-
clude technical articles and trends analysis on the downstream
processing industry’s drive to optimize sustainable practices.
This includes the process of managing available resources, in-
vestments and technologies to maintain and optimize opera-
tions for greater safety, reliability, efficiency, and environmen-
tal and social awareness.
As Hydrocarbon Processing adds new sections to the publi-
cation, our editors continue to seek opinions from the jour-
nal’s global audience. We want to know what you want more
of within the magazine. With all publications, it is imperative
to provide the audience what it wants. Therefore, the editors
have posted a new poll on the Hydrocarbon Processing website
to gauge what technical topics interest our readers and will
provide the most value to our global audience. These topics
can include:
• Maintenance and reliability
• Process engineering and optimization
• Catalysts
• Project management
• Environment and safety
• Process controls and instrumentation
• Digital transformation
Reliability/Equipment Editor Heinz P. Bloch
Contributing Editor Alissa Leeton
Contributing Editor ARC Advisory Group
Contributing Editor Anthony Sofronas
MAGAZINE PRODUCTION / +1 (713) 525-4633
Vice President, Production Sheryl Stone
Manager, Advertising Production Cheryl Willis
Assistant Manager, Advertising Production Dasha Ivanova
Manager, Editorial Production Angela Bathe Dietrich
Assistant Manager, Editorial Production Lindsey Craun
Graphic Designer Krista Norman
Artist/Illustrator David Weeks
ADVERTISING SALES
See Sales Offices, page 88.
CIRCULATION / +1 (713) 520-4498 / Circulation@GulfEnergyInfo.com
Director, Circulation Suzanne McGehee
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Subscription price (includes both print and digital versions): One year $399,
two years $679, three years $897. Airmail rate outside North America $175 addi-
tional a year. Single copies $35, prepaid.
Hydrocarbon Processing’s Full Data Access subscription plan is priced at $1,995.
This plan provides full access to all information and data Hydrocarbon Processing
has to offer. It includes a print or digital version of the magazine, as well as full
access to all posted articles (current and archived), process handbooks, the
HPI Market Data book, Construction Boxscore Database project updates and more.
Because Hydrocarbon Processing is edited specifically to be of greatest value to
people working in this specialized business, subscriptions are restricted to those
engaged in the hydrocarbon processing industry, or service and supply company
personnel connected thereto.
Hydrocarbon Processing is indexed by Applied Science & Technology Index, by
Chemical Abstracts and by Engineering Index Inc. Microfilm copies available through
University Microfilms, International, Ann Arbor, Mich. The full text of Hydrocarbon
Processing is also available in electronic versions of the Business Periodicals Index.
DISTRIBUTION OF ARTICLES
Published articles are available for distribution in a PDF format or as professionally
printed handouts. Contact Foster Printing at Mossberg & Co. for a price quote and
details about how you can customize with company logo and contact information.
For more information, contact Jill Kaletha with Foster Printing at
Mossberg & Co. at +1 (800) 428-3340 x 149 or jkaletha@mossbergco.com.
Hydrocarbon Processing (ISSN 0018-8190) is published monthly by Gulf Energy
Information, 2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, Houston, Texas 77046. Periodicals post-
age paid at Houston, Texas, and at additional mailing office. POSTMASTER: Send
address changes to Hydrocarbon Processing, P.O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252.
Copyright © 2019 by Gulf Energy Information. All rights reserved.
Permission is granted by the copyright owner to libraries and others registered
with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) to photocopy any articles herein for
the base fee of $3 per copy per page. Payment should be sent directly to the CCC,
21 Congress St., Salem, Mass. 01970. Copying for other than personal or internal
reference use without express permission is prohibited. Requests for special
permission or bulk orders should be addressed to the Editor. ISSN 0018-8190/01.

• Sustainability
• Valves, pumps and turbomachinery
• Regional trends and capital expenditures
• Water management
• Other.
Visit HydrocarbonProcessing.com and cast
your votes. Your feedback will help Hydrocarbon
Processing focus on the topics its readers
are most passionate in pursuing.
President/CEO John Royall
CFO Alan Millis
Vice President Andy McDowell
Vice President, Finance and Operations Pamela Harvey
Vice President, Production Sheryl Stone
Vice President, Data Sales Harry Brookby
Publication Agreement Number 40034765 Printed in USA
Other Gulf Energy Information titles include: Gas ProcessingTM, Petroleum Economist ©,
World Oil ®, Pipeline & Gas Journal and Underground Construction.

4 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Select
Select 84
84 at
at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Pipeline projects, contacts
most comprehensive
Now you can find all the information you need in one easy-to-use
global pipeline resource. The Energy Web Atlas gives you and your
company actionable project leads, project alerts, and data on
1.2 million miles of natural gas and liquids pipelines.
Introducing Energy Web Atlas/Pipelines, the world’s most comprehensive data set on global pipelines.

If you’re in the global pipeline market, this new service from Pipeline & Gas Journal and Gulf Energy Information
will help you do your job better by giving you not only a platform to visualize pipeline infrastructure, but to help
you track pipeline projects and the critical contacts for those projects.

The Energy Web Atlas offers the world’s most extensive set of pipeline data and information, including new
project announcements. A mapping capability allows you to visualize infrastructure, produce reports, and gather
critical information on natural gas pipelines and crude pipelines.

A web-based interface makes it easy to access information in the office

or in the field; all you need is internet access.

Energy Web Atlas is produced along with Pipeline & Gas Journal.
Readers and customers of Pipeline & Gas Journal may subscribe at
a discount, for a minimum of two users up to company-wide access.

For more information, call +1 (713) 525-4675

or visit EnergyWebAtlas.com.
and data from the world’s
pipeline dataset

Facility data includes

Operators/Shareholders,
Capacity, Diameter, Length,
Key Dates, Project Contacts
 Zyme-Ox® Plus

Rezyd-HP™

Zyme-HT®

Zyme-Flow® UN657
Select 79 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

zymeflow.com © United Laboratories

International, llc. All Rights Reserved
 Editorial
Comment
The true essence of optimization
What is the first thing that comes to
mind when we hear the word optimiza-
tion? Most people tend to think about their
work processes and how they can change
or adapt to increase efficiency. After all,
the term optimization means to make the
best or most effective use of a thing or situ-
ation. But what do we mean when we think
of optimization on a more macro scale?
This issue of Hydrocarbon Processing
revolves around the central theme of op-
timization. In the downstream processing
industry, this equates to reviewing existing
processes for improved yield, quality and
efficiency. Optimizing crucial portions of
your business can ultimately lead to more
reliable, safer and more profitable opera-
tions. How can a company, or an industry,
strive for and achieve such lofty goals?
This broad question can take a com-
pany down several different paths. For
maintenance teams, optimization may
mean increasing the reliability of equip-
ment to run more efficiently. For an en-
gineering, procurement and construction
firm, optimization may mean employing
the latest digital technologies to model,
design and engineer capital-intensive units
and/or complexes. A sales or marketing
group might view optimization as a bet-
ter, more efficient way to reach customers
and broadcast their technology, service or
equipment to the people that are search-
ing for their own ways to optimize their
operations. In the end, it all depends on
the goals of each company.
This idea was on full display at a re-
cent user group conference, where the
focus was on digital transformation. Each
technical session was loaded with ways
operating and engineering companies
can optimize operations, including new
digital technologies for predicative main-
tenance, safety and remote viewing of as-
sets. These optimization techniques har-
nessed the latest technologies in artificial
intelligence to provide operations teams
with the best scenarios to profitability.
This included wireless sensors to alert
LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER
Lee.Nichols@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
personnel when a piece of equipment
might fail—often several weeks ahead of
the failure; maintenance teams can har-
ness the power of augmented and virtual
reality to train personnel or service equip-
ment in the field; and advanced process
systems can provide personnel the best
use of resources (e.g., raw materials, feed-
stocks and water) for optimal flexibility,
compatibility and efficiency.
Digital technologies can absolutely
enhance operations, but they can also
provide engineering and construction
teams an advanced level of design, mod-
eling and construction efficiency. New
software is providing engineering teams
a more efficient way to design process-
ing units. These enhanced technologies
provide the best routes to optimum per-
formance at the best cost, giving produc-
ers choices on how to best utilize their
capital-intensive complex.
However, incorporating digital tech-
nologies is just one route a company can
take to optimize its operations. Digital
technologies can certainly enhance work
flows, supply chains and processing unit
reliability, safety and profitability, but op-
timization can easily apply to other aspects
of the hydrocarbon processing industry.
For example, the global refining industry
is responding to new regulations on sul-
fur limits in transportation fuels. Refiners
have, and are continuing to, invest capital in
unit upgrades and grassroots capacity con-
struction to produce low-sulfur and ultra-
low-sulfur (ULS) fuels. The production of
ULS fuels provides a cleaner burning fuel,
but its effects on mitigating smog and pol-
lution optimizes the standard of living for
billions of people around the world.
The increased production of clean fu-
els is one more example of how the down-
stream processing industry is optimizing
itself. Both refiners and petrochemical
producers are investing in new ways to be
greener, safer, more profitable and effi-
cient. In the end, are not those aspects the
true essence of optimization?
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
10 Business Trends.
Hydrocarbon Processing details
the many clean fuels regulations put
forth by dozens of countries around the
world, as well as the investments being
made by refiners to adhere to new fuel
quality regulations.
19 Construction.
The newest
addition to Hydrocarbon
Processing, Construction details
major contract awards for project/unit
technology licensing, engineering and
construction around the world.
36 Special Focus. The global
hydrocarbon processing
industry continues to engineer new
processes and technologies to optimize
operations. These advancements
provide safer, cleaner and more
profitable operations for producers.
51 Catalysts.
This article discusses
a proprietary fixed-bed reforming
catalyst and its commercial applications
in refineries across the globe, focusing
on the first commercial use at the
Bayernoil refinery in Neustadt, Germany.
63 Process Control
and Instrumentation.
Many technologies enable refiners and
petrochemical producers to optimize
their operations. This month’s Process
Controls and Instrumentation section
examines the latest corrosion monitoring
and measurement technologies to
mitigate corrosion challenges from
opportunity crudes; how automatic batch
distillation is benefitting Chevron’s DPST
labs in Richmond, California; and how
refiners can use Raman spectroscopy
to optimize hydrogen usage.
79 Project Management.
This article defines some of
the key paths forward for a project
execution team to consider during
petrochemical revamp projects.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 9
 | Business Trends
Around the world, dozens of nations are enacting new regulations
to curb sulfur levels in transportation fuels, primarily in diesel
and gasoline. Refiners have met new clean fuel policy regulations
with capital-intensive investments in grassroots unit construction
and modernization and revamp projects. This month’s Business
Trends focuses on clean fuels regulations being enacted around
the world, as well as investments refiners are making to produce
low-sulfur and ultra-low-sulfur transportation fuels.

Photo: A Fluor JV is building Kuwait National Petroleum Co.’s Mina Abdullah

Package 2 Clean Fuels Project in southern Kuwait. Photo courtesy of Fluor.
LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER
Lee.Nichols@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Sustainability: Clean fuels—
The advancement to zero sulfur
In April, Hydrocarbon Processing launched the first iteration of
its HP Sustainability webcast series. This series will focus on pol-
icy/regulations, capital expenditures and the latest technological
advancements to ensure more sustainable operations at refiner-
ies, petrochemical plants and gas processing/LNG facilities.
The following is a summary of the first presentation, which
focused on the global increase in policies and regulations to
produce low-sulfur and ultra-low-sulfur (ULS) transportation
fuels, and the subsequent boost in capital expenditures to ad-
here to new fuel regulations. The full webcast can be viewed at
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/resources/webcasts.
What are clean fuels? A major aspect of “clean fuels” focuses
on mitigating pollutants—carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide,
hydrocarbons and particulate matter—from vehicles’ exhaust.
Many refiners around the globe have adopted European stan-
dards for fuel quality (Euro 4, Euro 5 and Euro 6), as Europe has
been the frontrunner on regulations for low sulfur, “clean” trans-
portation fuels. This includes reducing sulfur limits—measured
in parts per million (ppm)—in transportation fuels. The refin-
ing industry has invested hundreds of billions of dollars over the
past 30 yr to reduce the amount of sulfur in gasoline, diesel, jet
fuel, etc. These investments have reduced sulfur levels in trans-
portation fuels from 2,000 ppm (prior to Euro 2) in 1993 to less
than 10 ppm (Euro 5 and Euro 6) at present.
Most countries use the European standards to measure sul-
fur in fuels, but use different names to describe them. These
ULS fuels include Bharat Stage 6 (BS-6) in India, National 5
and Beijing 6 in China, Tier 3 in the US, AFRI 4 in Africa, and
K4 and K5 in Kazakhstan, among others. Not only are these
nations, and others around the world, regulating and invest-
ing in low-sulfur and ULS fuels production, but they are also
mandating higher ethanol blending rates; an increase in biofuels
production and usage; and an increase in the adoption of elec-
tric, hybrid-electric, compressed natural gas (CNG), hydrogen-
fueled and/or alternative fuels-powered vehicles.
The push for lower-sulfur transportation fuels has moved
into the global shipping sector, as well. In 2020, the Internation-
al Maritime Organization’s 2020 Global Sulfur Cap regulation
will go into effect, which calls for marine vessels to burn low-
sulfur marine fuels.
Capital expenditures for sulfur reduction. Over the past
30 yr, the global refining industry has invested hundreds of bil-
lions of dollars to reduce sulfur levels in transportation fuels,
Business Trends
and many new units are expected to begin operations over the
next several years.
According to OPEC’s World Oil Outlook 2018, nearly
12 MMbpd of new secondary unit capacity will begin opera-
tions by 2024 (FIG. 1). These capacity additions include more
than 6 MMbpd of new desulfurization capacity, more than
3 MMbpd of conversion capacity and more than 1.7 MMbpd
of octane-boosting capacity. Most of this new capacity will be in
the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions.
Global initiatives. Every region has announced new policies
and regulations to reduce sulfur levels in transportation fuels,
along with emissions-mitigation initiatives and capital invest-
ments in new processing capacity. The following will detail
major initiatives and investments being made by each region.
Additional in-depth information on these plans is available in
the HP Sustainability webcast.
Asia-Pacific. Many nations in the Asia-Pacific region are en-
acting policies to provide their populations with ULS fuels. The
move towards clean-fuels production will help mitigate pollu-
tion in major cities, as well as adhere to emissions reduction
targets set in the Paris agreement.
China is making great strides to mitigate significant smog in
major cities. The country has, and continues to, invest in capi-
tal-intensive refineries to produce ULS fuels, as well as upgrades
to existing facilities. This includes the production of China 6
(which is equivalent to Euro 6-standard fuels), as well as remov-
ing more than 1 MM high-polluting long-haul trucks by 2020.
1.6
Conversion
1.4 Desulfurization
Octane units
1.2
1.0
0.8
MMbpd
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
FIG. 1. New secondary unit capacity construction (MMbpd), 2018–2024.
Source: OPEC.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 11
 Business Trends
The country has also initiated its Blue Sky Defense to help
curb air pollution. The program includes setting aggressive fuel
economy, emissions and quality standards through 2020, retir-
ing many coal-fired power plants and converting them to natural
gas; experimenting in utilizing alternatives fuels, such as metha-
nol and CNG; increasing ethanol blending to 10% (known as
E10); and increasing the adoption of EVs/HEVs.
In January 2015, India announced that it will skip the imple-
mentation of BS-5 fuels and move directly to BS-6 fuels (e.g.,
fuels that are equivalent to Euro 6 standards). This regulation
will go into effect in 2Q 2020. Most of the nation’s refineries are
adapting to the new fuel standard and are investing in new units
and/or upgrades to produce compliant fuels. The nation has also
approved its National Biofuels Policy. This program envisions
increasing ethanol blending in gasoline to 10% by 2022 and
up to 20% by 2030. The policy will help mitigate fuel imports,
which could save India approximately $7 B in oil import costs.
Additional Asia-Pacific clean fuels initiatives include:
• Indonesia. The country has initiated its $25-B
Refinery Development Master Plan, which calls for the
construction of greenfield refineries and the upgrade
of its existing refining network by 2027. The goal is to
increase the complexity and flexibility of the nation’s
refineries, while being able to produce Euro 4- and
Euro 5-standard fuels.
• Malaysia. The country has mandated that all domestic
refineries must produce Euro 5-equivalent fuels by
September 2020. The $27-B Refinery and Petrochemical
Integrated project, which started commissioning
activities in late 2018, will produce Euro 5 fuels.
In February, the country enacted its B10 biodiesel
program, which increased bio-content—primarily
palm oil—in diesel from 7% to 10%.
• Thailand. Investments are being made to boost refining
capacity to satisfy demand, as well as upgrades to
existing facilities to produce Euro 5 fuels.
• Singapore. ExxonMobil announced it will make
significant investments to its integrated complex in
Singapore. These investments include increasing the
production of clean fuels. Neste has announced it will
invest $1.6 B in new biofuels production facilities.
Africa. The African Refiners Association (ARA) has devel-
oped AFRI specifications as a guideline to produce low-sulfur,
clean fuels to improve air quality. According to the ARA, the
goal is to implement AFRI 4 (equivalent to Euro 4) by 2020 and
AFRI 5 (Euro 5) by 2030.
However, these standards are being met with several chal-
lenges. Adhering to these standards would be capital-intensive,
and many African nations do not have the monetary resources
to invest in expensive upgrades and/or grassroots units. Prob-
lems also arise in synchronizing standards among many nations,
as well as trying to implement them.
Although adhering to low-sulfur and ULS standards can be
capital-intensive for refiners, several countries are investing in
upgrades and new units to meet Euro 4 and Euro 5 standards.
For example, Algeria has initiated a refinery upgrade and re-
habilitation program to produce low-sulfur fuels; Egypt will
produce more Euro 5 fuels once its Midor refinery expansion/
12 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
modernization and Assiut refinery hydrocracking projects are
completed; Dangote’s $12-B integrated complex in Nigeria
will produce Euro 5 fuels once completed; and South Africa
is instituting a framework that calls for biofuels to meet 2% of
the country annual fuel consumption a feasibility study is being
conducted by Saudi Aramco on a new $10-B refinery to pro-
duce ULS fuels, and BP announced a $300-MM upgrade to its
refinery to produce low-sulfur diesel such as D50 and D10.
North America. In December 2018, Canada announced its
Clean Fuel Standard framework. The initiative calls for the mit-
igation of greenhouse gas emissions of 30% below 2005 levels
by 2030. The region is planning to enact this program in 2022.
Canada hopes that the plan will encourage the use of biofuels,
EVs and alternative fuels, as well as an increase in the invest-
ments for clean fuels.
The US has begun to enforce Tier 3 regulations, which
lower sulfur content in gasoline from 30 ppm to 10 ppm. Large
US refineries—those with a processing capacity of more than
75,000 bpd—had to comply with the regulation in 2017. Re-
fineries with a capacity of less than 75,000 bpd must comply by
2020. In total, Hydrocarbon Processing’s Construction Boxscore
Database is tracking more than $6 B in active refining projects
to boost the production of ULS fuels in the US. These projects
are being executed by companies, such as Andeavor, Chevron,
ExxonMobil, Valero, Marathon Petroleum andMeridian En-
ergy, among others.
Earlier this year, the US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) issued its final rule that set renewable fuel targets for
2019. The renewable fuel standard—put in place by the US
EPA to increase the production and use of renewable fuels—set
a biofuels blending target of 19.92 Bgal for 2019.
Latin America. Mexico has announced an ambitious $11-B
plan to rehabilitate the country’s refining network and build a
grassroots facility. The rehab plan includes increasing domes-
tic production of high-quality, low-sulfur fuels at all Pemex re-
fineries. Mexico is trying to significantly decrease sulfur levels
in domestically produced diesel to adhere to new regulations
that call for a reduction in diesel sulfur limits from 500 ppm to
15 ppm. However, due to the scarcity of the fuel, the country’s
Energy Regulation Committee has delayed the new regulation
until at least mid-2019.
Most capital expenditures will be directed towards a new
$8-B, 340,000-bpd grassroots refinery in the state of Tabasco,
enabling the country to boost production for ULS fuels.
With help from China National Petroleum Corp., Brazil’s
state-owned oil and gas company, Petrobras, plans to finally
complete its COMPERJ refining project; the project is in the
feasibility study stage. If completed, COMPERJ will produce
ULS fuels. The country is also trying to boost the use of biofu-
els and renewables fuels through its RenovaBio program. The
program, which will go into effect in 2020, aims to double the
use of ethanol to 26 Blpy by 2030, along with an increased use
in renewables.
Additional Latin America clean-fuels initiatives include:
• Argentina. YPF is investing $2 B to add desulfurization
units to its La Plata and Mendoza refineries to increase
clean fuels production.
Get accurate flare gas BTU values fast,
with the FlarePro™ Mass Spectrometer

To properly manage your flare gas stack combustion, you’ll need to measure
heat values at the stack quickly, accurately, and often. The FlarePro mass
spectrometer has the speed and specificity for the task, calculating
make-up gas quantities 10x faster than chromatographs. It can speciate
and quantify alkanes and alkenes up to C7, as well as convert ASTM
calculations of concentration to yield flare gas BTU values, even with
wildly changing flare gas streams. Features include:

• 24" footprint (general or C1, D2 areas)

• 16-valve inlet system
• 1 to 100 amu mass range
• Easy-to-service modular design
• Low maintenance
• Modbus/OPC communications
• Environmentally controlled to accommodate
a wide range of temperatures

Learn more at www.ametekpi.com/FlarePro.

Select 78 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

© 2019 by AMETEK Inc. All rights reserved.

 Business Trends

• Ecuador. At the time of this publication, Ecuador was
tendering contracts to complete upgrade work at the
Esmeraldas refinery, as well as the construction of a new
300,000-bpd complex refinery. The new units at the
Esmeraldas refinery would increase clean fuels production,
reduce emissions, etc. If built, the country’s 300,000-bpd
grassroots refinery would produce ULS fuels.
• Jamaica. Petrojam is investing $1 B in the Petrojam
Refinery Upgrade Project (PRUP). Once completed,
the PRUP will increase the refinery’s flexibility and
conversion to produce high-value, low-sulfur fuels.
• Peru. The country’s state-owned petroleum company,
Petroperú, is investing $6 B on the Talara refinery
modernization project. The capital-intensive project
will increase the refinery’s flexibility and conversion
to produce fuels that adhere to new sulfur limit
requirements in the country.
Middle East. The Middle East has and continues to build high-
ly complex facilities. These facilities, combined with upgrades
and expansions, are designed to minimize fuel oil output and
to maximize middle distillate, diesel and gasoline production.
One of the region’s main initiatives is the focus on clean fuels
production. Most Middle Eastern nations have invested in new
units to increase the production of ULS transportation fuels.
ULS fuels are becoming mandatory in both developed and de-
veloping countries, and it is imperative that Middle Eastern re-
fineries produce fuels that adhere to sulfur requirements—espe-
cially since surplus fuels will be exported to regions that require
low-sulfur fuels (e.g., Asia and Europe).
The region is making capital-intensive investments in sec-
ondary unit capacities to increase the production of ULS fuels.
According to OPEC, the region will add more than 4.1 MMbpd
of secondary unit capacity by 2024. This capacity increase in-
cludes 2.8 MMbpd of desulfurization capacity; 700,000 bpd of
conversion capacity; and 600,000 bpd of octane-boosting units.
As part of its Vision 2030 program, Saudi Arabia is invest-
ing more than $6 B in clean-fuels initiatives at several domes-
tic refineries. Kuwait is investing approximately $25 B in the
615,000-bpd Al-Zour refinery and the Clean Fuels Project
(CFP). Both projects will increase the production of ULS fu-
els. Earlier this year, Kuwait National Petroleum Co. announced
that it is considering the construction of a fourth refinery in the
south of the country.
The United Arab Emirates plans to invest $45 B to boost
downstream processing capacity. A portion of this investment in-
cludes the construction of a new 600,000-bpd refinery in Ruwais,
which will produce ULS fuels once completed. Bahrain is invest-
ing $6 B to expand and modernize its Sitra refinery. The project’s
primary goals are to increase conversion to ULS fuels, as well as
increase energy efficiency and environmental compliance.
Europe: East vs. West. Both Western and Eastern Europe,
Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)

Meeting Your Total

Turbomachinery Needs
We know you’re no stranger to pressure. At Atlas Copco Gas and Process,
we transform industrial ideas into solutions that help you thrive under
extreme conditions. Backed by more than seven decades of extensive
experience and technical expertise, our full spectrum of compressors and
expanders provides the reliability and efficiency you need.

Handle the Pressure

Whether you need turboexpanders, refrigeration, regeneration
or residue compressors, Atlas Copco Gas and Process is the total
turbomachinery provider for your gas processing operation, helping
you handle today’s pressures while creating a sustainable future.

Find out how Atlas Copco Gas and Process can help you
handle the pressure at atlascopco-gap.com

Select 151 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

14
19-ACC-0200_ad_Hydrocarbon Processing June Half Page Ad Update_v1.indd
JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com 1 5/8/19 2:40 PM
 Business Trends
Put the Solution
are investing to increase the production of ULS fuels. However,
Western Europe’s refining network is much older and more de-
veloped, so many Western European countries are focusing on
Before the Problem
the move towards a carbon-neutral society while Eastern Eu-
rope, Russia and the CIS are investing in upgrades and new re-
fining capacity to adhere to higher fuel-quality standards. When you’re measuring pressure,
Western Europe is pushing for a carbon neutral economy by inaccuracies or instrument failures will
2050, which includes programs such as the EU Renewable En-
ergy Directive (RED 2), an increase in the use of biofuels, EVs/ compromise production and safety.
HEVs, etc. According to the European Commission, RED 2 has
an overall target of 32% use of renewables in the EU total energy
You can avoid these problems by
mix by 2030, along with a minimum of 14% for renewables us- designing-in our expert solutions.
age in the transportation sector.
Most nations in Western Europe have announced major ini-
tiatives that call for the increased use of biofuels and alternative
fuel technologies and capital investments to increase biofuel Gauges with
production capacity, as well as the outright ban of gasoline and the PLUS! ™
diesel-powered vehicles. Several of these initiatives include: performance
• Spain—Proposing a ban of gasoline and diesel by 2040. option dampen
The country’s Balearic Island has announced
pulse & vibration
it will ban the use of diesel-powered vehicles in 2025
and gasoline in 2035. for easier reading
• Italy—Investing in new biofuels, low-carbon fuels and and longer life.
waste-conversion technologies/plants.
• Germany—The country is allowing cities the right to
limit/ban the use of diesel cars to help mitigate emissions.
The nation has also announced plans to phase out nuclear
power generation for renewables.
• The Netherlands—Implementing zero-emissions
vehicles for all public transport by 2025. The 2198 MicroTube™
• Sweden—Neste and BP will supply low-carbon aviation siphon dissipates
fuel (e.g., non-palm renewable and sustainable raw heat to avoid damage.
materials) to Sweden airlines.
• Finland—Neste is making capital-intensive investments
in new biofuels technologies.
• United Kingdom—Announced plans to ban the sales
of gasoline and diesel vehicles by 2040. The country
will also subsidize the sales of EVs, as well as invest in Diaphragm seals isolate
retrofit public transport, build new charging stations, and protect your valuable
and fund research and development in new low-carbon assets from corrosive
transportation technologies.
media.
• France—The country has announced plans to ban
gasoline-powered vehicles in Paris by 2030, as well as
pushing the use of SP95-E10 gasoline (10% ethanol blend).
Russia and the CIS have major ongoing initiatives, as well.
Russia is at the tail-end of its $55-B modernization program to
upgrade and modernize its domestic refining network. Since
the nation is self-sufficient in fuels production, the program
focuses on upgrading and conversion capacity rather than ad-
ditional crude distillation capacity. We’d like to help you.
In the CIS, several capital-intensive projects are helping the
Please contact us at (203) 385-0635 or
region to mitigate imports, as well as produce ULS transporta-
tion fuels. Examples of these projects include SOCAR’s Aliyev visit our website at www.ashcroft.com
Heydar refinery modernization project, Kazakhstan’s comple-
tion of its domestic refineries modernization and plans to build
a fourth refinery to adhere to K4 and K5 fuel specifications
(fuels equivalent to Euro 4 and Euro 5-standards); and Uzbeki-
stan’s investment of more than $2 B to build a new 5.5-MMtpy
refinery in the Jizzakh region to produce clean fuels.
Select 152 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
15
18_July_Hydro_Proc_015-5806 Rev #2.indd 3 7/17/18 8:22 AM
THREE LEGACIES ONE FUTURE
For years, the energy and petrochemical industries have counted on the catalysts, technology licensing, and
services provided by the companies that comprise Criterion, CRI, and Shell Global Solutions. Today, these
companies have come together under the Shell Catalysts & Technologies brand, channeling years of experience
providing value-adding solutions, technologies, and services that drive the industry — and the world — forward.

Learn more about the promise of Shell Catalysts & Technologies at Shell.com/CT
MIKE RHODES, MANAGING EDITOR
Mike.Rhodes@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Industry Metrics

In the US, continued gasoline–related tightening exerted upside Global refining margins, 2018–2019*
pressure on prices, despite improvement in refinery throughputs as 20
refineries returned online. Europe saw strong gasoline exports to the US WTI, US Gulf
and Africa. A steep decline in ARA inventory levels further exacerbated 15 Brent, Rotterdam

Margins, US$/bbl
Oman, Singapore
tightness in product markets and provided support to refining margins. In
10
Asia, gains were sustained by scheduled refinery maintenance.
An expanded version of Industry Metrics can be found 5
online at HydrocarbonProcessing.com. 0

April-18

May-18

June-18

July-18

Aug.-18

Sept.-18

Oct.-18

Nov.-18

Dec.-18

Jan.-19

Feb.-19

Mar.-19

April-19
US gas production (Bft3d) and prices (US$/Mft3)
100 7
Global refining utilization rates, 2018–2019*
6
80 100
5 US EU 16
95
60 4 Selected Asia
Utilization rates, %
90
40 3 85
Monthly price (Henry Hub) 2
12-month price avg. 80
20
Production 1 75
0 0 70
O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A
April-18

May-18

June-18

July-18

Aug.-18

Sept.-18

Oct.-18

Nov.-18

Dec.-18

Jan.-19

Feb.-19

Mar.-19

April-19
2016 2017 2018 2019
Production equals U.S. marketed production, wet gas. Source: EIA.

Selected world oil prices, US$/bbl US Gulf cracking spread vs. WTI, 2018–2019*
100 50
90 W. Texas Inter. 40
Cracking spread, US$/bbl

80 Brent Blend
30
Oil prices, US$/bbl

70 Dubai Fateh
Source: DOE 20
60
10
50
0
40 Prem. gasoline Diesel
30 -10 Jet/kero Fuel oil
-20
20
April-18

May-18

June-18

July-18

Aug.-18

Sept.-18

Oct.-18

Nov.-18

Dec.-18

Jan.-19

Feb.-19

Mar.-19

April-19

May-19
A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A
2017 2018 2019

World liquid fuel supply and demand, MMbpd Rotterdam cracking spread vs. Brent, 2018–2019*
106 7 30
Implied stock build Forecast
104 6
Stock change and balance, MMbpd

Implied stock draw

Supply and demand, MMbpd

Cracking spread, US$/bbl

102 World supply 5

100 World demand 4 15
98 3
Prem. gasoline Gasoil
96 2 0 Jet/kero Fuel oil
94 1
92 0
90 -1 -15
April-18

May-18

June-18

July-18

Aug.-18

Sept.-18

Oct.-18

Nov.-18

Dec.-18

Jan.-19

Feb.-19

Mar.-19

April-19

May-19

88 -2
2014-Q1 2015-Q1 2016-Q1 2017-Q1 2018-Q1 2019-Q1 2020-Q1
Source: EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook, May 2019
Singapore cracking spread vs. Dubai, 2018–2019*
Brent dated vs. sour grades 20
(Urals and Dubai) spread, 2018–2019*
Cracking spread, US$/bbl

6 10
Light sweet/medium sour
crude spread, US$/bbl

4 Prem. gasoline Gasoil

0 Jet/kero Fuel oil
2
0
-10
-2 Dubai
April-18

May-18

June-18

July-18

Aug.-18

Sept.-18

Oct.-18

Nov.-18

Dec.-18

Jan.-19

Feb.-19

Mar.-19

April-19

May-19

Urals
-4
April-18

May-18

June-18

July-18

Aug.-18

Sept.-18

Oct.-18

Nov.-18

Dec.-18

Jan.-19

Feb.-19

Mar.-19

April-19

May-19

* Material published permission of the OPEC Secretariat; copyright 2019;

all rights reserved; OPEC Monthly Oil Market Report, May 2019.

Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 17

 CRI MANAG
TIC
AL E HS
ASS 2 R
EMO
ETS VAL

AU
WAT XILIA
ER R
TRO SYS Y
UBL TEM
E S
SER SHOOT COM
VIC I
ES NG P
SYS RESSO
DEH TEM R
S
YDR
ATI
O N

I
SEP NLET
ARA
TOR
AM
INE
UNI
T

CO
Act & O NNE
iva PT CT
Ch te Co IM ED
em nne IZE
y & cted A D
istr AS
SE
TS

Exp na
ert lytic
ise s PR
OD
UC
TIV
ITY

PR
OF
ITA
BIL
ITY

CO
ST
S

MAXIMIZE PLANT
RELIABILITY
Optimize your plant’s operations with a Nalco Water Partnership.
WITH GREATER With real-time monitoring, modeling and analytics, you can achieve increased
RETURN ON INVESTMENT amine life and maximize plant efficiency.

MOVING MIDSTREAM FORWARD

© 2019 Ecolab USA Inc. All rights reserved.

Select 67 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER
Lee.Nichols@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
ASIA-PACIFIC
Sinochem Hongrun Petrochemi-
cal Co. Ltd. will use Honeywell UOP’s
ionic liquids alkylation technology to
produce high-octane, cleaner-burning
transportation fuels. The alkylation unit
will be built at the company’s 100,000-
bpd refining and petrochemical complex
in Weifang City, China.
PetroChina has awarded Lyondell-
Basell a technology licensing contract
for three polyethylene (PE) units to be
built in China. LyondellBasell’s low-
pressure slurry process will be used for
a 300,000-tpy, high-density PE (HDPE)
unit to be built in Korla City, Xinjiang
Province; a 400,000-tpy unit in Jiey-
ang City, Guangdong Province; and a
400,000-tpy plant in Yulin City, Shaanxi
Province. The contracts were awarded
by China HuanQiu Contracting &
Engineering Co. Ltd., a wholly owned
subsidiary of PetroChina. Once opera-
tional, the three plants will produce a
range of multi-modal HDPE products.
Haldia Petrochemicals plans to in-
vest approximately $9 B in a refinery and
petrochemical integrated complex. The
facility, located near Kakinada in Andhra
Pradesh, will consist of a 12-MMtpy re-
finery and a 1.6-MMtpy ethylene plant.
The refinery’s primary purpose will
be to produce feedstock for the petro-
chemical complex. According to Haldia
Petrochemicals, the refinery will pro-
duce primarily LPG, naphtha and para-
xylene as feedstock for the complex’s
petrochemical units. Once completed in
2024, the crude-to-chemicals complex
will produce HDPE, monoethylene gly-
col, polyvinyl chloride and other petro-
chemical products.
Oman’s Overseas Oil and Gas LLC
(OOG) and Indonesia’s state-owned oil
and natural gas company, Pertamina, are
seeking partners for a proposed, $15-B
refinery and petrochemical complex in
Bontang, Indonesia. The project will
consist of a 300,000-bpd refinery and pet-
rochemical units. If built, the integrated
complex is scheduled to begin operations
in 2025/2026. OOG has already signed a
memorandum of understanding with Sa-
nurhasta Mitra Tbk and PT Meta Epsi
Tbk to build power stations, pipe infra-
structure and water treatment facilities.
Axens has been awarded several tech-
nology licensing contracts from HPCL
Rajasthan Refinery Ltd., a JV between
Hindustan Petroleum Corp. Ltd. and the
government of Rajasthan, India. The tech-
nologies will be used in HPCL Rajasthan
Refinery Ltd.’s $6.2-B, 9-MMtpy refinery
and petrochemical integrated complex in
the Barmer District of Rajasthan. Axens
will supply technologies for several units,
including a naphtha hydrotreater, a semi-
regenerative reformer, a C5–C6 isomeriza-
tion unit, a vacuum gasoil hydrotreater, a
cracked gasoline selective desulfurization
unit, a unit to produce high-purity 1-bu-
tene, and a complete sulfur block consist-
ing of a Claus unit, a sour water stripper,
an amine regeneration unit and sulfur
handling facilities.
Chevron Lummus Global was
awarded a licensing and basic engineering
design contract by Chennai Petroleum
Corp. Ltd. (CPCL) for a 2.5-MMtpy
delayed coking unit. The new unit will be
built at HPCL’s Cauvery Basin refinery in
Tamil Nadu, India.
ExxonMobil has greenlighted a major
capacity expansion project at its Singapore
complex. The multibillion-dollar project
will add 20,000 bpd to the facility’s Group
2 base stocks production capacity, apply
new chemical technologies and integra-
tion across the crude cracker and refin-
ing complex to enhance the competitive-
ness of crude cracking, and increase the
production of low-sulfur fuels by 48,000
bpd—including marine fuels that adhere
to the International Maritime Organiza-
tion’s 2020 Global Sulfur Cap regulation.
Engineering, procurement and construc-
Construction
tion (EPC) activities have been initiated,
with completion scheduled for 2023.
CANADA
Pieridae Energy awarded KBR a
technical verification and open-book
estimate EPC contract for the proposed
Goldboro LNG export facility in Nova
Scotia, Canada. Under the terms of the
contract, KBR will review the terminal’s
front-end engineering design (FEED)
study. Once the review is completed,
Pieridae plans to move to a final invest-
ment decision. The company has also
announced plans to start construction
on the $7.5-B, 10-MMtpy LNG terminal
in 2019, with operations to commence
in 2023/2024. The facility plans to ship
most of the produced LNG to Europe.
EUROPE
Wood has been awarded an engineer-
ing, procurement and construction man-
agement (EPCM) contract by Evonik
for the company’s new, $446-MM poly-
amide 12 production complex to be built
in Marl Chemical Park, Marl, Germany.
The plant is scheduled to begin opera-
tions in 1Q 2021.
ExxonMobil has greenlighted a plan
to expand its Fawley refinery in the UK.
The more-than-$1-B investment will
boost the refinery’s ability to produce
ultra-low-sulfur diesel by 38,000 bpd.
The project includes the construction of
a hydrotreater unit and hydrogen plant.
These units will allow for the removal
of sulfur from fuel, as well as improve
the facility’s energy efficiency. Detailed
engineering and design are underway.
Construction is scheduled to begin in
late 2019, subject to regulatory approval,
with startup expected in 2021.
McDermott International has been
awarded an EPCM contract from Uni-
petrol to upgrade the Litvinov refinery
in the Czech Republic. The project in-
cludes the upgrade of the facility’s hy-
drocracking unit.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 19
 Construction
LATIN AMERICA
Sempra Energy and IEnova plan to
add liquefaction trains to the existing En-
ergia Costa Azul regasification terminal
in Baja California, Mexico. The project
will be completed in two phases. Phase 1
includes the construction of one liquefac-
tion train. Phase 2 includes the construc-
tion of two additional liquefaction trains
and an LNG storage tank. TechnipFMC
and Kiewit were awarded the EPC con-
tract for the project.
Over the next 5 yr, Argentina’s state-
owned oil company, YPF, will invest ap-
proximately $2 B in new desulfurization
projects at two of its refineries: the Men-
doza province refinery and the La Plata
refinery. The new desulfurization projects
will allow YPF to produce high-quality,
low-sulfur transportation fuels that ad-
here to international clean fuels standards.
MIDDLE EAST
Kuwait Integrated Petroleum Indus-
tries Co. (KIPIC), a subsidiary of Kuwait
Petroleum Corp., has awarded a technol-
With us keeping an eye on
10% of the world’s gas supply,
you can sit back and relax.
Wood offers industry leading, proven solutions
for Asset Performance Management, leveraging
its deep domain expertise in the oil & gas,
refining and chemical industries. Our solutions
focus on helping companies run safer,
more reliable and profitable enterprises.
To learn more, contact us at:
intelligentops@woodplc.com
www.woodplc.com/intelligentops
20 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
ogy licensing contract to McDermott
International for the company’s Petro-
chemical Refinery Integration Project
(PRIZe) in Al Zour, Kuwait. McDermott
will provide basic engineering, technol-
ogy licensing and catalyst for the project.
Once completed, the new unit will
use the refinery’s byproduct streams to
produce 330,000 tpy of propylene. Ac-
cording to McDermott, PRIZe will add
a gasoline block, an aromatics block, an
olefins conversion unit, polypropylene
units, and associated utility and offsite
facilities to the existing refinery sites.
The new units will be closely integrated
with the Al Zour refinery and Al Zour
LNG projects.
In April, Iraq’s oil ministry announced
a plan to build a new, 150,000-bpd refin-
ery in Kirkuk. If built, the refinery would
not begin operations until the mid-2020s.
Saudi Aramco will utilize KBR’s sol-
vent deasphalting (SDA) technology for
the company’s residue upgrading and
clean fuels project at the Riyadh refinery
in Saudi Arabia. KBR will provide propri-
etary SDA technology, basic engineering
design and proprietary equipment. Part
of the Kingdom’s Vision 2030 plan, Saudi
Aramco is making capital-intensive invest-
ments to boost clean fuels production.
Borouge, a JV between Abu Dhabi
National Oil Co. (ADNOC) and Bo-
realis, has awarded WorleyParsons a
project management contract (PMC) for
the JV’s Phase 4 expansion project. The
new petrochemical complex will include
a new mixed-feed cracker to produce 1.8
MMtpy of ethylene, as well as additional
units to produce 3.3 MMtpy of olefins
and aromatics. The PMC contract fol-
lows WorleyParsons’ work during the
project’s pre-FEED phase.
US
Meridian Energy Group is building
two refineries in the US. The company’s
$1-B, 49,500-bpd Davis refinery is be-
ing built in North Dakota’s Bakken Shale
play. The facility will process shale oil
from the Bakken to produce up to 800
MMgpy of refined products.
Select 153 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Construction

Fairway Methanol LLC, a 50/50 JV Arthur refinery in Texas. According to Darling Ingredients Inc., plans to in-
between Celanese and Mitsui, plans to the company, the project will increase vest approximately $1.1 B to expand its
substantially increase methanol produc- utilization of the crude distillation unit, renewable diesel production facility by
tion capacity at its Clear Lake, Texas plant. reduce vacuum gasoil purchases and in- 400 MMgpy. The project, scheduled to
The expansion project will increase the crease heavy sour crude and resid pro- be completed in late 2021, will increase
plant’s methanol production from 1.3 cessing capabilities. The new units are the refinery’s production capacity to
MMtpy to 1. 7 MMtpy. scheduled to be operational in 2022. 675 MMgpy. The project will involve
the construction of a second produc-
In April, Sempra Energy began com- Lastly, Diamond Green Diesel, a tion plant next to the existing facility.
missioning activities on the first of three JV between Valero subsidiary Diamond Once completed, the facility will be the
LNG trains at the company’s Cameron Alternative Energy and project partner second-largest renewable diesel plant.
LNG project. Once fully operational by
2020, the $10-B facility, located in Hack-
berry, Louisiana, will include three liq-
uefaction trains, with a total production
capacity of 12 MMtpy. The facility can
also accommodate two additional lique-
faction trains (Trains 4 and 5), if needed.
Should Sempra Energy build five LNG
trains, total liquefaction capacity could
reach nearly 25 MMtpy.

Sempra Energy’s subsidiary, Port Ar-

thur LNG, received authorization from
the US Federal Energy Regulatory Com-
mission (FERC) to build the Port Arthur
LNG export terminal. Located in Jeffer-
son County, Texas, the 11-MMtpy facility
will comprise two liquefaction trains, up
to three LNG storage tanks and associ-
ated facilities.

Wood has been awarded an EPC con-

tract to build a 55,000-bpd, four-drum
delayed coking unit at a Port Arthur refin-
ery in Texas. According to Wood, the new
delayed coker will increase the refinery’s
flexibility to process a variety of crudes,
improve turnaround efficiency and in-
crease throughput capacity. The unit is
scheduled to begin operations in 2022.

Valero is making significant invest-

ments in new downstream capacity at
several of its US refineries. The company
is investing $400 MM to expand an alkyl-
ation unit by 17,000 bpd at its St. Charles
refinery in Norco, Louisiana, to allow the
production of high-octane gasoline.
The project is expected to be com-
pleted in 2020. Valero is also wrapping
up a $300-MM alkylation unit expansion
project at its Houston refinery. The proj-
ect, to be commissioned in June, has in-
creased the unit’s capacity by 13,000 bpd.
To improve margins and light prod-
uct yields, Valero is investing $975 MM
in the construction of a new, 55,000-bpd
coker and sulfur recovery unit at its Port
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 21
 Filtration has
a new shape.
Invicta™ filters from FTC are going to change
everything you think you know about liquid
process filtration from filter life to flow capacity
to expense.

Invicta™ liquid cartridge filters represent a

revolutionary leap forward, incorporating a novel
design to lower CAPEX, OPEX, and to maximize
productivity.

Take a look at what Invicta provides and ask yourself

why you would choose any other cartridge filter:

•
•
Unprecedented filter element packing density

•
Up to 175% more surface area

•
Smaller vessel footprint (e.g. 24” vs 30” OD)

•
More dirt holding capacity

•
Lower clean pressure drop

•
Less frequent filter change-outs

•
Lower associated maintenance costs

•
Reduced shipping and disposal costs
Quick and easy retrofit for your current vessel

Reshaping Filtration
713.849.0849

Find out more at ftc-houston.com Select 96 at www.hydrocarbonprocessing.com/RS

 HEINZ P. BLOCH, RELIABILITY/EQUIPMENT EDITOR
Reliability Heinz.Bloch@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Know the pitfalls of excessively high oil viscosity
Since its inception in June 1990, more than half of the 347
“HP Reliability” columns published in Hydrocarbon Process-
ing have incorporated consulting experiences and commu-
nications that span the globe. The event and analysis in this
month’s issue are again based on actual consulting experience.
They relate to an incident involving a pump-related fire; the
pump-and-driver layout resembled FIG. 1.
Initially, the sequence of events was investigated by refinery
staff; a 6-hr meeting was convened later. This close-out meet-
ing was attended by a consulting engineer whose site notes
and report later supplemented the observations offered by
refinery staff.
Pump lubrication. In this instance, visualize a hot service
pump that was lubricated with pure oil mist. Oil mist, or “oil
fog,” consists of atomized oil suspended in clean instrument
air. The oil mist is carried to each bearing housing in a large
header leading to small-bore tubing and “reclassifier” orifices
that terminate at the bearings. The facility used ISO VG Grade
100 in its oil mist system, which is generally quite acceptable
for the rolling element bearings in this 3,560-rpm, API-style
pump. Therefore, some deviation from normal dimensions
or best-available application practice, or an external trigger
event, must have existed to cause bearing failure. A process of
elimination was utilized to narrow the possibilities of what had
probably happened.
The oil mist was properly applied between the bearing hous-
ing end caps and bearings; nevertheless, the angular-contact,
back-to-back-oriented thrust bearing set had failed. Calcula-
tions verified that the axial thrust load during normal operation
was well within the bearings’ allowable load range. At the time
of failure, the various operating parameters had been normal.
How motor lubrication differed. The 150-hp or 200-
hp/3,560 rpm induction motor was equipped with babbitted
sleeve bearings that carried the radially acting rotor load. On its
drive end (DE), the sleeve bearing had an integral thrust land
that limited the rotor’s axial travel. Lubricating oil was fed to
each babbitted sleeve bearing by way of oil rings and constant-
level lubricators.
Little doubt exists that ISO VG 32 was the required lubricant
viscosity for these sleeve bearings. However, the DE bearing had
failed and a considerable amount of the low-melting-point bab-
bitt had overheated and melted. It is known that serious compli-
cations would result if one were to use, perhaps inadvertently,
ISO VG 100 where ISO VG 32 is needed. Oil rings will slow
down in thick oil or, if the rings are not concentric within 0.002
in. (0.05 mm), they would probably stop moving altogether.
Moreover, a thick oil may not carry away enough heat to prevent
FIG. 1. Pump and driver layout sketch showing bearing types,
locations and lubricants supplied.
babbitt from softening. With excessive heat buildup, babbitt will
quickly weaken to the point of melting.
Looking for deviations from acceptable operation. At
the time of the close-out meeting at the refinery, none of the
many attendees seemed to know if the excessively viscous ISO
VG 100 had inadvertently been used for babbitt bearings. That
the babbitt in the failed DE bearing had indeed overheated
was not in dispute. A fatigue failure at the pipe thread-to-pipe
juncture had allowed hot babbitt to flow out of the 3/4-in. pipe,
which connected the constant-level lubricator to the DE bear-
ing housing. There was a puddle of molten babbitt on the con-
crete floor directly under the broken pipe; this prompted the
consulting engineer to ask that an oil viscosity analysis be done
on a sample that had been taken from the unaffected, non-drive
end (NDE) of the motor.
The oil ring retrieved from the distressed DE bearing hous-
ing was measured and observed to be 0.017 in. out of concen-
tricity. This eccentricity is roughly eight times what the authori-
tative Wilcock and Booser text1 allows. An eccentricity of 0.017
in. could have caused the flawed oil ring to go into a pendulum-
like side-to-side motion. While this unintended combination
of eccentricity and side-to-side slewing motion would not have
caused catastrophic failure with low VG oil in the motor bearings,
additional deviations increased the failure risk. However, oil ring
eccentricity combined with excessive oil thickness would have
contributed to serious distress. In other words, failure in the DE
bearing would result if the housing had been filled with thick ISO
VG 100 lubricant. (Note: If an oil analysis was indeed performed,
the results were not made available to the consulting engineer.)
Considering a most-probable timeline, it was assumed that
the pump thrust bearing had failed soon after the motor bear-
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 23
 Reliability
ing had overheated, weakened and begun to melt. Severe vi-
bration originating at the motor DE would have caused radial
overload in the pump thrust bearing, and vibration forces then
led to failure of the threaded pipe.
Deviations from normal will add to failure risk. It is usu-
ally possible to operate machines with just one minor devia-
tion. However, using a thick oil in an oil ring environment is an
unacceptable deviation. Adding another deviation would have
increased the failure risk even further. The consulting engineer
believed there were four relevant deviations:
Deviation 1. As mentioned earlier, oil rings are almost ex-
clusively designed for ISO VG 32 and VG 46 oils. (The speci-
fication sheet for the equipment at issue contained basic mo-
tor requirements, but left open the properties of the oil.) If the
missing oil analysis proved that the oil was, in fact, VG 100, then
excessive oil viscosity would be the most probable sleeve bear-
ing failure initiator. Only if it could be ascertained that VG 32 or
VG 46 had been used would we have seen fit to delete lubricant
issues from our failure inventory for the motor’s DE bearing.
Deviation 2. The DE oil ring was found to be seriously out
of round. Chances are that the oil rings in this motor had not
been given stress-relieving heat treatment as an intermediate
manufacturing step. The non-concentric DE oil ring likely
slewed back and forth during operation and contacted station-
ary parts. Abrasion probably took place and caused the oil to
be contaminated. Together with an insufficient amount of heat
Your partner in stainless steel premium tubular solutions.
SHAPING OUR PRODUCTS TO DEFINE YOUR SOLUTIONS
At TUBACEX we take an inside perspective to define tailor-made solutions of high
technological value, offering the widest portfolio of seamless stainless steel
tubular products and a full range of services including design, manufacture and
after-sale operations.
This is possible thanks to our knowledge of the market, product and
technological processes, our commitment to R&D and our management model
based on continuous improvement.
Our fully-integrated manufacturing model offers total flexibility to cover the
most demanding requirements of the industry, assuring optimum quality and
product performance in the most challenging environments.
One Group of leading companies:
24 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
dissipation, the bearing was now compromised, and severe vi-
bration caused the 3/4-in. pipe to fail.
Deviation 3. Although an API-compliant flush-ground set
of back-to-back-mounted ball bearings was used, flush-ground
bearings present an elevated failure risk in thrust-loaded pump
bearings. If ISO VG 100 oil is used in conjunction with flush-
ground bearings, the risk is somewhat elevated. Visualize that
rolling elements in bearings arranged with a horizontal shaft
will need to plough through a small puddle of oil near the 6
o’clock position of the concave outer ring ball track. One of
the two back-to-back-mounted pump thrust bearings will
then likely be unloaded because thrust (normally) acts in only
one direction. The unloaded bearing will tend to skid, and
that tendency becomes greater when viscous oils are used.
We can assume that other pumps at this refinery are simi-
larly affected if flush-ground, back-to-back sets of thrust bear-
ings are used. While API compliance is usually optimal for gen-
eral application and for reasons of perceived cost savings, these
bearing sets are not always the best choice; they will disappoint
in many pump applications. Sets of preloaded and/or asym-
metrical contact thrust bearings are easily cost justified in situ-
ations where their use would avoid premature bearing failures.
Deviation 4. In a bearing set not preloaded for skid preven-
tion, whenever one of the rolling elements on the unloaded half
of the API-compliant duplex bearing passes through the small
puddle of oil, that rolling element’s surface velocity will slow
down and, a fraction of a second later, its surface velocity will in-
tubacex.com
Tubacex group, sharing your challenge
Select 155 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Reliability

crease again. The difference in speeds causes skidding, and the

skid path is longer if ISO VG 100 oil makes up the small puddle.
In bearings with thick bronze or brass cages (per API 610, but
representing Deviation 4), the skidding occurs largely in the
machined ball pockets. Skidding in the ball pockets causes a
transfer of material (“smearing”), and some copper-bearing-
alloy flakes from the many “smear islands” will fall into the ball
track. Once that happens, failure can be instantaneous.
Among the potential reliability-improving opportunities is
the use of oil mist-lubricated ball bearings in motors up to 500
hp. Experience at best-of-class refineries elsewhere has shown
that it would save the client refinery considerable money and
would provide an additional layer of protection.
Most machinery problems in the petrochemical and oil re-
fining industries are human factor problems. Often, we do not
want to uncover the truth because it would expose human er-
ror. We wish to overlook potential issues and the shortcomings
of some managers. However, selective disclosure of only partial
findings to a consulting engineer or third-party analyst often
hides or compounds an issue. The candor with which facts are
shared by airlines and their respective governmental or regula-
MULTIPLE
tory agencies is not imitated in the hydrocarbon processing in-
dustry (HPI). In the HPI, providing feedback to people outside
TEMPERATURE
of the plant is often hindered, prevented or outright prohibited.
POINTS
When deviations combine, failure is near-certain. Sev-
eral factors acted together to increase the failure risk in this
motor-driven pump set. The various influencing factors are
ONE SENSOR
described in many papers, articles and books.2 “Following the
Temperatures often vary within a
book” and implementing what others have successfully done
years ago would be highly appropriate for this refinery. Above manufacturing process. However, a
all, the facility should realize that one or two small deviations single Pyromation multi-point sensor can
can be permissible; however, allowing three, four or even measure temperature at numerous points
more deviations to combine will push fluid machines toward throughout the process. We manufacture
unpredictability and failure. It makes economic sense to iden- a variety of standard and custom RTD
tify and then disallow all risk-inducing deviations. The best (Pt100) and thermocouple multi-point
available practice is quite simple: It allows no deviations. constructions for applications including
We have ample reason to believe that managers who demon-
storage tanks, piping systems, ovens/
strate an intense intolerance for deviations and who lead by ex-
ample will be much respected. Their seeking out opportunities kilns/furnaces, airflow ducts, grain bins,
to correct deviations whenever they first manifest will likely be heat exchangers, railcar and truck tanks,
emulated by many principled and motivated employees. The re- chemical vessels and more.
sulting failure reductions will quickly demonstrate the value of
eradicating deviations before they combine to become major is-
sues. While encouraging problem disclosure in imitation of the GET A QUOTE !
commercial aviation industry may require a shift in the prevail- pyromation.com/oilandgas
ing mindsets, much good would be derived from such a shift.
260.209.6341
LITERATURE CITED
1
Wilcock, D. F. and E. R. Booser, Bearing Design and Application, McGraw-Hill
Publishing Co., New York, New York, 1957.
2
Bloch, H. P., Petrochemical Machinery Insights, Elsevier Publishing Company,
Oxford, UK and Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2017.

HEINZ P. BLOCH has authored or co-written more than

730 publications. His professional career began in 1962
and includes long-term assignments for Exxon Chemicals.
Mr. Bloch holds BS and MS degrees (cum laude) in mechanical
engineering from the Newark College of Engineering (NCE).
He is one of 10 inaugural inductees into NCE’s Hall of Fame,
which honors its most distinguished alumni.
Select 156 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
25
2/18/19 5:01 PM
Navigating a New
Course Under
IMO Rules
Don’t let IMO’s 2020 lower global sulfur
regulations capsize your FCC bottoms
strategy. Grace leads the catalysts industry
in helping steer potential problems to
profitable solutions. Let us show you how
to turn the challenges of blending FCC
bottoms into an opportunity to create
more valuable FCC LCO.

Grace has partnered with hundreds of

refineries to provide comprehensive
catalyst solutions and we’re leading
the way into 2020 with current
and new technologies designed
to provide advantaged bottoms
cracking and increased FCC fuels
and petrochemical production.

Ask Us How We Do It

grace.com/value

Select 89 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

Petrochemicals
DME market outlook impacted by clean fuels
demand, diesel emissions
As environmental concerns emerg-
ing from the incessant consumption of
fuels have gripped the attention of global
leaders, energy producers have been de-
veloping cleaner fuel alternatives for use
in domestic and commercial settings.
The bio-based and synthetic dimethyl
ether (DME) industry has expanded into
numerous applications in this regard, in
addition to the compound’s conventional
deployment as aerosol propellants in
pharmaceutical, cosmetics, and paint and
coatings products. Recently, initiatives
undertaken by governments and indus-
try players have resulted in the expansion
of research and development activities,
aimed primarily at utilizing DME in au-
tomobiles and energy production.
Growing populations in developing
countries and the increasing use of liqui-
fied petroleum gas (LPG) for domestic
purposes in the Middle East will offer
considerable growth opportunities from
LPG blending applications for DME pro-
ducers. The industry will also leverage
the global surge in biomass production
and availability of natural gas, which are
the raw materials for obtaining DME that
is highly efficient and has lower carbon
emissions than standard fuels. A report
released by Global Market Insights Inc.
estimates that the DME market will sur-
pass $14.4 B in value by 2025.
Growth prospects for DME. Forecasts
for DME growth in different market seg-
ments are detailed in the following sec-
tions.
LPG blending. LPG has long been
a source of fuel for cooking and heating
in households in Asia, especially in the
portable form. It has also been adopted
by carmakers to support the demand for
more fuel-efficient vehicles in emerging
economies, like India. The ease of DME
production and its similarity with LPG
has made it a suitable (and largely clean-
P. SINGH
Global Market Insights
er) substitute, as opposed to traditional
fuels. DME is now being blended with
LPG for domestic heating and cooking,
since blends comprising approximately
20% DME volume do not necessitate
any equipment modification.
According to the International DME
Association, more than 65% of DME
produced worldwide is blended with
LPG, indicating the high consumer pen-
etration rate of the DME market. The
Association also suggested that countries
like China, India, Korea, Japan, Indonesia
and Egypt have undertaken several proj-
ects to augment the adoption of DME
and blended LPG fuel. Household uses
dominate the application of LPG in de-
veloping nations. For example, India had
more than 234.6 MM registered domes-
tic LPG consumers as of March 31, 2017,
a 32.8-MM increase from the year before.
The Indian government has made efforts
to expand the supply of clean cooking
fuel to rural areas, presenting a crucial
target base for the region’s DME industry.
In June 2018, Sharjah National Oil
Corp. announced the commissioning of
a giant LPG blending and loading project
in Sharjah, UAE. The project is based on
rising LPG demand trends across various
markets and is another indication of the
acceptance of LPG blends in essential
domestic uses. Asia-Pacific, the world’s
most populated region, has seen a tre-
mendous rise in emissions owing to the
vast utilization of conventional domestic
fuels, and will witness a significant trans-
formation with the growth of the LPG
blending segment. In fact, the DME mar-
ket from LPG blending is projected to
exhibit a compound annual growth rate
(AGR) of 7.6% from 2019–2025.
Transportation fuel. Diesel emis-
sions have become a major source of en-
vironmental degradation globally, with
nearly all commercial vehicles running
on diesel, in addition to a large number
of passenger cars and power generation
equipment. DME has a very high cetane
number. Additionally, energy efficiency
and power ratings for DME engines are
similar to those for diesel. However, DME
as an alternative fuel has negligible partic-
ulate emissions compared to diesel fuel.
Continuous expansion of trade ac-
tivities has reinforced the transportation
sector, complementing the increased
production of commercial vehicles, such
as heavy-duty trucks and public buses,
which mostly run on diesel. The Inter-
national Organization of Motor Vehicle
Manufacturers (OICA) reported that in
2017, nearly 97.3 MM vehicles were man-
ufactured worldwide, out of which almost
24.5% were commercial vehicles.
Unquestionably, the commercial au-
tomobile segment represents an enor-
mous potential for the use of DME as an
alternative fuel, with experts suggesting
that only minor changes are needed in
diesel engines to incorporate its greener
substitute. As such, automakers need not
design a completely new power system
for their vehicles and may just need to
adjust their existing diesel motors. The
International Organization for Standard-
ization (ISO) has issued standards for
its processing and production, further
boosting the DME market value.
Leading the automotive industry in
terms of developing the compound as a
diesel replacement, renowned American
carmaker Ford, in association with the
German government, has begun testing
ether-based fuels for diesel engines in its
cars, with an aim to deliver a zero-partic-
ulate-emissions fuel.
PANKAJ SINGH develops content
for a variety of portals pertaining to
market research. He holds a post
graduate degree in management
and has worked as a content
contributor for websites adhering to
the UK insurance industry. At
present, he writes content for Global Market Insights.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 27
Select 91 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Engineering
Case Histories
Case 107: Weld failures in vibrating equipment
Vibrating equipment can be ma-
chines, such as vibrating screens, con-
veyor pans or a combination of both,
that are designed to transport, sort or
dry materials. Various types are used in
many processing industries. They typi-
cally vibrate at 500 cycles per minute
(cpm) and accumulate vibratory cycles
quickly. These conveyors contain many
welds and, while welds may not be a
concern with constantly applied stresses,
they can be with cyclic stresses.
These conveyors are excellent weld
fatigue testing machines, even though
they are not intended to be used as such.
When a weld is not designed for fatigue,
it will likely fail. Welds contain unavoid-
able defects and, with elevated cyclic
stresses, cracks can grow quickly from
these defects.
The author is not a metallurgist, but
he has analyzed many such failures as
a consultant. Over-stroking, broken
springs, incorrect operating procedures
on well-designed equipment or poor at-
tention to details on new designs are usu-
ally the causes of such failures, shown in
FIGS. 1A, 1B and 1C. Some sources1 say that
90% of failures in engineering compo-
nents are due to high-cycle fatigue.
FIG. 1A is from a poorly designed, 20-ft-
long conveyor/dryer that was recently in-
stalled. It had cracked at so many welds
throughout the conveyor that a decision
on whether to rebuild or scrap the unit
was required.
FIG. 1B failed after a diverter gate be-
came loose, causing high-impact stresses
on the welds and resulting in cracks. The
meandering nature of the crack growth
indicates a low cyclic stress. When a loud
“clanking” sound was heard, the diverter
gate was locked back into place, but a siz-
able crack had already formed.
FIG. 1C represents one of several welds
on a new vibrating conveyor/dryer. This
machine’s rocker arm stabilizer struts
were misaligned during manufacture,2
which resulted in large bending mo-
A. SOFRONAS, CONSULTING ENGINEER
http://mechanicalengineeringhelp.com
FIG. 1. Dryer and conveyor weld failures.
ments throughout the conveyor and
weld failures.
Welds do not have the typical endur-
ance limit of solid steel bars because the
endurance limit of a piece of steel at 1 ×
106 cycles is based on the development of
a crack, not the continuation of one. Once
a crack is present, it can grow quickly.
Conveyor vibratory service generates
1 × 106 cycles on a weld in a day or two,
so weld defects grow when cyclic stresses
are high enough. Fracture mechanics crack
growth calculations2,3 (FIG. 2) represent the
approximate time for a small weld defect to
grow through a good weld, with different
cyclic nominal stresses opening and clos-
ing the crack. A cyclic stress above 4,000
lb/in.2 can result in a short life. A long life is
expected at less than 4,000 lb/in2.
Having analyzed many weld failures
and knowing the approximate cycles to
failure, it was noted that all of them oc-
curred at nominal weld stresses higher
than +/– 5,000 lb/in2. This tends to agree
with the threshold stress needed for a
weld crack to grow.3
For these reasons, the conveyor pur-
chase specification for clients was modi-
fied. The specification stated that the
nominal cyclic stresses at all welds in the
structure should be at or less than +/–
4,000 lb/in2, as verified by strain gauge
testing. Major equipment manufactur-
ers made this possible by designing the
welds for cyclic stresses and developing
precision fixturing for the strut locations.
1/2 in. weld throat crack
1.00E+12
1.00E+10
25 yr
2.5 yr 0.7 yr
Weld cycles to failure
1.00E+08
0.3 yr 0.1 yr
1.00E+06
1.00E+04
1.00E+02
1.00E+00
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000
Nominal weld stress, lb/in2
FIG. 2. Crack growth in conveyor weld since
time of welding.
The statement, “perform a better in-
spection,” is not an appropriate remedy
because all welds have defects that can-
not be eliminated even if they are located.
For example, FIG. 3A illustrates a “blind”
plug weld that failed due to high bending
stresses in diaphragm plates.2 Since the
equipment can be welded from only one
side, there is a gap where the crack started
and the plate failed. The bending stresses
in the design needed to be reduced by
thickening the plate and modifying the
weld details. In FIG. 3B, weld end discon-
tinuities are removed by completely weld-
ing around the plate and not allowing
sharp end weld details. This also reduces
the stress on the weld.
Keeping the cyclic stresses low in well-
designed welds is the most helpful meth-
od for avoiding weld fatigue failures. This
is not always possible, however, especially
with an existing design. For these cases,
welding fatigue improvement techniques
can increase the fatigue life of welds:
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 29
 Engineering Case Histories
• Improve weld geometry.
Deposited welds usually do not
have smooth transitions between
the zones they join. Undercutting
due to poor welding techniques
can occur, which can greatly
reduce weld fatigue life. Improving
the weld geometry by grinding or
re-melting areas, such as the weld
toe, can help in lowering the high
stress concentrations
FIG. 3. Plug weld failure and discontinuous weld.
Select 157 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
30JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
due to the discontinuities.
• Reduce residual stress.
High residual stresses can occur
during the welding process due
to the cooling of the molten
weld pool, and can result in high
tensile stresses, which can add
to the cyclic tensile stress. These
residual stresses can be lowered
by shot peening or weld thermal
relief methods.
Most manufacturing machine shops
will have the tools necessary for the
procedures described. The decision on
whether to perform any of these tech-
niques is based on the economics of the
situation.4 Some are quite time-consum-
ing, however, and only marginally benefi-
cial if carried out incorrectly.
LITERATURE CITED
1
Gurney, T. R., Fatigue of Welded Structures,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1979.
2
Sofronas, A., Analytical Troubleshooting of Process
Machinery and Pressure Vessels, Including Real-World
Case Studies, Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey,
2006.
3
Barsom, J. M. and S. T. Rolfe, Fracture and Fatigue
Control in Structures, 2nd Ed., Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey, 1987.
4
Kirkhope, K. J., R. Bell, L. Caron and R. I. Basu,
“Weld details fatigue life improvement techniques,”
Report SSC-400, PB97-193031, December 1996.
TONY SOFRONAS, D. Eng, was the
worldwide lead mechanical engineer
for ExxonMobil Chemicals before
retiring. He now owns Engineered
Products, which provides consulting
and engineering seminars on
machinery and pressure vessels.
Dr. Sofronas has authored several engineering books
and numerous technical articles on analytical methods.
 J. ECHOLS, G. CROWLEY AND S. O’NEILL
Risk Opportune LLP, Houston, Texas
Navigating energy volatility: Understanding
the principles of commodity risk management
The persistent volatility of energy pric-
es is well known, and sustained price move-
ments have fueled a boom-and-bust cycle
in different energy sectors for decades. Ef-
fective commodity risk management inevi-
tably gives way to price risk management.
This, in turn, implies that an enterprise
knows what price risks it faces and that it
has decided to do something about it—
even if that something is nothing.
In helping companies build, evaluate
or repair commodity risk management
activities in the decades since US energy
deregulation began in 1980, a few endur-
ing principles stand out. Our view is that
effective price risk management is found-
ed on a thoughtful, board-directed view
of risk appetite considering the commer-
cial strategies being employed. In turn,
this top-down directive empowers the
development of a measurable business
case linked to a risk management policy
and multi-layered limits to ensure that ev-
eryone in the organization is on the same
page—from traders/risk managers to in-
vestor relations.
Next, the nuts and bolts of execution
come into play—the people, processes
and systems that carry out commodity risk
management daily. Good separation of
front-, mid- and back-office functions are
basic, as is an effective trade/deal capture
process. A system that serves as a single
source for all stakeholders is essential and
can add efficiency to a complex activity.
Risk oversight is a final essential. The
ability to challenge positions and carry
out stress testing ensures that the board-
directed views on risk management stay
aligned with the efforts in the trenches.
People lose their jobs over surprises in
this area.
Our framework for effective risk man-
agement directly addresses a company’s
capabilities that link risk appetite, risk pol-
icy and limits, commercial strategies, orga-
nizational design, oversight and reporting.
Who needs an effective risk man-
agement function? Contract-based
commodity enterprises that are traders
and marketers generally have a robust
framework for buying and selling energy
commodities, backed by clear policies, an
effective organizational design and systems
in place, with an active oversight function.
Enterprises that hold self-images as
asset-based companies offer different
challenges. A key strength for many com-
panies is the effective placement and op-
eration of capital assets (i.e., refineries,
distribution, pipelines, midstream, etc.)
or the successful ability to explore or ex-
ploit oil and gas reserves.
For asset-based enterprises, the price
risk DNA that is dominant in traders and
marketers can be nominal. The lack of
deep valuation and price risk management
skills is not necessarily a fault. However,
the ultimate question is whether the com-
pany’s inherent commodity-related risks
are understood and acceptable, as per the
board’s guidelines. If not, then embarking
on a workable commodity risk manage-
ment framework is needed. This begins
with understanding how market price
changes impact a company’s results, as
well as determining whether such inherent
commodity risk is acceptable.
For company leaders, it helps to envi-
sion risk management as a strategic ob-
jective that can provide a competitive ad-
vantage and not simply as an operational
requirement. Yes, costs exist (i.e., systems,
people, etc.), but understanding risk ulti-
mately leads to improved processes, in-
creased efficiency and better decisions,
all of which drive profitability. As the old
saying goes, “The best offense is a great
defense,” and we contend this certainly ap-
plies to risk management for energy com-
modities trading.
Lender considerations. Asset-based
lending in the sphere of energy commodi-
ties can present complex considerations,
depending on whether the counterparty
is involved in trading and marketing or
whether the counterparty owns and oper-
ates assets, and earns at least part of its rev-
enues based on commodity prices.
Traders and marketers. For counter-
parties involved in trading and market-
ing, the traditional borrowing base is built
upon agreed percentages of eligible re-
ceivables and inventory. However, signifi-
cant losses in trading can occur quickly in
volatile markets, potentially reducing the
counterparty’s expected future cash flows
and increasing the lender’s risk exposure
significantly in the days or weeks follow-
ing the most recent borrowing base report.
Therefore, a lender’s understanding of
its counterparty’s risk management frame-
work is essential. Evaluating the frame-
work involves assessing the counterparty’s
understanding of risk appetite and the re-
lationship between that risk appetite and
its risk policy, its risk limits and the orga-
nizational design and oversight in place to
monitor risk-based transactions. The exis-
tence of a comprehensive risk policy, well-
defined risk limits and clear responsibility
for risk oversight can provide a lender with
insight into how a counterparty can react
to adverse market outcomes and avoid or
limit losses.
Lenders should also develop reporting
protocols with their trading and market-
ing counterparties to ensure that lenders
understand the counterparty’s positions
and results on a frequent basis.
Asset-based counterparties. For
counterparties operating assets with a rev-
enue stream derived, at least in part, from
commodity prices, lenders face increased
risk as commodity prices decline. This is
not only due to the exposure held directly
by the lender’s counterparties, but also
to their counterparties’ customers, who
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 31
 Risk
could also face severe financial distress in
a volatile price environment. The resulting
domino effect can be disastrous for lenders
that underestimate commodity price risk.
Determining whether such a coun-
terparty actively assesses its exposure to
commodity prices is an important first
step. To the extent that such exposure is
more than nominal, understanding how
the counterparty measures and monitors
such exposure is like understanding the
REDUCE ENERGY COSTS AND
INCREASE OPERATING MARGINS
Performance monitoring and predictive maintenance
software for shell-and-tube heat exchanger networks
SmartPM aids engineers in analyzing
heat exchanger networks to improve
operations. The software can:
• Estimate exchanger cleaning
schedules to improve energy
efficiency, reduce fuel consumption,
and manage fouling
• Implement HTRI heat transfer and
pressure drop methods to advance
calculation reliability
• Exchange data with Xist® cases for
rapid network modeling and analysis
Select 158 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
32
risk framework for trading and market-
ing companies. Is there a risk policy with
defined limits? If so, are the limits against
meaningful risk measures well understood
and consistent with the counterparty’s risk
appetite and business strategy? Is there
clear accountability for risk oversight?
Stated broadly, counterparties with
unmanaged commodity price exposure
can effectively transfer such exposure
to lenders that would otherwise be pro-
When you
need accurate
predictions of heat
exchanger network
performance, you
can count on HTRI.
www.htri.net
tected by the value of the collateral. Put
simply, linking effective commodity risk
management to the long-term assessment
of a lender’s risk is essential. This risk is
often underestimated, particularly by
smaller lenders that may lack expertise,
but even larger institutions with in-house
commodity risk management capabilities
may not have the proper communication
channels to filter important guidance to
loan officers. Regardless, the primary
objective of any sound risk management
framework for getting the right informa-
tion to the right people at the right time
may not be achieved, and the conse-
quences can be severe.
Managing energy price volatility ef-
fectively requires the development of a
well-ordered framework of policy, ex-
ecution and oversight. Lenders are well-
served in understanding whether their
counterparties display the core capabili-
ties needed to be effective at managing
energy price risk.
JOHN ECHOLS is a Partner in
Opportune’s energy consulting
practice. He has more than 30 yr
of business experience, including
6 yr as a senior executive in the
energy industry. Mr. Echels was a
partner with Arthur Andersen’s
audit practice, serving energy clients in Andersen’s
Houston, Texas and New Orleans, Louisiana offices.
He left Andersen to join Enron’s wholesale energy
trader, serving as Managing Director in both
commercial and commercial support roles. At Enron,
he assisted in the structuring of complex gas supply
contracts, as well as the design of complex integrated
power and gas arrangements.
GREG CROWLEY is a Director
in Opportune’s strategy and
enterprise risk practice areas.
During his 25-yr energy-centered
career, he has created and led
several commodity trading
platforms in both the physical
and financial institutional environments. Mr. Crowley
has worked across multiple industry segments
helping companies understand market, credit,
liquidity and operational risks.
SEAN O’NEILL is a Director in
Opportune’s process and technology
practice in Houston, Texas. He has
more than 25 yr of experience with
creating, preserving and selling
economic value added through the
successful execution of organic
growth initiatives, acquisitions and divestitures, and
process improvement at commodities trading and
manufacturing firms. Mr. O’Neill has a proven track
record of integrating market and liquidity risk analysis
with valuation uncertainty assessments to ensure
accurate estimates of risk and valuations across
complex energy commodity derivative positions in
portfolios with gross market value of more than $2 B.
 Executive
Viewpoint
Trends in the global process furnace market
Whether it is heating process fluids to
achieve enough temperature in crude at-
mospheric and vacuum distillation units,
or reaction temperatures inside furnace
tubes to produce ethylene, vinyl chloride
monomer, synthetic gas and continuous
catalytic reformer reactors, or simple pro-
cess heating (thermal fluid), process fur-
naces play a critical role in refineries and
petrochemical complexes. Process furnac-
es are mostly qualified as long-lead items
or critical items in tenders, so they are of-
ten ordered in the early phases of a project.
Over the past few decades, the market
for process furnaces has experienced tre-
mendous changes. Mostly driven by effi-
ciency and total cost of ownership (TCO),
the process furnace market is strongly
influenced by the need for refineries and
petrochemical assets to comply with ever
tighter environmental standards (e.g., fu-
els and emissions) and by the growth of
petrochemical demand.
Market evolution 2014-2019: Deep
shifts in demand. After robust demand,
driven by the latest petrochemical growth
cycle, the furnace market experienced a
strong slowdown in volume—reaching
its lowest point in 2017—due to the drop
in oil prices in 2014 (FIG. 1). The furnace
market has partially recovered but has
not reached levels prior to the crisis. In
the meantime, client expectations and de-
mand patterns have changed considerably.
The main driver of the furnace market
remains cost effectiveness. However, this
driver is expressed in two different ways,
both which have drastically impacted the
market over the last few years. First, on the
lower end of the furnace market—mostly
cost-driven furnace manufacturers with no
technology integration—there is a strong
drive towards lower cost execution. This
trend is supported by low-cost fabrication
and material sourcing—mostly in Asia—
and has been driven by large engineering,
procurement and construction (EPC)
companies primarily under strong pres-
THOMAS GRIMAUD, Executive Vice President, Engineering and Solutions,
Axens, Paris, France; and NIAZ MUSTAFA, Global Commercial Director,
Process Furnaces, Engineering and Solutions, Axens, Houston, Texas
sure from refining and petrochemical pro-
ducers to reduce their investment costs.
Second, on the higher end of the fur-
nace market—mostly technology inte-
grated furnace manufacturers—there has
been an evolution towards the develop-
ment of a reduction in TCO. This move is
leading to more integrated offers, with the
objective to improve operations with mul-
tiple services. This includes technical ser-
vices for new assets to integrated revamp-
ing approaches in which energy efficiency
and compliance with stricter emissions
standards are combining to provide higher
value to clients. In this approach, overall
costs are significantly reduced. However,
an integrative approach requires develop-
ing additional skills and competencies.
Both market segments (e.g., high-end
and low-end) have experienced similar
trends in project execution, such as low-
cost sourcing and in low-cost fabrication,
as well as modularizing furnaces to reduce
site erection costs and lead time when
project requirements imposed such ar-
rangements.
The growth of the process furnace
market has been unequally spread across
regions. During the oil price crisis, a
strong deceleration was observed in every
region. However, the main engines of the
market (e.g., the Middle East and Asia)
have restarted. At present, 55% of the fur-
nace market and more than two-thirds of
its growth is in the Middle East and Asia
(FIG. 2). This growth is driven by major
refining and petrochemical projects in
those two regions.
Market competition: Toward diversity
and integration. The process furnace mar-
ket is comprised of three different groups:
• Group 1, which represents
approximately 50% of market
volume, are the global integrated
actors, chiefly large EPC
companies. These companies
base their development on their
own technology.
• Group 2 is constituted mostly by
small and agile companies that can
deliver projects in different regions
of the world depending on their
experience and capability. They
are generally private capital and
family-owned subject matter experts
(SMEs) in Italy, Spain, the UK,
Korea, Japan and the US who have
generally been through the crisis by
developing strategies to reduce their
costs (e.g., lower overheads and
increased low-cost sourcing).
• Group 3 is mostly fabricators that
evolved toward furnace engineering
or small engineering groups who
developed into furnace equipment.
Their area of influence is mainly
regional, but they are less present
when it comes to global tenders and
execution in other regions. They are
notably located in the US, Europe,
Korea, India and China.
The evolution of process furnace man-
ufacturers has mirrored the evolution
of the market: small and family-owned
companies from Group 2 have increas-
ingly developed their ability to source
in low-cost areas to survive the oil price
drop crisis. Larger and integrated players
have developed their cost competitive-
ness and have chosen to build their devel-
opment with their own technologies and
on larger offerings based on their group
products and services.
Market demand and perspectives.
Since the slump of 2017, the market has
been recovering at a relatively steady pace.
However, furnace manufacturing capacity
still exceeds demand in most areas and
pressure on prices remains high, specifi-
cally in Europe where the highest concen-
tration of furnace vendors is located.
Based on project forecast, the process
furnace market is expected to continue its
recovery in 2019 and 2020 and will possi-
bly revert to its robust levels witnessed in
2014. This recovery is highly dependent
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 33
 Executive Viewpoint
upon the speed at which several major
projects will materialize, especially in the
refining and petrochemical sectors in Asia
and the Middle East.
Digitalization. Beyond these vol-
ume considerations, high-speed data
networks, cloud-based systems and ad-
vanced data techniques are leading a dis-
tinct change in the way industries moni-
tor and optimize their operating assets.
Refineries and petrochemicals sites that
adopt real-time unit monitoring tools in-
corporating on-demand, advanced mod-
elling or process performance will see an
immediate marketplace advantage. Such
initiatives include a digital servicea that
addresses the challenge to substantially
improve the efficiency of refineries and
petrochemical sites, and furnaces spe-
cifically. This service automatically col-
lects data from the site, with the highest
standards of cybersecurity, and converts
it into normalized key performance in-
dicators (KPIs) using proprietary high-
fidelity models in real time. Results are
displayed through customized dash-
50
40
30
Furnace market growth, %
20
10
2% –25%
0
–10
–20
–30
–40
2014 2015
FIG. 1. Evolution of the non-proprietary process furnace market, 2014–2018.
FIG. 2. More than 50% of the non-proprietary furnace market is in Asia and the Middle East.
Source: Axens.
34 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
boards and projection tools that acceler-
ate decision-making processes.
Revamping. In the refining world,
where margins are highly volatile, en-
vironmental standards are driving sig-
nificant plant emissions reduction and
technological changes, and where energy
costs and energy efficiency are becoming
increasingly important, the revamping of
old assets to obtain “more with less” is
another strong driving force for process
furnace manufacturers.
This is particularly true for regions
with cost and demand constraints, such
as Europe, where most refining produc-
ers are looking for more from their assets,
as well as transforming their assets to ob-
tain a more versatile feed (e.g., fuel oil to
fuel gas) or even to convert their refiner-
ies to bio-based feedstocks.
The ability to design and endorse the
process characteristics of a fully revamped
furnace, together with significant capabil-
ities for piping and instrumentation that
are often required in large projects, is cre-
ating a differentiation between furnace
38%
18%
–27% –33%
2016 2017 2018 2019
vendors. Larger revamping projects are
requiring a broader set of capabilities that
restrain the number of players with the
critical resource and experience in this
segment, whereas most furnace manufac-
turers can manage simpler projects, such
as convection section revamping.
In this respect, the acquisition of
Heurtey Petrochem by Axens has al-
lowed Heurtey Petrochem Solutions—
the new brand under which the furnace
activity is developed within the group—
to integrate technological support and
resources that reinforce its capabilities
to conduct large and integrated revamp-
ing, which necessitate a strong coordina-
tion between the process technology and
project construction teams.
A choice in growth strategies. In the
rapidly evolving furnace market, furnace
companies face two choices: growing and
sustaining their activities on equipment
and execution costs or growing through
enhanced offers integrating technology
and services. Certain actors have been
practicing both to combine a search for
competitiveness and an improvement of
their positioning. However, only tech-
nology-integrated companies have been
successful in combining both to offer
additional services like emissions reduc-
tion technology, higher efficiency fur-
naces, high levels of modularization and
technical service for furnaces.
NOTES
a
Refers to Axens’ Connect’In, an Axens’ software-as-
a-service
THOMAS GRIMAUD is a chemical
process engineer graduate from
École Nationale Supérieure de Chimie
de Paris and from the Insead Global
Executive MBA. He held various
management positions at Total,
Arkema and Manoir Industries before
joining Heurtey Petrochem in 2015. Mr. Grimaud is
Executive Vice President in charge of the Engineering
and Solutions business unit of Axens, which regroups
the former activities of Heurtey Petrochem, the project
execution teams of Prosernat, and the advanced services
of the Performance Programs product line of Axens.
NIAZ MUSTAFA graduated from the
University of Calicut India with a
degree in chemical engineering. He
has more than 25 yr of process design
and commercial experience in process
furnaces. He held positions at
Engineers India Ltd., Lummus Heat
Transfer and Technip (KTI Corporation) before joining
Petro-Chem Development Inc. (later acquired by Heurtey
Petrochem) in 2006. Based out of Houston, Texas, he is
the Global Commercial Director of Furnaces for the
engineering and solutions business unit of Axens.
YOUR PARTNER IN
FUELING REFRACTORY
SUCCESS
When you partner with North
America’s largest producer of
refractory products, a dedicated
contractor / installer network,
and a vast network of local
distribution centers, you’ve got a
team of problem solvers in your
corner. Choose the expertise of
HWI. Our people – and technology –
will ignite your refractory success.
That’s intensity at work.

TO LEARN MORE, CALL

412-375-6756 OR VISIT
THINKHWI.COM/
REFINERIES-PETROCHEMICALS

INTENSITY AT WORK
Select 81 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 | Special Focus
PROCESS OPTIMIZATION
Optimization is a wide umbrella under which engineers can identify
opportunities to shift plant and refinery operations to higher
levels of efficiency. Through innovative thinking and engineering
prowess, new processing technologies are increasing profitability
for refinery and petrochemical plant operators. The Special Focus
explores innovative methods and programs to ensure that HPI
facilities operate at their optimum levels of safety and efficiency.

Photo: A view of Marathon Petroleum Corp.’s 119,000-bpd Anacortes refinery

north of Seattle, Washington. Photo courtesy of Marathon Petroleum Corp.
 Special Focus
Set refinery profitability goals
While the ultimate purpose of oper-
ating a refinery is to produce gasoline,
diesel or asphalt, key objectives include
improving return on investment (ROI),
net profitability and cash flow.1
Great strides have been made in im-
proving plant efficiency and productivity
by implementing online, interactive com-
puter controls. Key segments of refiner-
ies have been upgraded, such as vacuum
tower steam ejectors and vacuum con-
densers. Tower resid stripping trays have
also been replaced with new types of
structured packing.
But has this improved profitability or
cash flow? How can the first-line man-
agement level know that its cash flow or
ROI has been improved?
Setting goals. Process engineers try
to keep products on spec and minimize
utility consumption and pump outages.
What other goals can be set, and what
other guidelines can be employed? At the
first-line management level, cash flow,
net profitability or ROI cannot be easily
measured, but they can be determined if
things are really improving.
To gauge directionally if cash flow is
improving, the following variables, which
are listed in order of economic impor-
tance, should be monitored:
1. Minimum of 1,050°F (566°C)
minus gasoil in vacuum resid,
based on ASTM D-1160 test
2. Minimum of 650°F (343°C)
minus diesel in fluid catalytic
cracking unit (FCCU) feed, based
on ASTM D-86 test
3. Minimum of 340°F (171°C) jet
fuel (sim distillation) in naphtha
4. Minimum of C3–C4 liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) in fuel gas
5. Minimum C7 toluene precursors
in isomerization unit feed
Process Optimization
E. JOHNSON and A. JOHNSON, Graham Corp.,
Covington, Louisiana; and N. LIEBERMAN,
Process Improvement Engineering, Metairie, Louisiana
6. Minimum C6 (i.e., benzene be only 400 bpd, rather than 2,000 bpd.
precursors) in reformer feed Additionally, this promotes coke forma-
7. Minimum of amylenes (C5 ) tion due to the lack of wetting of the grid.
in alkylation feed Over a period of months, the quality of
8. Minimum butylenes (alky feed) in the gasoil product will deteriorate, and the
fluid coking unit (FCU) naphtha flash zone pressure will increase.
9. Minimize Ni + Va in gasoil to The metals in the gasoil will increase,
FCU feed hydrotreater and these higher amounts of metals will
10. Minimize slop production. ruin the catalyst in the FCCU feed gasoil
hydrotreater, which is contrary to Goal #9
Vacuum resid gasoil quality. Con- listed here.
sidering the diesel diluent needed to
add to vacuum resid to meet Goal #6 oil Increasing flash zone temperature.
viscosity specs, each barrel of gasoil left The heater outlet could be raised from
in vacuum tower bottoms is a $20 loss. 760°F (404°C) to the design tempera-
This is particularly true with the new, ture of 780°F (416°C) if the heater is not
5,000-ppm-sulfur spec on bunker fuel oil over-firing, if the forced draft (FD) air
for ocean-going ships. blower is running below rated speed, and
However, many plants do not sample
the vacuum tower bottoms stream for fear 680°F resid
of a fire at the sample point. The auto ig-
nition temperature of the vacuum resid is
320°F (160°C). The sample point is on
the run-down stream at 450°F (232°C).
The plant safety department may prohibit I.D. steel sample bottle
the use of such a sample station.
However, a sample can be obtained
without any hazard, even though the resid
solidifies at temperatures below the 320°F FIG. 1. Sample bottle.
(160°C) auto-ignition temperature. The
sample can be obtained at the bottom’s
Vacuum system
pump discharge temperature of 680°F
(360°C) using a steel bottle, as shown in
FIG. 1. The bottle should be allowed to fill
with resid, blocked in and cooled, and then
unscrewed and sent to the lab.
The seemingly simplest way to reduce Vacuum gasoil
gasoil lost to vacuum resid would be to Wash oil grid Wash oil
cut back on the wash oil flowrate (FIG. 2)
above the grid from approximately 5,000 Feed
bpd to 3,000 bpd. However, this will not
yield 2,000 bpd of incremental heavy
gasoil product. About 80% of the wash Resid
oil evaporates in the grid, so the reduced
FIG. 2. Wash oil protects the grid from coking.
wash oil lost to vacuum tower resid would
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 37
 Process Optimization
if the burner flames are not near the tubes. the average coil temperature by promoting
However, the higher flash zone tempera- more vaporization in the heater tubes. The
ture will increase cracked gas flow, which lower temperature will also reduce the rate
can overload the vacuum system. The of cracked gas formed in the tubes.
tower pressure will increase as a result, and The extra steam may cause an overload
gasoil recovery will drop. of the first-stage ejector capacity and raise
Another option is to increase the steam the vacuum tower flash zone pressure.
through the vacuum heater passes concur- Only a plant test can determine the best
rently with the higher outlet temperature. course of action.
The reduced oil soaking time in the tube
due to the steam would offset the hotter Commissioning spare steam ejector.
outlet, decreasing the formation of cracked One option is to commission the spare
gas. Also, the coil steam would reduce the first-stage ejector. Previously, each time
hydrocarbon partial pressure in the flash this has been attempted (FIG. 4), the vac-
zone. This does place a larger load on the uum breaks and the tower top increases in
first-stage ejector (FIG. 3). However, the ex- minutes by 20 mm Hg. Why? Testing the
tra steam in the heater passes will suppress jet by itself showed that it ran well. The
steam nozzle was replaced anyway, but that
Motive system made no difference to the performance.
Startup of the idle jet was again at-
tempted. However, the new first-stage jet
First-stage jet
was on an 80-ft elevated platform by itself
and was connected to the tower overhead
vapor line by 120 ft of 16-in., bare piping.
As soon as the outside operator cracked
open the inlet gate valve (FIG. 4), the local
vacuum pressure gauge jumped from 36
FIG. 3. Extra steam to the vacuum heater mm of Hg to 48 mm of Hg and continued
overloads the first-stage jet.
to trend higher.
This repeated each time, and it was
noted that the suction line could be full
“A” of water. When the operator opened valve
Old jet B, water would be drawn into both the
old and new ejectors, bogging down both
jets. It would be necessary to drain down
the 16-in. line going to the new jet before
16 in. opening valve B. However, the 2-in. valve
“B” (i.e., valve C) just upstream of valve B
New
jet could not be opened because the 100-ft-
“C” long, 16-in. line was under a vacuum. If
opened, it would draw air into the jets and
50 ft 2 in. the vacuum would break.
A hose was run from the 2-in. drain to
a bucket of water 50 ft below the C drain
Water valve (FIG. 4). For this to work, the hose
Bucket must first be filled (i.e., primed) with wa-
FIG. 4. Commissioning the spare first-stage ter. Then, the 16-in. line can be drained
ejector. before opening valve B.
The 2-in. drain should have been piped
Gas
into the seal drum or the initial installation
should have been designed to avoid low
Steam
points in the piping that can gather liquid.
Diffuser Silicas in steam nozzle. Months before,
Silicates
deposits the vacuum was suddenly deteriorating. A
common cause is silicate deposits in the
FIG. 5. Silicate fouling is a possible cause steam nozzle (FIG. 5). The steam quality
cause of poor ejector performance in may have suffered, contaminated with car-
refineries.
ry-over from a kettle waste heat boiler. The
38 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
entrained moisture can be 10,000 ppm of
total dissolved solids (TDS). This is main-
ly silicates, which precipitate out in the
steam nozzle. A plug on the back of the jet
can be used to clear the steam nozzle with
a wire brush. This cannot be done while
the jet is running. Once the new ejector is
online, the old jet can be cleaned. This plug
is intended to check the internal diameter
(ID) of the steam nozzle, but it can also
be used as a clean-out access to the steam
nozzle. Note that larger ejectors may not
be supplied with this connection. In this
case, the motive steam chest would need to
be removed to check and clean the nozzle.
Wet steam. Water in steam degrades jet
performance and damages the ejector. A
cyclonic steam separator will help to pre-
vent the problem. The condensate drains
through a bucket trap. They work similar
to a centrifugal separator.
The effect of wet motive steam to an
ejector can be observed. The temperature
of the ejector discharge line drops by 15°F–
30°F within a few feet of the jet discharge.
If the steam blowing out of a bleeder is in-
visible for an inch or more, the steam is dry.
If the steam blows out white, it may still be
reasonably dry (i.e., a few percent mois-
ture). If water accumulates at a low-point
drain every few minutes, the steam is likely
wet enough to adversely affect vacuum. As
a test, 30 ft of a 2-in. steam supply line were
wrapped with rags and insulation, and sev-
eral mm of Hg were gained.
Cooling water flow. It was observed that
the cooling water flow to the first-stage
vacuum condenser was gradually falling
and the tubes were chemically cleaned to
remove scale, but it failed to help.
The problem was not fouling, but air
that evolves out of the water at the con-
denser outlet. The evolved air chokes
off the flow of water through the tubes.
As the water rises 80 ft to the elevated
surface condensers, it loses head pres-
sure and liberates air. The dissolved air
content of the cooling water should be
constant, but why was the loss of cooling
water getting worse?
Investigation showed that the suction
piping of the cooling water pumps was 7
ft above the water level in the sump. That
means that the suction piping to the water
pump was under a vacuum of 3 psi, or 12
psia—2.3 ft of water are in a psi. If small
holes develop in the carbon-steel suction
 Process Optimization

piping due to corrosion, the air is sucked and time, so the carbon steel ends up not was determined that the recycle line was
into the pump’s suction. At the 60-psig being as cheap as first thought. Stainless- installed correctly (FIG. 6).
pump discharge pressure, the air dissolves steel tubes, brass tubes or duplex-stainless However, the recycle line is piped from
in the water. In that way, the dissolved air tubes are preferred in vacuum condensers. the discharge of the last-stage ejector back
content of the cooling water can increase to the suction of the first-stage ejector.
by a factor of four. Furthermore, the prob- Recycle line control. The vacuum sys- Most of the load at the end of the ejector
lem could grow worse with time. tem’s recycle pressure control caused the system is noncondensables. When the re-
One temporary solution is to wrap tower pressure to fluctuate when it was cycle flows back to the suction of the first-
the suction line in duct tape or a fiber- put into service, but inspection failed to stage ejector, it not only adds load to the
glass wrap, which will also help the pump find anything wrong with the control first-stage ejector but also overloads the
discharge pressure. Duct tape has also valve. The P&IDs were reviewed, and it second- and third-stage ejectors. Ordinar-
been used to temporarily mitigate an air
leak on the steam ejector diffusor. Note:
While duct tape does a good job of seal-
ing a vacuum leak, using it for more than
a temporary patch is not advised. If the
metal is thin enough to develop a hole, it
could be uniformly thinning and could
collapse on itself.

Tube material selection. One of the

first intercondensers was re-tubed due to
wear, and that condenser is now present-
ing issues. Condensers often need to be
re-tubed at least once during their opera-
tional life, and they normally work better
after new, clean tubes have been installed.
In this case, the condenser operated well
for the first few months, but it should
have operated more effectively due to the
material change: the stainless tubes were
replaced with carbon-steel tubes, which
appeared to be a better option. Not only
were the carbon-steel tubes readily avail-
able and cheaper, but carbon steel also has
a better heat transfer rate than stainless
tubes. The improved heat transfer rates
should give the condenser more capacity.
However, for this service, carbon-steel
tubes are a bad choice. The carbon-steel
tubes are exposed to cooling water that is
rich in oxygen on one side, and oxygen-
containing vapors on the other side.
These cause the carbon steel to oxidize
and rust. While the tubes do work well at
first, it does not take long for them to rust
over, impeding heat transfer. That rust
buildup can choke off the cooling water
flow over time, further degrading perfor-
mance. Carbon-steel tubes generally do
not last more than 1 yr–2 yr before devel-
oping major cooling water leaks.
This also explains the increase in hot-
well condensate rates and the reduction
in condenser performance.
In addition to negatively affecting
performance, carbon-steel tubes must
be replaced more often because they fail
so quickly. This requires additional work
Select 159 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
39
 Process Optimization
Steam Feed back
from tower
top pressure
First transmitter
jet
Steam Control
valve
Tower Second
jet
Recycle
control Third
(incorrect) jet
FIG. 6. The vacuum system’s recycle pressure
control caused the tower pressure to fluctuate
when it was put into service, but a P&ID
review determined that the recycle line was
installed correctly.
Feed back from tower
Steam top pressure transmitter
Control
valve
First
Steam
jet
Second
jet
Tower
Recycle
control
(correct)
FIG. 7. A larger pressure differential allows the
sizing of a smaller line and control valve.
ily, a significant amount of load is needed
to change the suction pressure of the first-
stage ejector, but the third-stage ejector is
designed to handle only the noncondens-
able loading at the tail end of the system.
When the entire system is recycled, the
last ejector is overloaded, causing it to
break performance. This causes the tower
top pressure to fluctuate and the recycle
control valve to cycle between fully open
and fully shut.
This is a common error. By recycling
from the third-stage ejector discharge
back to the first-stage suction, a large
pressure differential exists compared to
the correct configuration, which is re-
cycling from the first-stage ejector dis-
charge back to the first-stage suction.
The larger pressure differential allows the
sizing of a smaller line and control valve,
which is cheaper to install (FIG. 7).
Rather than controlling the tower
pressure with a recycle line, nitrogen can
be bled into the system. A nitrogen line
was on the tower for purging, as well as a
40 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
small connection at the tower top where
the nitrogen could be introduced. Con-
trolling how much nitrogen is introduced
allows the control of the vacuum. Steam
is also available to bleed into the system
and can be used in place of the nitrogen.
Steam Unfortunately, in this case, nitrogen
would not work. The system was a three-
stage system, and bleeding in nitrogen
would overload the last-stage ejector.
AC
Steam could be bled to the first-stage
ejector suction to control the load and
suction pressure, but this would require a
significant amount of steam. Also, the op-
erating cost of doing so can be expensive.
Bleeding in steam is not a good long-term
solution. A properly installed recycle line
is ideal for the installation because it has
added no operating costs.
Corrosion control inhibitors. One un-
usual way to improve vacuum is to shut
down the corrosion control spray being
used to help reduce corrosion. At the
Steam tower top pressure of 10 mm Hg, water
will flash at 52°F (11°C). If the corrosion
Third inhibitors are being diluted with water
jet
and injected into the system, that water
AC
will flash and load the system.
The best way to prevent this is to chill
the inhibitor mixture before it is injected;
this will avoid flash off and system over-
load. Equipment can also be built out of
more corrosion-resistant material.
Drain leg leak. To identify air leaks, the
offgas composition should be examined
for unusually high levels of oxygen and
nitrogen. An air leak will cause the third-
stage ejector pressure to be lower than
design. In this case, the leak was in the
second condenser’s condensate drain leg,
about 10 ft above the condensate drum.
How would air ever leak into the con-
densate drain leg, as those drain legs are
filled with liquid? The legs are also at a
subatmospheric pressure down to the liq-
uid level in the condensate receiver. If the
line were to develop a hole, it would pull
air into the system, not leak out as would
a line under positive pressure. If air was
being pulled into those lines, why did it
not flow down into the hotwell with the
condensate? The answer is that the flow
through the seal legs is low compared to
the line sizes, which are designed to vent
back to the condensers. Any air that gets
pulled into a leak would rise toward the
ejectors, which operate at a low pressure.
If the leak is large enough, the air being
pulled in can prevent the condensate from
draining and cause the condenser to flood.
Takeaway. When the goals were re-
viewed, it was determined that the 1,050°F
minus content of the vacuum residue had
dropped from 18% to 10%. This had re-
duced the vacuum resid production rate
by about 2,000 bpd, with a concurrent in-
crease in vacuum gasoil yield of 2,000 bpd.
The delta value was worth $40,000/d.
This achieved the goal of improving cash
flow by $14 MM/yr with better vacuum
tower operation, and ROI and net profit-
ability were significantly advanced.
LITERATURE CITED
1
Goldratt, E. M. and J. Cox, The Goal: Excellence in
Manufacturing, North River Press, 1984.
ALICIA JOHNSON is assisting
Graham Corp. with its expanding
support role as Performance
Improvement Engineer by helping
manage the company’s newly
opened Gulf Coast Office in
Covington, Louisiana. She
previously served as the Condenser Competiveness
Lead, overseeing a quick response office cell and
project managing jobs within Graham. She has also
worked as a Project Engineer, managing projects after
an order has been received and working closely with
the customer. In addition, she has spent time as the
Supervisor of heat transfer products, and has worked
as an Application Engineer, quoting and servicing
customers. Ms. Johnson graduated from Clarkson
University in Potsdam, New York with a BS degree
in mechanical engineering.
ERIC MICHAEL JOHNSON has
worked for 7 yr as a Service
Engineer for Graham Corp. in
Batavia, New York, specializing
in the evaluation, troubleshooting
and commissioning of vacuum
equipment. He previously acted
as the Supervisor of Graham’s service department,
overseeing the daily operation of its service team
and providing support for vacuum systems globally.
He now assists Graham Corp. with its expanding
support role by helping manage the company’s
newly opened Gulf Coast Office in Covington,
Louisiana. Mr. Johnson graduated from Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York with a
BS degree in mechanical engineering.
NORM LIEBERMAN graduated with
a degree in chemical engineering
from The Cooper Union in New York
in 1964. In 1965, while working for
Amoco Oil, he designed the first
complex fractionator using a
computer simulation (i.e., with
side draws, side strippers and pumparounds). Over
18,000 engineers and technicians have attended
Mr. Lieberman’s refinery troubleshooting seminars
since 1983. Based in New Orleans, Mr. Lieberman
specializes in the retrofit design of crude units,
fractionators, delayed cokers, sulfuric acid alkylation
plants and sulfur recovery units.
Select 59 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 AreYou
Are YouReady
Ready
forIMO
for IMO2020?
2020?

Whether your goals are handling difficult feeds or producing more diesel, Advanced
Refining Technologies (ART) offers you a better perspective on hydroprocessing.

Partner with us to meet IMO 2020 regulations head on and come out ahead. ART is the
proven leader in providing excellent solutions for today’s refining industry challenges.

• High Si Capacity Solutions • High Metals Capacity

for Coker Naphtha
• High Metals Capacity Solutions
for FCC Pretreat
• Distillate Selective Catalysts for
Increasing Diesel Demand
Hydrocracking Solutions
• High Metals Capacity Catalysts for
Opportunity RDS and EBR Feeds
• Specialized Catalyst(s) for
DAO Containing EBR Feeds

Visit arthydroprocessing.com

Select 55 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Special Focus Process Optimization
L. E. CURCIO, Refinery Automation Institute,
Morristown, New Jersey

Linear vs. nonlinear: Calculate gasoline

component properties
The US is the largest “gasoline guz- This is a mistake that can waste signifi- blend behavior). The nonlinear molecu-
zler” in the world, producing and con- cant capital because it is overestimating lar interactions show a difference in class:
suming about 9 MMbpd of gasoline— or underestimating valuable properties • Nonlinear blends at PONA
global production is approximately 45 (i.e., ON or RVP). (parafines, olefins, naphthenes,
MMbpd. Considering current gasoline aromatics)
prices (Regular 87 octane discounted Linear vs. nonlinear. The perennial • Paraffins and naphthenes
at $2.22/gal), and a $2.5-B/yr gasoline question is: What is the difference be- • Paraffins and olefins.
production cashflow for an average-size tween linear and nonlinear worth? It is Despite this behavior, the linear blends
US refinery, the capital involved is a stag- actually a simple blend of subjects that show same molecular class—e.g., paraf-
gering $250 B/yr. This means that even include physics, chemistry, engineering fins and paraffins, or olefins and olefins,
small production improvements have an and math. and so on.
enormous impact on the economics of Since gasoline and hydrocarbon- Gasoline has more than 30 specifi-
the US refining industry. based components don’t really “like” cations2 to be met simultaneously, and
However, sloppy gasoline production each other when combined, chemical most of them are nonlinear. Focusing on
costs the blender money. A simple ex- interactions modify the behavior of the the most important one from a revenue
ample illustrates the “sloppiness” value solution or blend. perspective, TABLE 1 shows which gaso-
in terms of easily understood property This means that 1 + 1 does not equal line properties are linear and which are
giveaway; that is, the gap between a spec 2 but might be equal to 3 or 1.5. The fol- nonlinear.
(e.g., 87 octane) and the actual produced lowing example illustrates the concept
gasoline property (for example, measured behind this complicated behavior. TABLE 1. Main gasoline properties
at 87.9 octane). FIG. 1 shows the blending of two com- behavior
A 2013 study undertaken by Valero1 ponents (same quantity, 1 bbl each): re- Linear/
indicates a US refining industry conser- formate with a research octane number Property Type nonlinear
vative octane giveaway of approximately (RON) of 100 and a light straight-run Research Performance Nonlinear
0.5 octane number (ON) and a Reid va- with a RON of 74. If the linear calculation octane
por pressure (RVP) giveaway of approxi- is done [i.e., (100 + 74) ÷ 2], the result is
Motor Performance Nonlinear
mately 0.3 psi. This is valued at approxi- 87, but if a blend sample is analyzed by a octane
mately $3 B/yr. Since there are 121 US lab, the result is 88.
RVP Volatility Nonlinear
refineries, $3B/121 = $25 MM per US The reason for this difference is the
refinery in property giveaway alone. strong interactions between molecules in TVL = 20 Volatility Nonlinear
Several alternatives can reduce the the blend that make the phenomena high- of VLI or DI
giveaway: ly nonlinear (i.e., 1 + 1 does not equal 2). Dist 10% Volatility Nonlinear
• Properly optimizing a recipe using For example, molecules differ in struc-
Dist 50% Volatility Nonlinear
adequate tools ture, size or thermal stability (differing
• Using better measurement Dist 90% Volatility Nonlinear
systems—e.g., more precise Endpoint Volatility Nonlinear
analyzers Density Performance Linear
• Accounting for the nonlinearity of
Sulfur Health and climate Linear
gasoline component properties.
This article is focused on the nonlin- Oxygen Health and climate Linear
earity of gasoline component properties. Aromatic Health and climate Linear
This might appear an easy task, but more
Olefins Health and climate Linear
than 60% of US refineries calculate the
FIG. 1. Linear vs. nonlinear RON analysis. Benzene Health and climate Linear
gasoline component properties linearly.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 43
 Process Optimization
FIG. 2. Gasoline recipe for making M2 grade (87 AKI and 10-psi RVP).
TABLE 2. Gasoline final blend properties using linear equations vs. nonlinear equa-
using linear and nonlinear equations tions, the difference is shown in TABLE 2.
Linear Nonlinear TABLE 2 indicates a discrepancy calcu-
lating the AKI and RVP (besides other
x AKI 87 87.25
nonlinear properties, the focus here is
x RVP 8.8 10 only on the main mentioned two proper-
ties) linearly or nonlinearly.
TABLE 3. Economics comparing M2- If the AKI and RVP are calculated non-
grade finished price (using nonlinear linearly, then the final values are 87.25
equations) vs. M2 grade finished price ON and the RVP is 10 psi; this means
(using linear equations) and relative that while the 10 psi RVP is reached, a
giveaway per batch, 100,000 bbl giveaway on the AKI exists. Conversely, if
Economics the AKI and RVP are calculated linearly,
M2 grade, nonlinear $/bbl $70.87 the final values are 87 ON and the RVP
is 8.8 psi. This means the 87 ON for the
M2 grade, Linear $/bbl $70.78
AKI has been met, but there is a giveaway
Giveaway, linear vs. $/bbl $0.09 on the 8.8-psi RVP. This means that mon-
nonlinear
ey is being left on the table for each batch.
$ per batch $ $9,000 TABLE 3 indicates some important ob-
$ per batch, 1 yr $ $450,000 servations. If the linearly calculated final
gasoline blend AKI and RVP are consid-
ered, the result is sellable gasoline that
TABLE 4. Comparing linear, nonlinear
and lab results is on-spec for the AKI (87) but shows a
giveaway of 1.2 psi in RVP—the giveaway
Linear Nonlinear Lab
is the difference between the spec (i.e.,
x AKI 87 87.25 87.2 10 psi) and the calculated values (i.e.,
x RVP 8.8 10 10.2 8.8 psi). The selling price for this gasoline
batch is $70.78/bbl. This appears to be
ideal, as the gasoline producer, refinery
Comparing gasoline properties. The or terminal has made a sellable gasoline
most important gasoline properties are with an ON of 87 but with a giveaway on
ON and vapor pressure (RVP). In this ex- vapor pressure.
ample, the focus is on these two properties. However, if nonlinear equations are
For example, if the goal is to produce used to calculate AKI and RVP, the results
an M2 grade [an anti-knock index (AKI) are surprising:
of 87 and an RVP of 10 psi], FIG. 2 shows • With nonlinear correlations,
the recipes and blend results. There are the final AKI is 87.25 and the final
eight blend components with the recipes RVP is 10 psi
in bbl (barrels) and the volume fraction, • The linear AKI is 87 ON and
inventory, prices and specs (M2). The the RVP is 8.8 psi.
goal is to make a finished M2 grade with Comparing linear and nonlinear
an AKI of > 87 and a maximum RVP of equations, the Delta AKI (linear AKI–
10 psi. If the blend results are compared nonlinear AKI) is a clear 0.25 ON give-
44 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
away, and the Delta RVP (linear RVP–
nonlinear RVP) is 1.2 psi.
If gasoline is produced using the lin-
ear correlation, then the selling price is
$70.78/bbl. If the nonlinear correlation is
used, the selling price is $70.87/bbl. The
price difference is $0.09/bbl. If the refin-
ery produces 100,000 bpd, assuming the
refinery operates for 50 weeks per year,
this equals roughly $500,000/yr. The
example refinery or oil storage blending
terminal is losing $500,000/yr due to the
linear/nonlinear issue. The focus in this
case has been on one batch per day. Large
refineries make more than one batch per
day, and certainly more than 100,000 bpd.
This example shows the financial im-
portance of the nonlinearity of gasoline
blends in blending calculations.3
Properties calculation methods. The
concept of linear and nonlinear blend-
ing are summarized here, underlining the
main differences between the two.
The primary and easiest approach tak-
en is the linear approximation, which clus-
ters classes of molecules into “lumps” and
can use the following volumetric equation
(Eq. 1) to describe this behavior:
Q b = Q11V1 + Q 2V2 + ... Q iVi (1)
where:
Q b = Property of blend
Q i = Property of component i
Vi = Volume fraction of component i
in blend
The molecular interaction that the
linear approach ignores must be consid-
ered. The nonlinear blending properties
can be calculated using many methods,
including:
• Linear approximation with bonuses
(good results if bonuses are
updated constantly)
• Blending values method
• Developing regressed equations
using lab blend data
• Generic property models: Ethyl
RT-70 or DuPont interactions
to generate blending values.
Octane. Generally, the ON is one of the
most important and valuable gasoline
properties and is calculated using the
Ethyl RT-70 equations. Those equations
were developed in 1950, approximating
lab results over wide blending recipes,
using tens of thousands of US gasoline
blends from many refineries.

Today, it is one of the most common
methods to predict RON and MON. It is
easy to use even in its “shrink-wrapped”
form and does not require significant lab
data, like the DuPont interaction or the
regressed equation method.
The results in TABLE 2 were analyzed
with the RT-70 equation.
Vapor pressure. The other important
gasoline blend property is RVP, because
it is essential for using cheap butane in
blends, and for complying with the EPA
complex model.4 For RVP, the equa-
tion that has been used for several years
showing adequate accuracy is the Chev-
ron Research index method equation.
The results in TABLE 2 were analyzed
with the Chevron equation.
Disputes. In case of dispute, proof can
be determined in the lab. A certificate of
analysis can resolve any doubts regard-
ing the accuracy of a method. The good
quality of the nonlinear correlation may
be surprising. The results in TABLE 4
show how the lab data are very close to
Select 160 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
the nonlinear correlation (within the
reproducibility of the test method),
answering whether the nonlinear equa-
tions must be used.
Takeaway. This paper has focused on
the two major gasoline non-linear prop-
erties (RVP and ON). However, gasoline
has more than 30 specs in addition to
these two non-linear properties. For ex-
ample, other non-linear properties to be
taken into account are drivability index,
TVL/20 and distillation temperatures
(initial boiling point, T10-T50-T90 and
final boiling point). Refineries and oil
terminals must take the non-linearity
into account by using blend optimizer
software and not simple linear blend cal-
culators to save money on software. With
more than 9 MMbpd of US gasoline pro-
duction, it is economically vital to con-
sider the difference between linear and
nonlinear property calculation results
and understand the potential impact on
profit or loss. Refineries and oil termi-
nals must consider, at the minimum, us-
ing nonlinear calculations for octane and
Process Optimization
vapor pressure to minimize giveaway or
being off-specification.
LITERATURE CITED
1
Seiver, D. S., “Optimized gasoline blending—a stan-
dardized approach,” Valero Energy, Invensys Users
Group, January 2014.
2
Curcio, L. E., “What is blending?” Hydrocarbon
Processing, December 2017.
3
“Gasoline blending for refiners and traders course,”
Refinery Automation Institute LLC, 2018.
4
Barsamian, A. and L. E. Curcio, “Calculate gas-
oline RVP seasonal change giveaway economics,”
Hydrocarbon Processing, April 2017.
LEE ELISEO CURCIO is a Chemical
Engineer, Vice President and
CFO at Refinery Automation
Institute (RAI). As a blending and
optimization specialist, he has
worked with RAI for the past 6 yr
in the areas of gasoline, diesel
and bunker blending, ethanol nonlinear property
correlations and octane boost, and naphtha and
butane blending. He also teaches the gasoline,
diesel and bunker blending optimization section of
RAI’s blending public course. As a manager, he is
responsible for growing the business, acquiring new
customers and managing company cashflow. He
worked previously at Catholic University of Louvain
in advanced modeling and optimization. He holds
BS and MS degrees in chemical engineering with
high honors from the University of Calabria, Italy.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 45
Need unparalleled combustion process safety and control?

WE’RE IN THE ZONE.

The WDG-VCM combustion analyzer, fast becoming the industry standard for combustion control and
safety functions, is now available with an EXd enclosure for IECEx Zone 1 requirement applications.

It’s rock-solid, reliably detecting combustion oxygen, COe, and hydrocarbon levels in a fired heater
or boiler. Its integral design offers a new layer of safety, with a self-contained, dual-compartment
EXd cast-aluminum housing. And its response time is unsurpassed, reporting 90 percent
of a step change in oxygen in just 11 seconds—ideal for precise combustion control
and safety-permissive functions.

Plus, with five configurable alarms, internal diagnostics and MODBUS communication,
as well as analog outputs for oxygen, combustibles, and hydrocarbon/methane,
it’s our most complete solution for combustion control safety applications.

Learn more at www.ametekpi.com

Select 74 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

© 2019 by AMETEK Inc. All rights reserved.

 Special Focus Process Optimization
R. PRAMANIK and N. R. SRINATH,
Fluor Daniel India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, India

Air-cooled steam surface condenser case study:

Retrofit vs. revamp
It is difficult to revamp an existing air-
cooled steam surface condenser (AC-
SSC) for higher throughput, since most
ACSSC suppliers have changed to a
single-tube row design and have discon-
tinued their multi-tube row design. The
challenge is further exacerbated since
the ACSSC handles steam under vacu-
um, and any maldistribution due to the
geometric change (from multiple rows
to a single row) can severely impact the
performance of the revamped ACSSC,
thereby negating the purpose of the re-
vamp. The case presented here is for an
existing multi-row ACSSC that needs to
be revamped for a higher steam through-
put by adding additional bays under the
constraint of limited space. This article
will discuss various available options,
from retrofitting the existing ACSSC FIG. 1. ACSSC bay banks showing 20 existing bays in two bay streets, and four new bays
without increasing the plot space, and proposed by the process licensor.
augmenting the existing bays with a new
set of identical bays, to a combination sulting in a corresponding increase in the condenser bays with larger motors,
of both revamp and retrofit. Finally, this steam turbine capacity and the condenser vis-à-vis revamping the existing
work will recommend the option that is capacity by approximately 32%, with 20 bays with additional bays.
most suitable for the specified condition steam pressure and ambient conditions
that meets the overall project schedule. remaining the same. Supplier limitation—old vs. new
technology. The following two op-
Existing ACSSC. The existing condens- Retrofit vs. revamp: The challenges. tions were available:
er was designed and built during the early Being a brownfield project, the biggest • Option A: Consider the additional
1980s. It was a typical horizontal multi- challenge was the availability of plot space increase in duty as independent to
row design with a slope of 40 mm/m. To for additional bays to cater to the higher the existing condensers and provide
cater to a condensing duty of 107 MW, heat duty. This challenge was compound- a complete new set of air-cooled
without compromising on the proper ed by the following constraints specific to steam condensers
distribution of steam across all the bays, the type of service and technology: • Option B: Consider the increase
two streets of bays (of 10 bays each) were • Ensuring proper distribution in heat duty as an extension of the
mounted back-to-back on a common of steam at 0.44 bar(a) existing one and provide additional
manifold (FIG. 1). This design ensured op- • Enabling the exiting supplier, bays, identical to the existing ones,
timum utilization of the plot space. which had already moved into a to cater to the additional duty.
single-row condenser design, to In Option A, which could have gone
Process design conditions under quote for this previous generation for an open bid to all ACSSC suppliers for
the revamp scenario. To increase plant of ACSSC—hence, a study the additional condenser, the challenge
throughput, the capacity of the existing was carried out to evaluate the was that most of the suppliers of ACSSCs
cracked gas compressor was increased, re- feasibility of retrofitting the existing have changed over to the single-tube row
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 47
 Process Optimization

TABLE 1. Case study for various revamp and retrofit options

No. of Motor power Motor power Air inlet
Design additional Heat for new for existing temperature,
option Case bays duty bays, kW bays, kW °C Limitations Remarks
1A Retrofit None 5% None 45 49 Performance Process licensor did not agree for reduced
margin on duty. Hence, this option was not
recommended.
1B Retrofit None 15% None 45 44.1 Performance The air inlet temperature was unacceptable
to the client. Hence, this option was not
recommended.
2 Revamp 4 15% 45 45 49 Plot space Even though this option was more attractive
and than Option 3B, retrofitting existing motors/
retrofit fans during a short shutdown window was
risky. Hence, this option was not recommended.
3A Revamp 8 15% 30 30 49 Plot space Although this option was attractive from
an operational expenditure point of view,
accommodating eight bays was found to be
infeasible without any major change in
the existing plot space/shutdown window.
Hence, this option was not recommended.
3B Revamp 6 15% 45 30 49 Plot space This option was recommended, since it was
optimum from a plot and performance point
of view.

Plot space limitation. The plot space

FIG. 2. ACSSC bay banks showing 20 existing bays along six new bays arranged in two bay
streets, as recommended in the case study.
design, thus the chance of obtaining a
condenser with a design identical to that
of the existing one—thereby ensuring
proper distribution of the steam in all the
condenser bays—was remote.
In Option B, the challenge was to have
a plot space to ensure that bundles and
bays would be identical to the existing
ones, thereby helping the supplier of the
existing condenser to supply them.
Since Option B was found to be more
feasible, it was decided to first perform an
in-house rerating of the existing condenser
for the revised duty conditions to arrive at
a cost-effective design suiting the available
plot space in the existing plant, and then to
seek approval from the original equipment
manufacturer (OEM) on the finalized de-
sign to get a performance guarantee.
48 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Service limitation—ensuring distri-
bution of two-phase steam under
vacuum. The brownfield project’s plot
area limitation was compounded by the
service limitation that ensured proper
distribution of steam. Although the in-
crease in condenser duty was more than
30%, the original study estimated a 20%
increase in several bays. Due to the plot
limitation, the additional bays were
aligned with the existing bays, but in a
completely different location (FIG. 1).
It seems that the allocation of space for
the additional bays was proposed purely
from the point of view of layout without
considering the service limitation, which
required alignment of the additional bays
with the existing bays for the proposed
distribution of steam.
limitation was reviewed with the follow-
ing options:
• Option 1. Since additional plot
space was unavailable, the only
possible alternative was to retrofit
the existing condenser with larger
motors to push more air, and
to check the extent to which
the revised condenser duty
could be met.
• Option 2. Additional space could
be made available by demolishing
some existing equipment that
would not be in use under the
revamped condition. In this
situation, the extent of space
that could be made available
would be dependent on the
shutdown window, which,
in turn, would decide if a new
set of bays could be placed, or
a combination of new and
retrofitted existing bays with
higher-horsepower motors to cater
to the revised duty conditions.
While Option 1 did not completely
satisfy the required duty conditions, Op-
tion 2 required a sufficient shutdown
window to create additional space by de-
molishing existing equipment.
Revamp vs. retrofit. Keeping in mind the
challenges, a preliminary rerating of the ex-
isting condenser with 20 bays was carried
out. The following options were analyzed:
 Process Optimization

• Option 1—Retrofit. Retrofit

the existing 20 bays by changing
240 blades). Since this retrofitting
was too extensive to be completed
Achieve
all 40 motors from 30 kW to within the scheduled shutdown
45 kW, and then increasing the
blade angles of all 40 fans of the
window, this option was not
acceptable to the client.
Optimal
existing 20 bays to push more air • Option 3A. Although the total
through the existing tube bundles.
However, with this configuration,
consumed power of the new
bays was found to be less with Solutions
the retrofitted condenser would eight bays, this option was found
be unable to achieve a revamped
duty, even after considering a
infeasible due to the requirement
of an additional plot area, as with the
lower air temperature. compared to the six-bay option.
• Option 2—Combination of
retrofit and revamp. Achieve
100% of the revised duty by
• Option 3B. Adding six new
bays (FIG. 2) was considered the
optimum solution because of plot
HPI’s Top
changing all 40 motors from
30 kW to 45 kW; increase the
blade angles of all 40 fans of the
space and the shutdown schedule.

Takeaways. The following points may

existing 20 bays; and add four
identical bays, with two streets
of two bays each, mounted back-
to-back on a common manifold,
parallel to the existing bays.
• Option 3—Revamp. Achieve
100% of the revised duty by adding
six identical bays, with two streets
of three bays each, mounted back-
to-back on a common manifold,
parallel to the existing bays,
without retrofitting the existing
condenser bays.
Discussion and recommendations.
Technical
Resource!
need to be evaluated before deciding
whether to revamp or retrofit an existing
ACSSC for new design conditions:
• Technology. Due to advancements
in ACSSC technology, suppliers
or OEMs of existing ACSSCs
should be contacted to get their
approval on the feasibility of
revamping or retrofitting the
existing multi-tube row ACSSCs.
• Service. The plot layout should
ensure the proper distribution
of two-phase steam under vacuum
to all the tube bundles/bays.
• Shutdown window. The JANUARY
2019 | Hydrocarbo
nProcessin
g.com
HYDROCARBO

The various options are listed in TABLE 1. possibility of retrofitting the

N PROCE

The final recommendation to adopt six existing ACSSCs should be

SSING

additional bays was arrived at based on assessed to suit the plant PROCES
S
JANUARY

ATION
2019

OPTIMIZ
the following: shutdown window. Improvin
g resource
s efficiency
odology
PROCESS

REF meth
with TOP- gy
g technolo
ne upgradin ffinic feeds
OPTIMIZATION

• Option 1A. Although the • Plot area limitation. The

New octa para
value of light
increases on and
m optimizati n
Steam syste ns with desig
ation begi
risk mitig
DIGITAL

revamped duty included a 15% available plot space and the benefit refin
eries
How AI can chemical plants
and petro
MANAGE
MENT

changes required in the existing

PROJECT

margin, any reduction in this

a
learned from
Lessons e
mp nightmar
refinery reva
CATALYSTS
tability

margin was not acceptable, since plot plan will decide the extent
loop profi
g xylene
Maximizin

the process licensor did not want of the revamp.

the condenser to be a bottleneck
during the possible future increase
in plant throughput.
• Option 1B. Although the existing
condenser was designed for an
ambient air temperature of 44.1°C,
a reduction from the present
specified ambient temperature
of 49°C was not acceptable to
the client based on the present
meteorological data.
• Option 2. Retrofitting the existing
condenser bays involved replacing
the existing 40 motors, replacing
the existing cables of all the
motors, and changing the blade
angles of all 40 fans (totaling about
• Revamp vs. retrofit. All of these
factors need to be evaluated before
deciding the best option (e.g.,
retrofit, revamp or a combination
of both) for a particular service.
RITABRATA PRAMANIK has more than 32 yr of
experience in the design and engineering of heat
equipment in the oil and gas, petrochemical, LNG,
fertilizer, chemical and power sectors. He has
worked for Fluor Daniel India in New Delhi since
July 2013 and is a Fluor global subject matter expert
Subscribe Today!
on heat transfer.
Log on to
N.R. SRINATH has more than 11 yr of experience HydrocarbonProcessing.com
in the design and engineering of heat exchangers
used in process industries. He began his career with or call +1 (713) 520-4426.
Foster Wheeler India in 2007 and has worked at
Fluor Daniel India in New Delhi since May 2013.

Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 49

 Your operations.
Your insurance rates.
Your community.

Overfill risks them all.

This is why
level matters.
Tank overfill is a constant safety concern for any storage
terminal site, and for good reason. Overfill has resulted in
injuries, loss of life and billions of dollars worth of damages
worldwide. That’s why Magnetrol® matters. We have proven
ways to minimize your risks, reduce insurance premiums and
comply with the latest industry standards. Download our
Overfill Protection Kit and protect what matters. Because at
your site, level matters.

Download the Overfill Protection Kit

©2019 Magnetrol International, Inc. at overfillprotection.magnetrol.com
Select 73 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

Novel semi-regenerative reforming catalyst
increases unit efficiency and productivity
Catalytic reforming has been a staple in petroleum refining
since 1949. Refiners are looking for next-generation catalysts
that increase the productivity and performance of their exist-
ing semi-regenerative reforming operations. In many cases,
these catalysts must reliably process increasingly difficult feeds,
accommodate multiple sources of crudes and naphthas, and
bounce back from reformer unit upsets. For these circumstanc-
es, a robust catalyst with an extended cycle length that can with-
stand feed contaminations is an excellent option.
To meet this demand, a proprietary fixed-bed reforming cat-
alysta was introduced into the market in 2015. This catalyst is
commercially proven in more than 20 reforming units with full
reloads, exhibiting superior performance, allowing flexible unit
operation with extended cycle lengths and bringing optimal
value to refiners. The catalyst’s robust performance has been
commercially demonstrated for more than 3 yr, delivering high
activity at maximized cycle lengths with a wide range of feeds at
varied operating severities.
The catalyst is a high-performance platinum-rhenium re-
forming catalyst with no promoter. It brings high yields over
the cycle and high reforming activity, while exhibiting a high
tolerance to feed contaminants. The catalyst provides extended
cycle lengths with excellent yield stability, showing very low
yield decline over a cycle. Robust and easy to regenerate, the
trilobe-shaped catalyst is meeting customer needs and gaining
rapid commercial acceptance.
The following discusses the catalyst’s commercial applica-
tions at refineries across the globe, focusing on the first com-
mercial use at the Bayernoil refinery in Neustadt, Germany.
History. The proprietary catalyst is based on the author com-
pany’s previously-commercialized semi-regenerative reforming
catalystb. This catalyst has been used in more than 200 appli-
cations, and has an industry reputation of rugged performance
and easy regenerability. The latest catalyst builds upon that ex-
cellence by further improving performance stability and cata-
lyst activity, while providing improved reforming yields.
This new catalyst is a high-performance platinum-rhenium
reforming catalyst with no promoter. It uses a trilobe shape to
overcome diffusion limitations. With well-dispersed metals on
the trilobe shape, catalyst stability is further improved com-
pared to cylindrical extrudate geometry. It also provides an im-
provement in activity and yields, compared to its predecessor.
Catalysts
A. JAWANDHIYA, Honeywell UOP, Guildford,
UK; and R. DIETERICH, BAYERNOIL
Raffineriegesellschaft mbH, Neustadt, Germany
Most importantly, the new catalyst provides the longest
cycle length of all the author company’s reforming catalysts.
Reloading with this commercially proven catalyst will extend
the period between regenerations, leading to improved cycle
performance and excellent yield stability. Compared with pre-
vious-generation reforming catalysts, it also offers refiners the
flexibility to accomplish the following:
• Increase reformate octane
• Process difficult feeds without compromising
the planned cycle length
• Increase the feed endpoint or run with a leaner feed
• Decrease operating pressure (within compression limits)
for improved yields
• Resist feed contaminant upsets and sustain fluctuations
between varying octane severities
• Delay the catalyst regeneration to a more favorable
gasoline production period
• Maintain reforming hydrogen purity for a longer period.
The catalyst is a skewed platinum-rhenium reforming cata-
lyst with good tolerance against catalyst poisons and no propri-
etary promoter. Skewed metal catalysts are well known to be
more stable than balanced metal catalysts, which are typically
prone to faster deactivation, larger reformate and hydrogen
(H2 ) yield debits over the catalyst cycle.
This catalyst can sustain fluctuations between low- and high-
octane operations without excessive coking. A non-promoted
catalyst, it regenerates easily and does not require electrolytic
hydrogen or long hold steps during catalyst regeneration. Its
Higher yields
and lower WAIT Superior yield stability:
at SOR Increasing benefit as
the cycle progress
C5+ and H2 yields
Catalyst 1a
Increased
product yields
for Catalyst 1 vs.
Catalyst 2
Catalyst 2b
Time
FIG. 1. Improved stability and yields of the new fixed-bed reforming
catalyst vs. its predecessor.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 51
 Catalysts

robust form enables regeneration utilizing readily available re-
finery-grade hydrogen.
When processing difficult feeds or running at high operating
severity, the catalyst will have reduced downtime for the cata-
lyst regenerations because of its high stability. The catalyst’s ex-
tended cycle length provides refiners with additional flexibility
to decide when to regenerate based on turnaround schedules
and favorable demands for increased research octane number
clear (RONC) reformate.
This catalyst may be loaded in oxidized or pre-reduced and
pre-sulfided forms, enabling a faster unit startup with the as-
surance that the catalyst will be in the right condition for the
first cycle. Reduction and sulfiding are carried out in the author
company’s manufacturing facilities, following specific chlorid-
ing and oxidation steps, and this is the recommended procedure
to obtain the following operational advantages:
• Restart time savings of 2 d–4 d
• On-spec production attained faster for better profitability
• Reduced risk of low yields or short cycles due to poor
metals distribution during in-situ reduction
• Rapid restoration of the hydrogen supply to
downstream units.
First commercial use: Bayernoil refinery case study. The
first commercial use of this novel catalyst was in Germany at
the Bayernoil refinery in Neustadt. Bayernoil operates two re-
Benefits vs. proprietary catalystc
Catalyst Reformer 1
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0 0
Catalyst Catalyst Type A Type B
1d 2a
FIG. 2. Bayernoil catalyst evaluations.
-30
-20
Actual-predicted, °C
formers at Neustadt and a third reformer at its nearby Vohburg
refinery. Both reformers at Neustadt were operating with a dif-
ferent proprietary catalystc before they were reloaded with the
new reforming catalyst.
The catalyst in the Reformer 1 unit was nearing the end of its
life, and a reload was being planned during the next turnaround
to utilize the benefits of the latest-generation catalyst. An inquiry
was received from Bayernoil, seeking the best replacement cata-
lyst for both units. Subsequent catalyst evaluations performed by
Bayernoil, comparing potential benefits of the proposed catalyst
options from multiple vendors, are shown in FIG. 2. Bayernoil
decided to reload with the new reforming catalyst, with a goal
to extend cycle lengths with increased reformate and H2 yields.
The changeout for the Reformer 1 unit occurred in May 2015.
The performance guarantee test run was performed with a
rich feed containing polynuclear aromatic (PNA) hydrocarbons
by wt% (48.2/36.4/15.4) at a reformate octane of 94 RONC.
Apart from improved product yields, start-of-run performance
showed that the new catalyst was approximately 7°C more ac-
tive than the previous-generation catalyst. Higher activity was
achieved while maintaining yield stability at the same octane.
A summary of performance test operations is shown in TABLE 1.
The catalyst’s performance in Bayernoil’s Reformer 1 unit
is shown in FIG. 3. The new catalyst provided more flexibility
to increase octane or to run more difficult feeds. With a lower
rate of yield decline over the cycle, similar cycle lengths can be
achieved, even at increased severities.
Benefits vs. proprietary catalystc
Catalyst Reformer 2 Bayernoil was pleased with the performance in the Reform-
4,000 er 1 unit and decided to proceed with the new catalyst for the
Reformer 2 unit, which took place in April 2016. Activity and
3,000
yields for both reformers are in line with predictions.
2,000 TABLE 2 shows improved yields and selectivity for ring clo-
sure over paraffin cracking reactions with the new catalyst vs.
1,000 its predecessor for both reformer units. Both reforming units
at the Neustadt refinery showed expected yield uplifts. Bayer-
Catalyst Catalyst Type A Type B noil estimated that the return on investment (ROI) for the new
1d 2a catalyst reload in the Reformer 1 unit was less than 1.3 yr.
In commercial operations, a close correlation exists be-
tween actual reformate yields and the weighted average inlet
temperature (WAIT) with those predicted by kinetic models.
Actual WAIT-predicted WAIT °C
The predicted stability (cycle length) correlated very closely
with the actual cycle length, without major upsets or catalyst

-10 poisoning. As anticipated, the deactivation rate of the new

0 catalyst is slower than that observed for its predecessor. Data
-10 from commercial units after several regenerations showed a full
return to start-of-run WAIT when following standard regen-
-20
eration procedures.
-30
26-April-15 16-May-15 05-June-15 25-June-15 15-July-15 04-Aug.-15 24-Aug.-15 13-Sept.-15
10 TABLE 1. Performance guarantee test results
C6+ yield actual-predicted wt%
Performance test operation days
Actual-predicted C6+, wt%

3
Guarantee parameter Day 1 operation Day 2 operation
0 Reformate yield, wt% Exceeded guarantee Exceeded guarantee
of more than 0.5 wt% of more than 1.2 wt%
-5
H2 yields, wt% Exceeded guarantee Met guarantee
of more than 0.05 wt%
-10
26-April-15 16-May-15 05-June-15 25-June-15 15-July-15 04-Aug.-15 24-Aug.-15 13-Sept.-15 Required weighted Met guarantee Exceeded guarantee
reactor inlet (–3°C WAIT)
FIG. 3. The catalyst’s performance in Bayernoil’s Reformer 1 unit. temperature (WAIT), °C

52 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Customer:
World-scale ethylene producer, China.

Challenge:
Maximize feed stock delivery and ethylene
transport to boost downstream output.

Result:
Ebara Cryodynamics is selected as the world’s
most trusted cryogenic pump supplier.

They turned to Ebara Cryodynamics

for unparalleled expertise in cryogenic pumps TM

for liquefied gas applications.

With thousands of installations worldwide, Ebara Cryodynamics is the recognized global leader
for submerged electric pumps and expanders in liquefied gas applications. For over four decades,
Ebara Cryodynamics has delivered continuous advances in equipment design and technology to
liquefied gas customers around the world. Who will you turn to?

www.ebaracryo.com

Select 54 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Catalysts

TABLE 2. New catalyst performance in Reformers 1 and 2

179°C) with an average feed PNA hydrocarbon of 60/30/10
LV%. Catalyst activity and yields were in line with model pre-
Yields—Normalized on feed basis, wt% dictions. The customer is pleased with the successful opera-
Reformer 1 H2 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6+ tion of the new catalyst and has selected it for two more fixed-
Old catalyst 1.5 1.7 2.8 4.4 6.1 5.3 78.2 bed unit changeouts.
US refiner—Lean, straight-run naphtha at 97 RONC.
New reforming catalyst 2 1.3 2.5 3.2 3.7 4.8 82
A US refiner loaded the new catalyst in September 2015,
Yields—Normalized on feed basis, wt% with goals to obtain longer cycle lengths and to benefit from
Reformer 2 H2 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6+ improved technical service support. The feed was a very lean
Old catalyst 1.8 1.9 3.1 4.5 5.8 5 77.9 (highly paraffinic), straight-run naphtha (N+2A: 37 LV%–44
New reforming catalyst 2.1 1.5 2.6 3.2 4 4.9 82
LV%). The octane target was 97 RONC. The refiner could suc-
cessfully extend the cycle length due to a lower rate of deactiva-
tion observed for the new catalyst during operations.
35 100
Unplanned shutdowns of the reforming unit had adverse ef-
30 90 fects on refinery operations and profitability. These shutdowns
may be due to high coke laydown on the catalyst and the result-
25 80
ing loss in octane and/or product yields, or a shortened cycle.
Feed rate, m3/h

RONC, % coker
20 70 One such negative effect on the refinery would be the interrup-
tion of H2 supply to hydroprocessing operations, particularly
15 60
when it is the only hydrogen source in the refinery. The new re-
10 50 forming catalyst has demonstrated the ability to withstand these
Rx feed volume flow, m3/h upsets and extend the cycle lengths, thus ensuring steady hydro-
5 Octane target 40
Coker % gen production. This gives the flexibility to the refiner to delay
0 30 and plan for the catalyst regeneration to a more suitable time.
03-09-15 23-10-15 12-12-15 31-01-16 21-30-16

FIG. 4. The results of the first cycle load at an Asian refinery’s
semi-regenerative reformer.
Worldwide operations. At the time of this publication, the
new reforming catalyst has been loaded in 20 operating units
around the world. The following are additional case summaries
that highlight successful performance of the new catalyst.
Asian refiner—Coker naphtha feed at 97 RONC octane
target. A semi-regenerative reformer at an Asian refinery was
nearing a catalyst reload. The refiner wanted to process a more
difficult feed, while attaining higher yields without sacrificing
the cycle length. The new reformer catalyst was loaded dur-
ing a scheduled reload in September 2015. The reforming op-
eration was for butane, toluene and xylene (BTX) production
(97 RONC reformate target). The hydrotreated feed included
a high proportion of coker naphtha (~40%) containing up to
1 wt ppm sulfur that highly impacts the activity and stability of
the catalyst. Coker naphtha is well known to be a challenging
feed with high coke precursors and sulfur. The results of the first
cycle are shown in FIG. 4. The unit achieved the cycle guarantee,
even though the coker naphtha in the reactor feed reached 90%
for an extended period during the cycle.
After successful processing of the challenging coker naph-
tha feed, the refiner successfully regenerated the new catalyst
in March 2016. Refinery personnel used the same regeneration
procedure as for the unit’s previous catalyst. Even though the
conditions were not optimum during the regeneration, the cata-
lyst was successfully regenerated, demonstrating the robustness
Takeaway. The new commercially proven reforming catalyst
has demonstrated its success with a wide range of feeds and
operating severities. It is a good fit for virtually all units, and is
particularly valuable for units with sulfur upsets and difficult
regenerations and/or where operations are temperature lim-
ited. Compared to previous-generation reforming catalyst, this
novel catalyst combines robustness with high activity to deliver
a longer cycle length. It has a demonstrated ability to increase
unit performance with enhanced yields over a cycle. Improved
reload economics will maximize profitability of the naphtha
complex and help in the efforts toward meeting local norms
(e.g., Euro 5 emissions standards). The new reforming catalyst
offers an innovative solution for every refiner’s needs operating
a semi-regenerative reformer.
NOTES
a
Honeywell UOP’s R-560 fixed-bed reforming catalysts
b
Honeywell UOP’s R-56 semi-regenerative reforming catalyst
c
Honeywell UOP’s R-62 reforming catalyst
d
Honeywell UOP’s R-98 semi-regenerative platforming catalyst
AMIT JAWANDHIYA is a Lead Technical Sales Specialist for
naphtha products within Honeywell UOP’s catalyst, adsorbents
and specialties division. He manages technical catalyst reload
solutions for reforming, isomerization and Merox technologies.
Over the course of his 14 yr with Honeywell UOP, Mr. Jawandhiya
has held various positions in the company’s India and UK
offices. Previously, he worked in technical services for Reliance
Petroleum Ltd., Jamnagar, India. He holds a chemical engineering degree from
the Laxminarayan Institute of Technology (LIT) in India and is pursuing his MBA
from Warwick University in the UK.

of the catalyst. After the regeneration, the unit was restarted and RUDOLF DIETERICH is a Process Expert for naphtha reforming,
production returned to 97 RONC. Claus units, steam methane reforming, and energy and emissions
Russian refiner—Hydrotreated, straight-run naphtha projects within the asset development department at BAYERNOIL
Raffineriegesellschaft mbH in Germany. He initiates optimization
feed with 95–96 RONC target. In Russia, the new catalyst projects, and cares for catalyst selection and reloads in these
was purchased for a reformer reload in May 2017. The feed units. He holds a Diplom-Ingenieur (FH) degree in process
was a hydrotreated, straight-run naphtha (IBP 103°C–IBP technology from Technische Hochschule Nürnberg Germany.

54 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Heat Transfer
R. BROAD, GESMEX Exchangers GmbH, Schwerin,
Germany; and P. KAUDERS, CDE Projects Ltd.,
London, UK

Welded plate heat exchangers

cut refinery process costs—Part 2
Plate-and-frame (P&F) heat exchang-
ers were first manufactured 100 yr ago for
use in the dairy industry. They have since
been used in the process industries, as
they offer considerable advantages in true
counter-current flow, high heat transfer
rates, low manufacturing costs and a small
footprint. These benefits lead to lower
capital and operating costs than can be
achieved with shell-and-tube (S&T) heat
exchangers. The limitation on their use
has been the elastomer gasket between
each plate, which is susceptible to leakage
from chemical attack or to penetration by
aromatics. In addition, operating pres-
sure and temperature are typically limited
to 20 bar at 180°C (356°F) for water—a
condition that precludes its use in many
downstream processes, especially refining,
where aromatics can soften gasket materi-
als at considerably lower temperatures. FIG. 2. Typical series flow heat exchanger scheme for a CDU.
Welded plate exchangers arose from
these shortcomings in the P&F type. Two
types exist: plate-and-shell and plate-and- changer, plate packs assembly, flow direc- it enters a flash separator, the gas from
block. Both were initially tungsten inert tors, arrangements, reliability and main- which is fed directly to the main crude
gas (TIG) welded, but are now fabricat- tenance, and process applications. The column. The flashed crude oil is then
ed with laser-welded plates. Production following will present study results of a pumped through a third bank of heat ex-
of the laser-welded plate-and-shell type welded plate-and-shell heat exchanger in changers, the fired heaters and into the
started in 2006, and some 1,200 units have a crude distillation unit (CDU). The pos- flash zone of the main column at a tem-
since been delivered, mainly for use in the sibility of using a parallel scheme rather perature at or above 370°C (698°F). The
chemical industry or for utility systems than a series flow heat exchange scheme hot vapor rising in the column is cooled
in large buildings. The shell type differs for the crude preheat train is also investi- by the pumparound streams, and the re-
from the block type in two vital respects: gated for both heat exchanger types. sulting condensate is drawn off into side
it has true counter-current flow, whereas strippers. Three distillate products are
the block type is a cross-flow design; and CDU example. The main column pump- normal, i.e., kerosine, diesel or light gasoil
the service pressure for the plate-and- arounds, distillate products and atmo- (LGO) and heavy gasoil (HGO).
shell heat exchanger is potentially as high spheric residue (the largest heat source) Main column overheads are con-
as 400 barg, comparable to the S&T ex- are available to heat incoming crude densed, and offgas is compressed and re-
changer, whereas the block type is limited upstream of the furnace. Three banks of contacted with the distillate naphtha from
to around 30 barg by its cuboid shape. heat exchangers are present. The first one the reflux drum. The combined naphtha
Part 1, featured in the February issue heats the crude feed to desalting tempera- stream with the absorbed gas is sent to the
of Hydrocarbon Processing, detailed the ture; the second one heats the desalted naphtha hydrotreater unit for desulfuriza-
construction of a plate-and-shell heat ex- crude to 180°C (356°F)—at which point tion and fractionation.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 55
 Heat Transfer
The following study is based on
300,000 bpd of a typical Middle Eastern
blend (Arabian Gulf location), and is in-
tended to illustrate how welded plate heat
exchangers can be applied to the design
of a CDU. In an integrated crude and vac-
uum unit, the hot atmospheric residue
stream is replaced by the vacuum gasoil
(VGO) pumparound streams, hot VGO
product and vacuum residue streams.
Series and parallel flow with S&T
heat exchangers. A standalone CDU
in which the heat exchangers are placed in
series is shown in FIG. 2. The distillates are
on the tube side, opening the possibility of
a U-tube design. The huge imbalance in
flows between the crude oil and distillate
product streams is resolved by using four
or more tube passes. By flowing the total
crude feed through each heat exchanger,
FIG. 3. Parallel flow heat exchanger scheme for a CDU.
TABLE 1. A comparison of series and parallel-flow schemes for heat loads and furnace
inlet temperature
Parameter Series flow, Case S1
Furnace inlet temperature 302°C (576°F)
Furnace fuel 107.2 MW/366 x10 Btu/h 6
Heat duties, MW
Pumparound streams 111
Distillate rundowns 66
Atmospheric rundowns 146
Power, MWe 8.6
Estimated investment, $MM 193
56 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
the temperature rise at each is kept low, and
the outlet temperature of the hot stream
is kept above the hot crude temperature,
thereby avoiding a temperature cross and
the need for multiple shells in series.
Multiple tube passes are also needed
for heat exchange between crude oil and
the viscous residue stream to keep fluid
velocities up and promote heat transfer.
Placing the more viscous residue on the
shell side is often beneficial, and S- or T-
type floating heads are needed, as both
streams are potentially fouling. If tube
inserts are used to improve heat transfer,
then keeping the residue on the tube side
is essential. For the purposes of this study,
tube inserts are not considered.
However, there are two drawbacks to
a series flow scheme. First, the products
leave the pre-heat train at progressively
higher temperatures, which sacrifices
Parallel flow, Case P1
313°C (595°F)
93.5 MW/319 x106 Btu/h
111
70
156
9.5
206
some low-grade heat that might other-
wise be recovered. Secondly, the high
pressure drop arising from the series flow
in the crude stream raises both pump
power and mechanical design pressure,
which is particularly costly for the large
desalter vessels.
If a parallel flow scheme is considered
(FIG. 3), all the distillate products are
cooled to within 20°C (68°F) of the incom-
ing crude temperature. The atmospheric
residue is cooled to 80°C (176°F) to avoid
an overlarge and expensive heat exchanger.
More heat is recovered than in the series
scheme, leading to a lower fuel use, but
there is a pinch downstream of the flash
drum. This has been mitigated by a mixed
series/parallel heat exchange arrangement
in which the LGO and HGO pumparound
streams are in a series, and the cold end of
the LGO pumparound has been put in se-
ries with the hot residue heat exchangers.
The results are shown in TABLE 1.
Although the number of shells is much
larger in the parallel flow case, this is a
consequence of using 2- and 4-pass S&T
heat exchangers in counterflow [e.g.,
the kerosine rundown service is a single
shell of 243 m2 in the series flow case,
but it becomes five shells in series with
a total area of 540 m2 if there is a 20°C
(68°F) cold end approach in the paral-
lel flow case]. Overall, the lower energy
use of 47 MMBtu/hr—based upon 90%
furnace efficiency and a fuel heat rate
of 39 MMBtu/t—saves: 47/0.9/39 =
1.34 t/h of fuel oil, worth $2.25 MM/yr
at $200/t over 350 d of operation. The
extra power demand in the parallel flow
case is another consequence of having
multiple shells in series. At $0.10/kWh,
the penalty is $100/MWh × 0.9 MW ×
8,400 hr = $0.75 MM/yr. The reduction
in operating costs is $2.25 – 0.75 MM =
$1.5m/yr. The $13 MM higher invest-
ment would be paid back in 9 yr of opera-
tion—not an attractive proposition.
The following will examine what hap-
pens if counter-flow plate-and-shell heat
exchangers are considered.
Replacing S&T heat exchangers with
plate-and-shell heat exchangers.
The two reference schemes for series and
parallel flow are now altered, with the
S&T heat exchangers being progressive-
ly replaced with the compact plate-and-
shell type (e.g., the distillate services are
replaced in each bank of heat exchang-
 Heat Transfer

ers, then the hot residue service, and, with the larger pumparound flows and • S1 and P1 have only S&T-type
lastly, the cold residue service). The re- the residue stream are still worth chang- heat exchangers.
sults for replacing all services, including ing to the compact heat exchanger, but • P2 has all services, with one
the atmospheric residue/crude oil heat the outcome is less advantageous than distillate stream changed to a plate-
exchangers, with at least one distillate the parallel flow case. and-shell heat exchanger. Only the
stream are presented in TABLE 2. This is An overview of the case descriptions residue heat exchangers are retained
straightforward in the parallel flow case, is provided below: as the S&T type of exchangers.
as the counter-current flow advantage
of the plate-and-shell exchanger is clear. TABLE 2. Comparison of series and parallel-flow heat exchanger schemes
The results are significant. Replacing the
Parameter Series flow case Parallel flow cases
services with one distillate stream results
in a plant that is cheaper to build and Case S1 S2 S3 P1 P2 P3
uses less fuel and power than a conven- Furnace inlet temperature, °C 302 302 302 313 313 313
tional S&T design. If all the services are Furnace fuel, MW 107.2 107.2 107.2 93.5 93.5 93.5
replaced, then the reductions are quite
dramatic in both capital and operating Unit power demand, MWe 8.6 8.5 8.3 9.5 8.2 7
costs over a conventional series flow No. of HTX shells 53 49 38 94 59 37
scheme using S&T heat exchangers. Length of unit, m 165 150 145 230 165 145
The series flow case is more prob- Estimated equipment costs, $MM 52 51.8 48 55.6 50.6 43.4
lematic, as the flow imbalances between
crude oil and distillates can only be re- Quantities
solved by using multiple passes in series Pipe, t (excluding fittings) 1,047 1,021 1,063 1,179 1,022 1,000
for the distillate streams, or by keeping a Cable, t (+200-m run to MCC) 118 117 116 117 103 102
single pass but using more surface to re- Steel, t 1,110 1,042 1,047 1,530 1,112 995
duce the pressure drop. Neither solution
offers a significant economic advantage. Concrete, m3 8,587 8,121 7,868 9,958 8,153 7,334
However, the more difficult services Estimated total installed cost, $MM 193 191 185 206 187 172

Digitalizing hazardous areas.

Enabling connectivity.
Enhancing mobility.

Smart-Ex® 02
Smartphone for Global
Hazardous Areas

 Rugged, intrinsically safe smartphones for Zone 1/21, 2/22, and Div. 1/2 areas
 Global frequency bands and certifications for worldwide use
 Five-inch display and ergonomic design increase flexibility
 High-performance Android 9 operating system

www.pepperl-fuchs.com/smart-ex-02

Select 161 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 57
 Heat Transfer

• P3 has all heat exchangers as In the conventional series flow design for a single plate pack is 3 m, so two
plate-and-shell type. case S1, a single shell of 36-in. diameter shells could be accommodated in a back-
to-back arrangement that is
shorter than the channel plus
The proprietary software shows how compact tube length for the conven-
plate-and-shell heat exchangers save both capital tional S&T design.
The following is an exami-
and operating costs when replacing S&T exchangers. nation of a more difficult heat
It can also identify attractive, novel process transfer problem. TABLE 4A
and 4B shows a comparison
configurations, such as parallel flow heat exchange of cold atmospheric residue
schemes in crude distillation pre-heat trains. rundown heat exchangers.
With this example, there are
nine 56-in.-diameter shells for
• S2 has the pumparound services is attainable (TABLE 3A and 3B). With case S1 with a combined weight of 228 t,
as the plate-and-shell type, parallel flow, the NTU count increases whereas the plate-and-shell replacement
except for the rundown exchangers, significantly, and, for the shell-and-tube is only two shells with two passes on
where no advantage is found in case P1, five shells in series give an F fac- both sides and a combined weight of just
changing type. The crude oil flow tor of 0.9. No clear advantage exists with 43 t (one-fifth the conventional design).
is much larger than the distillate this case. If the S&T type is replaced The parallel flow case P1 can be achieved
stream for these items. with the plate-and-shell type, then a with two shells in parallel and is, there-
• S3 is like S2, but the residue heat pair of plate packs can be designed of a fore, a lighter design. However, note the
exchangers are all changed smaller diameter and lighter weight than large increase in residue pressure drop, as
to the plate-and-shell type. for the original case S1. The shell length much a consequence of the reduced out-
let temperature and increase in viscosity.
TABLE 3. Comparison of kerosine rundown heat exchangers In this case, the NTU is comparable to
the series flow.
A) Stream conditions (series and parallel flow) If the S&T type is replaced with the
Stream Duty, MW Flow, t/h Tin, °C Tout, °C NTU Tout, °C NTU plate-and-shell type, then a pair of plate
packs can be designed of a smaller diam-
Crude oil 5.6 1,717 35 41 (S) 0.1 135 (P) 3.6
eter and lighter weight than of case S2/
kerosine 5.6 71 173 55 2 55 4.2 S3. The shell length for the single plate
B) Designs pack is short (4 m). The nine shells of
case S1 become just two shells. With any
Case ΣA, m2 Shells Passes D, m L, m Δp bar S and T/pl Description ∑Wt, t
compact heat exchanger, the more dif-
S1 243 1S/1P 1S/2T 0.9 6.1 2 0.3 36-BEU-240 9 ficult the service, the greater the advan-
S2/S3 285 1S/2P 1S/1pl 0.77 3 1.7 0.7 XPS 100-760H 7 tage in a plate-type design.
P1 545 5S/1P 1S/4T 0.71 6.1 3.8 4.8 28-BEU-240 23
CDU study results. With S&T heat
P2/P3 287 1S/2P 4S/4pl 0.77 3 0.8 0.8 XPS 100-765H 6 exchangers, the parallel flow case P1 in
TABLE 2 is inferior in size, shell count, in-
vestment and power to the conventional
TABLE 4. Comparison of cold atmospheric residue rundown heat exchangers
series flow case S1. Its only advantage is
A) Stream conditions in terms of fuel use. However, the picture
Flow case Stream Duty, MW Flow, t/h Tin, °C Tout, °C NTU
reverses if all the items with one distil-
late stream are changed to a plate-and-
Series Crude oil 57.2 1,717 82 135 1.3 shell type: the design in case P2 becomes
Residue 823 211 102 2.6 more advantageous in power and invest-
Parallel Crude oil 55.3 917 35 135 2
ment cost than the series flow case S2,
considerably more so than in case S1. If
Residue 823 189 80 2.2 plate-and-shell heat exchangers are used
B) Designs for the atmospheric residue/crude oil
Case ΣA, m 2
Shells Passes D, m L, m Δp bar S and T/pl Description ∑Wt, t
exchangers, then the parallel flow case
P3 is significantly superior in investment
S1 5,468 3S/3P 1S/4T 1.36 6.1 2.3 5 56-BES-240 228 and power demand than in case S3, and
S2/3 3,344 1S/2P 2S/2pl 1.5 5.3 0.9 1.2 XPS300-1363H 43 matches the series case S3 in terms of
shell count and unit footprint. Further-
P1 4,554 3S/2P 1S/4T 1.5 6.1 2.4 15 60-BES-240 191
more, in cases P2 and P3, partial and
P2/3 1,382 1S/2P 3S/3pl 1.1 4 3.7 4.1 XPS200-1010H 20 total use of plate-and-shell heat exchang-
58 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Select 56 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Heat Transfer
ers, are superior to the original series
flow design with S&T heat exchangers in
terms of investment, as well as in power
demand and fuel consumption, with the
total use design being significantly so.
Perhaps it is time to rethink how the in-
dustry approaches process plant design.
The plate-and-shell type is one of two
types of laser-welded plate heat exchang-
ers, the other being the block type. The
cylindrical construction of the plate-and-
shell type enables it to be used in high-
pressure processes, such as hydrotreat-
ing—a possibility that is not open for
the block type, which is much more lim-
ited in mechanical pressure, with square
rather than round plates and flat panels
vs. a round shell. A further advantage of
the plate-and-shell type is that it is a true
counter-current flow exchanger, whereas
the block type is a cross-flow type. The
plate-and-shell counter-current flow ca-
pability is the reason that the shell count
is so dramatically reduced over the S&T
design in cases P2 and P3.
The key advantages of the plate-and-
shell heat exchanger compared with
the traditional shell-and-tube type are
threefold:
1. True counter-current flow,
leading to fewer shells in many
services, particularly where a
close temperature approach is
warranted for thermal efficiency
2. Much higher heat transfer rates
than the S&T type, leading to a
much smaller shell size for the
same duty
3. High intrinsic strength of the
plate-pack coupled with high
mechanical design pressure
for the cylindrical shell, which
opens possibilities of using it in
hydrotreating and hydrocracking
processes, as well as in low-
pressure fractionation processes.
Although there are only a relative-
ly small number of plate diameters to
choose from, the plate-packs can be in-
stalled in oversized shells, with the pos-
sibility of using them for revamp projects,
especially where a flow increase is need-
ed. The overall calculated pressure drop
is often lower than in the S&T heat ex-
changer bundles that are being replaced.
Design platform for comparison.
The comparison between the two
schemes has been conducted using a
60 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
proprietary computer programa that uses
logic and mathematics to emulate the
work undertaken in front-end engineer-
ing design (FEED). An inbuilt layout
module calculates equipment coordi-
nates, enabling determination of piping
and cable runs, and leading to quantifica-
tion of materials at the study stage.4 The
latest version of the program can carry
out heat transfer calculations and size
distillation columns from stream data for
most refinery processes.
The purpose of the program is not to
replace engineering companies, but to re-
duce design risk to the cost estimate, and
to facilitate the analysis of complex prob-
lems that are almost impossible to solve
by conventional methods. For those
who are familiar with the complexity of
refinery unit design, consider a column
pumparound. If the flow is increased, the
availability of the heat is improved, so
the heat exchangers become smaller, as
the average stream temperature has risen,
and it may be possible to improve the
heat recovered. However, the pump hy-
draulics, mechanical design of the equip-
ment and diameter of the column are just
some of the items that are adversely af-
fected. How can we possibly know what
a sensible design solution is?
Conceptual design emulation repli-
cates conventional engineering by re-
formulating the design basis and speci-
fications mathematically in a single file,
so that all the engineering calculations
for the FEED are undertaken together.
The equipment, pipes, valves and cables
needed for the process unit are all indi-
vidually sized and designed, and equip-
ment locations and piping and cable
runs are all calculated.
Lists of equipment, piping, valves
and cables are automatically created to-
gether with a cost summary, which uses
its own internal pricing system. Cost es-
timates have been benchmarked against
published data.5 The equipment and
materials and feasible design needed for
a process unit can be determined with
an accuracy typically only achieved in a
year’s FEED. Since runtime is measured
in seconds, design ideas and policy op-
tions can be tested and evaluated rapidly.
Takeaways. The following conclusions
can be made regarding the study:
1. Plate-and-shell heat exchangers
can be used as replacements
in nearly any heat exchanger
service where S&T heat
exchangers are used.
2. The key advantages of the plate-
and-shell type are its counter-flow
feature; high heat transfer rate;
and lightweight, intrinsically-
strong construction, which can
lead to more cost-effective design
solutions than conventional S&T
heat exchangers.
3. More efficient processes can be
developed using counterflow
plate-and-shell heat exchangers,
with lower energy use than in
traditional processes built around
the conventional S&T heat
exchanger.
4. As with all compact heat
exchangers, the plate-and-shell
heat exchanger reduces the size of
process units, leading to reduced
material quantities and lower
construction costs.
NOTE
a
CDE Consultants Ltd.’s Conceptual Design
Emulation software
LITERATURE CITED
4
Kauders, P., “How much,” The Chemical Engineer,
May 2014.
5
Gary, J. H., G. E. Handwerk and M. J. Kaiser,
“Petroleum Refining, Technology and Economics,”
5th Ed., Marcel Dekker, Inc., 2007.
ROBERT BROAD is a charted
chemical engineer, Fellow of the
Institution of Chemical Engineers
in the UK, and a member of both
the International Register of
Professional Engineers and the
European Federation of National
Engineering Associations. Mr. Broad has worked
more than 20 yr with compact heat exchangers,
focusing on process optimization to reduce energy
usage. He holds an MBA degree from Henley
Management College in the UK. Mr. Broad can be
contacted at robert.broad@gesmex.com.
PETER KAUDERS read Natural
Sciences and Chemical
Engineering at Cambridge
University and then worked in
the UK chemical industry before
embarking on a career in
engineering and construction
in the exploration, gas processing, refining and
petrochemical industries. In 2012, he started
developing conceptual design emulation (CDE),
a computer system that uses mathematics
and logic to mimic the steps taken by an
engineering team in process plant design. His
present research interest is to remove the barriers
to undertaking preliminary engineering design
directly from a process simulator. Mr. Kauders can
be contacted at pkauders@cdeprojects.com.
DON’T
JUST WORK.
WORK
SMARTER.
Every day, we’re working on Smart
Combustion™ solutions for you.
From optimizing combustion
with exclusive laser/fiber-optic
monitoring to real-time,
data-driven diagnostics and
management to maximize
performance and efficiency
every second of operation.

That’s smart.
That’s JZHC.

For patent and trademark information,

see johnzinkhamworthy.com/legal
johnzinkhamworthy.com | +1 918 234 1800 ©2019 John Zink Company LLC.

Select 64 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Table Sales
Now Open!

September 19, 2019 | The Houstonian | Houston, Texas

Honoring Innovation
in the Downstream
The HP Awards honor the downstream energy
segment’s leading innovations, as well as outstanding
personal contributions to the industry.

The editors of Hydrocarbon Processing will announce the

finalists on June 11, 2019.

Reserve your table today and join the HPI’s

leading pioneers!

FOR MORE INFORMATION on sponsorship

opportunities, please contact your sales representative or Tish
Barroso, Business Development Manager, at Hortensia.Barroso@
GulfEnergyInfo.com or by phone at +1 (713) 520-4404.

VI S IT HY DR OCAR BONPR OC ESSIN G. COM / AWA R DS FOR M OR E IN FOR M AT I O N


The benefits of automatic batch distillation
Process control methods have been applied to batch dis-
tillation of crude oil and intermediate oils performed in the
Chevron DPST labs in Richmond, California. The method
is based on following the cumulative yield curve as a “soft”
variable and proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controls
on the single variables and pot temperature. This combina-
tion significantly reduces the time and complexity required
to complete the atmospheric distillation process (commonly
called D-2892).
Following the cumulative volume curve allows for safe, steady
distillation of crude oil without the need for volume/mass track-
ing or differential pressure control to limit the boil-up rate.
The standard method for lab-scale batch crude oil distilla-
tion calls for manual adjustments to the column overhead pres-
sure and power rate to the pot heater. These two input adjust-
ments are carried out in a series of steps requiring significant
time periods for stabilization cooling between changes. The
Chevron lab typically pushes to a vacuum of 2 torr and pot
temperatures up to 315.56°C (600°F). The rate of distillation
(e.g., boil-up) will be limited by the capacity of the overhead
condenser and the flow resistance the condensed liquid has in
returning to the pot. Liquid boil-up that exceeds these limits
will result in column flooding. In the extreme case, changing
pot conditions too rapidly may lead to flashing of super-heated
pot liquid, thereby blowing pot liquid throughout the column
and receiver, effectively ending the distillation experiment.
The applicability of the new distillation control method
to liquids in addition to crude oil has been demonstrated on
FIG. 1. A view of Chevron’s DPST lab in Richmond, California.
Process Control
and Instrumentation
H. INGHAM and G. SVERDLOV, Chevron,
Richmond, California
vacuum gasoil intermediates and atmospheric residual mate-
rial. The method can be applied to any liquid where the cu-
mulative volume vs. temperature curve is known or where it
can be approximated. The same control scheme can be used in
state-to-state (new pressure, new temperature) changes with-
out cumulative curve guidance.
Control methods covered in the literature use mechanical
volume/mass tracking or limits in pressure differential be-
tween pot and vapor line.1–4
The lab. The Chevron distillation lab in Richmond, California
contains 30 pot stills, ranging in capacity from 50 ml to 5,000
gal, and 6 continuous units ranging from 30 l/hr to 300 gal/hr
(FIG. 1). Crude oil assays, samples from eight refineries, prod-
ucts from pilot plants and custom oil distillations from outside
organizations are in play every week at the lab. Recognizing the
need to reduce the time and complexity of batch distillation, the
organization started a program to tailor-fit distillation control
schema with the oil’s unique cumulative yield curve (cumyld)
FIG. 2. Following the cumulative yield curve.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 63
 Process Control and Instrumentation
to more efficiently drive the distillation process to completion.
The goal was to find a set of control parameters that would con-
trol the liquid boil-up rate by simultaneously increasing the pot
to higher temperatures, while lowering system pressure, staying
within the limits of the distillation column’s overhead condenser.
To achieve the goal of simultaneous variable control, two
improvements have been implemented. The first is utilization
of a PID algorithm in single variable control loops. The second
is the use of the oil cumyld, vol% vs. temperature for real-time
generation of setpoints for the individual PID loops. The PID
FIG. 3. Typical batch distillation equipment.
FIG. 4. Sequence of cuts for a full distillation. This work goes on
to DSL.
64 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
control targets are adjusted on the fly to keep the cumulative
volume of the oil on track, thus keeping the rate of distillation
within the operating capacity of the equipment—namely the
ability of the condenser to completely condense the overhead
vapor without flooding.
The distillation rate is accumulated over time into a cumu-
lative volume (comvol). This cumvol%, intersected with the
cumyld curve, generates a current atmospheric equivalent tem-
perature (AET) setpoint for the controls system. In practice,
both the pressure and pot temperature are adjusted to match
the target AET delivered by the oil cumyld curve. In this way,
the two primary driving forces used in distillation—pressure
and temperature—can be moved simultaneously to maintain a
constant rate of distillation (boil-up).
The Maxwell-Bonnell5 equations are used to calculate the
AET from the VLT at pressures below atmospheric. The con-
trol system is tasked to keep the calculated AET on the AET
from the cumulative volume curve, while following a preset
“rate of production (boil-up)” as displayed by the vol%/min
curve (FIG. 2).
The time required for distillation is approximately one-third
that of established procedures. Reducing pressure at the begin-
ning of the distillation process significantly reduces initial pot
temperatures, protecting thermally-labile components in the
oil. Operator actions such as dropping heating mantles, manual
pressure settings and pot heater adjustments, are eliminated.
The use of a dry ice trap maintains the overall loss at approxi-
mately 0.25 wt% of the charge total.
Through experience with the 3 × 2 (3 ft of packing by 2 in.
wide) Chevron column system (FIG. 3), the typical rate of dis-
tillate production (boil-up) was set at about 400 ml/hr. This
boil-up rate limit is converted to vol%/min by dividing the
boil-up rate by the pot charge volume—typically 17,000 ml
(17 liters) at about 0.04%/min.
The typical Chevron assay includes the separation steps
shown in FIG. 4. Nominal AET cutpoints are set and the program
drives toward these targets. The pot temperatures are preset for
each cut, automatically advancing to the next pot setpoint. In
this scenario, the pot is under its own PID control, while pres-
sure adjusts instantaneously to keep the AET on the cumyld
boiling point curve. As the pot heats so will the VLT, sometimes
erratically. However, the pressure changes respond to the VLT,
FIG. 5. AET vs. pressure, vapor line and pot temperature.

keeping the AET on track. Even with the onset of boiling, the
pressure controller maintains a smoothly changing AET.
The distillation procedure starts by lowering the system
pressure without heating the pot. The cumyld tracker moves
at the preset rate (in this case, 0.04%/min), sending an AET
setpoint value where system pressure is calculated algebraically
from the inverted Maxwell-Bonell equation. The PID controls
drive the pot temperature to pre-set values for each cut.
FIG. 5 shows the essential features of this method. Starting
from the top of the graph are AET, pot temperature, vapor line
temperature and pressure (°F and Torr). The numbers in bub-
bles are the targeted cutpoints. Note that the wavy appearance
of pot T and VLT are compensated by pressure to maintain
the AET calculated from the VLT on the AET of the cumula-
tive yield curve.
Other features programmed into the protocol are pressure
bumps combined with a pause in the cumulative volume for “cut
taking.” When the laser level indicates a full receiver, the pressure
instantly increases by 50 torr and the pot temperature holds at its
current level (these are the upward ticks in the yellow pressure
curve). This allows for safe switching of the full receiver with an
empty, while maintaining vacuum. After reset, the volume ac-
cumulator starts up, once again sending new AET setpoints to
the AET pressure calculator. In this way, the system follows the
cumyld within the condenser limits of the equipment.
FIG. 6 shows the crude assay true boiling point curves for two
distillation runs, one using the standard methods employed at
Chevron, the second using automatic batch distillation (ABD).
The two curves are collinear up to 800°F, separating at this
point only because a vacuum distillation was not carried out on
the more than 650 ABD run.
FIG. 6. Results for regular vs. ABD.
Process Control and Instrumentation
The controls have been enhanced so that different state
points (pressure and temperature) can be set independently,
without the cumyld. In this way, custom distillations can be
achieved without the worry of burping.
Takeaway. Combining PID controls with the cumulative vol-
ume curve of oil allows for smooth transitions to higher pot tem-
peratures and lower pressures. Absent expensive volume/mass
tracking equipment or complex differential pressure monitor-
ing, these straightforward techniques can reduce the time need-
ed to complete a batch distillation. Just as important is increased
safety by reducing operator interaction with hot equipment,
which is no longer necessary since the transitions to higher tem-
perature and lower pressure are completed automatically.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to thank their colleagues at the Chevron Research
and Technology Center in Richmond, California. These include Patrick Andrews,
Matthew Blickle, Francisco De La Torre, Reckaraido Lcasiano and Andrew Santori.
REFERENCES
1
Distillation Column Flooding Diagnostics with Intelligent Differential Pressure
Transmitter, https://www.emerson.com/documents/automation/white-paper-distil-
lation-column-flooding-diagnostic-dp-transmitter-en-87404.pdf
2
ROFA laboratory and process analyzers, http://rofa-products.com/products/TBP.php
3
Luyben, W. and E. Quintero-Marmol, “Inferential model-based control of multicom-
ponent batch distillation,” Chemical Engineering Science, 1992.
4
“Selecting the sensor locations for inferential control of high-purity batch distillation
column,” IFAC Advanced Control of Chemical Processes, Pisa, Italy, 2000.
5
Maxwell, J. B. and L. S. Bonnell, “Derivation and precision of a new vapor pressure cor-
relation for petroleum hydrocarbons,” Industrial Engineering Chemistry, 1957.
Only One Foot Required.
Roth Low NPSH pumps
require a Net Postive
Suction Head (NPSH)
of only one foot of
liquid for full curve
performance.
Roth chemical processing pumps
include a standard chemical duty, low
NPSH, seal less magnetic drive, and
low NPSH multistage pump options to
pump an extensive array of chemicals
including liquefied gases.
1-888-444-ROTH • www.rothpump.com
Select 162 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 65
HP Sustainability:
Guiding the future of the HPI
Hydrocarbon Processing is proud to introduce HP Sustainability, a multi-platform series examining
sustainability in the hydrocarbon processing industry (HPI). Hydrocarbon Processing defines “Sustainability
in the HPI” as the process of managing available resources, investments and technologies to maintain and
optimize operations for greater safety, reliability, efficiency, and environmental and social awareness.

Drawing on the technical expertise of Hydrocarbon Processing, HP Sustainability will partner with the
industry’s leading players—through editorial content, webcasts, white papers, and events—to address the
technical challenges and trends facing the industry.

HP Sustainability will focus on many aspects of sustainability, including:

» Carbon Emissions Mitigation
» Circular Economy
» Alternative Fuels/Biofuels
» Water Management
» Plastics Recycling
» Digital Technologies

Submission of articles, speaking, advertising and sponsorship

opportunities are available! For more information, please
contact Catherine Watkins, Publisher, at +1 (713) 520-4421 or
Catherine.Watkins@HydrocarbonProcessing.com.

Mitigating corrosion challenges
from opportunity crudes
High-quality crudes are not always
readily available, or at a price that is
acceptable to the producer’s budget.
Therefore, the trend toward using op-
portunity crudes—or spot crudes—is
growing, despite the corrosion challeng-
es that come with them.
The financial case for opportunity
crudes—purchased at a significant dis-
count per barrel—is compelling. Even
a 1% use of opportunity crudes, at a
discount of $6/bbl in a medium-size re-
finery of 300,000 bpd, can lead to crude
oil cost savings of up to $6.5 MM/yr. In
addition, these crude oil cost savings are
conservative, considering that the typi-
cal Western Canada Select (WCS) crude
discount to West Texas Intermediate
(WTI) is about 25%.
However, the quality of the crude of-
ten fluctuates, depending on the field the
crude originated from—with oil sand
fields, in particular, producing a crude
with much higher acidity, or total acid
number (TAN) levels.
According to Natural Resources Can-
ada, Canada exported 3.3 MMbpd to the
US in 2017, with much of the crude com-
ing from the Alberta oil sands. This crude
is characterized as being heavy, sour and
acidic, with high TAN levels and high
sulfur. These characteristics—along
with nitrogen and aromatics content and
high viscosity—are often key elements
of opportunity crudes and pose signifi-
cant dangers to refinery equipment.
Such challenges are also compounded
by storage tanks, which can have residue
left in them from previous crudes stored
there, and by the issues around blending.
Opportunity crude oil properties often
do not match the specifications of the re-
Process Control
and Instrumentation
K. WOLD, Emerson Automation Solutions,
Trondheim, Norway
finery and process equipment and, there-
fore, have to be blended. With numerous
crude oil feedstocks and varying proper-
ties, as well as the danger of blending too
much opportunity crude into the mix, it
is vital to have modern and flexible cor-
rosion monitoring.
Finally, the aging infrastructure that
characterizes many refineries brings
with it another set of challenges when it
comes to opportunity crudes. Maintain-
ing any system requires deliberate plan-
ning and scheduled maintenance to re-
main safe and meet regulatory standards,
while also remaining profitable.
While the optimal blending of oppor-
tunity crudes can have a significant im-
pact on finances in refineries, it must be
backed up by the latest corrosion moni-
toring and measurement technologies.
This article will examine some of the re-
cent advances in this area.
Opportunity crude corrosion chal-
lenges. What impact can opportunity
crudes have on corrosion, and what are
the challenges in detecting corrosion?
The causes of corrosion and the prob-
lems that are associated with it can vary.
The most common forms of corrosion in
refineries are caused by high TAN levels
in opportunity crudes, leading to naph-
thenic acid corrosion (NAC), sulfuric
acid corrosion, hydrochloric acid corro-
sion and hydrofluoric acid corrosion.
A key challenge is that these differ-
ent types of corrosion often behave dif-
ferently and are found at different plant
locations. For example, NAC corro-
sion—the result of a mixture of naturally
occurring cycloaliphatic carboxylic acids
recovered from petroleum distillates—
 
takes place in the high-temperature parts
of a plant, typically in primary and vacu-
um distillation units and associated pipe-
work, and increases when there is higher
TAN and sulfur content in the crude.
NAC is also often triggered by ve-
locity, and is, therefore, found in bends.
Another challenge with NAC is that the
impact is localized and the exact impact
point is difficult to predict.
It is also important to note that the
types of acids in a crude oil vary and that
the boiling point distribution can differ
dramatically among different crudes.
The TAN value for a crude oil indicates
the potential for corrosion problems,
but this one acid number measurement
does not provide all the details on acids
within the crude oil and the impact on
refinery assets.
Furthermore, because opportunity
crudes can accelerate corrosion issues
that might not have been detected earlier,
the risk of process upsets increases if no
instruments are in place to monitor for
corrosion at various locations and critical
points throughout the process.
The purpose of corrosion monitoring
and the intended information value of
the system should be considered when
designing a monitoring program. Moni-
toring data can be used for process tuning
or alarms if corrosion rates increase. If so,
fast response and high-resolution moni-
tors will often be preferred. Corrosion
monitoring can also be part of an integ-
rity management program, in which case
longer term trends for metal loss would
be more important than immediate re-
sponse to changes.
Available monitoring technologies
have different benefits and limitations
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 67
 Process Control and Instrumentation
FIG. 1. An overview of corrosion monitoring technologies.
FIG. 2. FSM sensing pins installed on the
external pipe wall.
with respect to the objectives indicated
above. If a combination of process opti-
mization and integrity management is re-
quired, a combination of monitoring tech-
nologies would provide the best result.
In addition to selecting technologies
suitable for the purpose, data handling
and reporting should reflect the objective
of monitoring and the actionable infor-
mation needed. Data processing should
reflect if information is intended for de-
tecting rapid changes, or whether long-
term corrosion damage can be expected.
Many examples exist in industry where
the full information value of the monitor-
ing system is not achieved due to a lack of
understanding of the data and how that
data should be processed for best value.
An integrated corrosion monitoring
strategy. A good corrosion management
system will ensure that line and equip-
ment conditions are known at all times,
so that problems can be anticipated and
surprise process upsets avoided. How-
ever, what constitutes a good corrosion
management system and how will it fit
within existing systems?
68 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
What is needed is to make sure that
opportunity crudes remain economically
attractive without causing additional—
unforeseen—expenses on the back end.
Unfortunately, a one-size-fits-all solution
does not exist. The ideal setup depends
on the age of the facility and the condition
of the infrastructure, as well as the types
of metals used in the piping and how cor-
rosion resistant they might be, and wheth-
er or not the facility is already set up for
digital and wireless communications.
A good refinery corrosion monitor-
ing setup will consist of a combina-
tion of technologies—all with different
means of tackling the unique corrosion
monitoring challenges that opportunity
crudes bring (FIG. 1).
For example, online information
from corrosion monitoring sensors can
form part of a comprehensive monitor-
ing program, which includes metallurgy
upgrades, chemical inhibitors, crude oil
(blend) feedstock selection, inspections
during turnarounds and the repair/re-
placement of assets damaged by corrosion.
Such a system might also include
corrosion probes that provide the high-
est sensitivity and fastest responses to
changing corrosion rates, with their sen-
sitivity highly valuable for the fast-track
monitoring of process changes and for
tuning remedial processes, such as corro-
sion inhibitors.
For example, electrical resistance
(ER) probes are based on measuring
changes in electrical resistance, as the
thickness of the probe’s measurement
element decreases due to corrosion. ER
probes are particularly effective for cor-
relating with other process data, iden-
tifying how process changes (such as
crude selection, including blends) influ-
ence corrosion conditions, and provid-
ing input into the amount of chemical
inhibitors to add.
In addition, inline corrosion coupons
calculate corrosion through weight loss
with the coupon surface analyzed with
respect to localized attacks (pits) and
possible deposits. Such inline probes
and coupons deliver fluid corrosivity
data and rapid information about chang-
ing corrosion rates, giving operators a
more accurate and timely understanding
of asset integrity.
Another non-intrusive technology is
the field signature method (FSM), which
is based on feeding an electric current
through a monitored section of a pipe,
pipeline or vessel, where the applied cur-
rent sets up an electric field that is moni-
tored as voltage drop values between a set
of sensing pins installed on the external
pipe wall (FIG. 2).
The initial measurement sequence,
called the field signature, within the FSM
measures the voltage drop between all
pairs of sensing pins. Measurements are
compared to the field signature, where
general corrosion can be seen as a uni-
form increase in voltage drops between
all pin pairs, and localized corrosion can
be seen as a local increase in the values.
The FSM is particularly adept at differ-
entiating between localized corrosion—
small areas or zones on the metal sur-
face—and generalized corrosion, where
corrosion is uniformly distributed over
a much larger area.
Finally, wall thickness monitoring via
ultrasonic (UT) measurements is a fast
and easy corrosion monitoring tool that
provides direct metal thickness measure-
ments at refinery temperatures of up to
600°C. The limited maintenance require-
ments and ease of installation of wall
thickness measurements also allow for a
wide distribution of sensors for integrity
and corrosion management, as well as
process insight across the refinery.
Ultrasonic systems also deliver wall
thickness measurements continuously
from locations where access is costly, dan-
gerous or physically restricted. The data
from ultrasonic systems can be combined
with inline probes, leading to the high-
sensitivity/fast-response technologies of
the probes for the immediate tracking of
corrosion rate changes alongside direct
wall thickness change monitoring for con-
firmation and verification of asset condi-
 Process Control and Instrumentation 

tions. FSM corrosion monitoring can also
work alongside ultrasonic measurements,
combining total area coverage for local-
ized corrosion with the direct assessment
of pipe and vessel wall thickness.
The further merging of corrosion
monitoring technologies could cover the
ability to differentiate between localized
and generalized corrosion and prioritize
comprehensive monitoring solutions for
critical conditions (such as the distilla-
tion area) against less-costly monitoring
solutions spread over the refinery.
Within the plant, such a corrosion
monitoring strategy must also be closely
linked to other maintenance and reliabil-
ity strategies related to inhibitor injection
control, flow measurements and risk-
based inspection and reliability mainte-
nance programs.
The growth in wireless. One solution
that makes tracking plant health and col-
lecting data more efficient is wireless
technologies. Not only can the right
wireless tools make data collection more
effective, but they can also collate data,
and create current and actionable reports
that help streamline operations. Similar-
ly, the ability to identify problems early
can get slowed down by data bottlenecks
if equipment is unable to efficiently
provide data or if there is no way to sift
through the data in a timely manner.
Whereas many older corrosion moni-
toring systems were based on offline data
collection, the standardization of wireless
communications (such as through the
WirelessHART standard) has led to un-
paralleled quality and frequency of corro-
sion monitoring data.
At present, a large number of applica-
tions (for pressure, temperature, vibration,
etc.) are available with IEC 62591-stan-
dardized (WirelessHART) communica-
tions and can be combined through the
same gateway, providing online commu-
nication to a range of data management
solutions or control systems.
The growth in wireless technologies
also means that corrosion monitoring
sensors are viable options for future in-
vestments to enable digital transforma-
tion strategies and solutions in manufac-
turing and refining, such as big data, the
Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) and
Industry 4.0.
A more flexible and responsive ap-
proach. As refineries continue to focus
on costs and margins, it is essential for
operators to learn which crude oils and
blends work best in their refineries, and
how any corrosion resulting from this
can be preempted and mitigated.
A combination of inline, fast-response
and non-intrusive corrosion monitor-
ing technologies, alongside the latest
in wireless, are ensuring a more flexible
and responsive approach to opportunity
crudes and more financially sustainable
refineries.
KJELL WOLD is the After Sales
and Support Manager for Roxar
Corrosion and Erosion Solutions/
SME, at Emerson Automation
Solutions. Mr. Wold has worked
in corrosion monitoring for nearly
35 yr and has presented papers
at numerous corrosion conferences. He earned an
MS degree in electrochemistry from the Norwegian
University of Science and Technology.

The right
people
make all the
difference.. ™

Your project is complicated, but it doesn’t have to be difficult. Not with

Hargrove on the job. Our Teammates, like Project Director Nigam Patel,
have plenty of plant experience. We understand the pressures you face and
work tirelessly to meet every deadline and every benchmark on every design-
build project we manage. hargrove-epc.com / 877.123.4567 /

Select 163 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

2019 HEC_Hydrocarbon_Processing_HalfPg.indd 1 3/11/19 2019
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 69
11:37 AM
 WOMEN’S

October 28-29, 2019 | Houston, Texas | Royal Sonesta | WGLConference.com

INSPIRING

the NEXT GENERATION of

LEADERS
Come and join us on October 28-29, 2019, as we celebrate the 15 Anniversary of the Women’s Global Leadership
th

Conference in Energy (WGLC) in Houston, Texas.

WGLC is the largest women’s event in the energy industry that focuses on discussing the industry’s key
environmental, economic, professional development and human capital issues in one setting.

Register Now at WGLConference.com

2019 WGLC SPONSORS

Bronze Sponsor &

Platinum Sponsor Gold Sponsor Silver Sponsors Conference Bag Sponsor

Young Women’s Preparatory Academy

Bronze Sponsor Mobile App Sponsor Program Print Sponsor Student Sponsor

For information on sponsorship opportunities, please contact:

Hortensia “Tish” Barroso, Business Development Manager, at Hortensia.Barroso@GulfEnergyInfo.com

Be Inspired. Feel Empowered. Stay Connected.


Raman spectroscopy for the optimization
of hydrogen usage in refineries
Approximately 700 refineries are in
operation worldwide, producing a range
of petroleum products including gaso-
line, diesel, jet fuel, liquified petroleum
gas (LPG) and fuel oils. The primary re-
fining process is the distillation of crude
oil by an atmospheric distillation unit to
separate those fractions that will boil up
to about 350°C and 1 barg–2 barg (C1–
C17+). A second vacuum distillation unit
(VDU) further separates the light- and
heavy-vacuum gasoil fractions derived
from the bottoms of the atmospheric dis-
tillation tower (C18–C38+).
An oil refinery contains several dif-
ferent process units to further refine the
primary distillate fractions derived from
the atmospheric distillation unit and the
VDU. Many of these process units involve
hydroprocessing, in which hydrogen (H2 )
is used in the catalytic modification of
these distillate fractions. These processes
vary depending on the input feedstock
and the desired modification—such as
sulfur removal—or the need to produce
specific end products, such as diesel oil.
One class of hydroprocessing units en-
compasses hydrotreaters, often hydrode-
sulfurization units. Hydrotreaters are the
most common process units in modern
petroleum refineries, with more than
1,300 worldwide. The primary role of
hydrotreating is the removal of contami-
nants, such as organic sulfur and nitrogen,
by converting them into hydrogen sulfide
(H2S) and ammonia (NH3). Minimal
cracking occurs in most hydrotreatment
units—typically less than 15 wt%.
Hydrocracking involves the catalytic
hydrogenation of higher-molecular-
weight hydrocarbons into lower-molecu-
Process Control
and Instrumentation
S. SUTHERLAND, SpectraSensors,
an Endress+Hauser company, Houston, Texas
lar-weight products and is primarily used
to produce middle distillates, such as ker-
osine and diesel. Cracking efficiencies are
typically between 40% and 95%.1
One common factor with these pro-
cess units is the use of significant amounts
of H2 . The H2 is either produced onsite
via an H2 plant and catalytic reformers,
or can be supplied by a third party from
a commercial H2 and carbon monoxide
(HyCO) plant. In most cases, the unused
H2 and other light gases formed in these
units are recycled.
H2 consumption by oil refineries is
growing due to the use of low-quality
heavy crude oil feedstocks, which requires
more H2 to refine, and due to low-sulfur
requirements in diesel fuels. H2 manage-
ment has become a priority in many refin-
ery operations, particularly those produc-
ing low-sulfur gasoline and diesel fuels. In
addition, higher H2 purities within the H2
network are required to boost hydrotreat-
er capacity and lengthen catalyst life.2
This article presents a case study for
the analysis of H2 , H2 S and other com-
pounds in the H2 recycle in a refinery
hydrotreater/hydrocracker, and for H2
purity measurements in a captive H2 plant
associated with a refinery.
Background. Many technologies can
be used for the measurement of H2 in
a gas stream. These include techniques
based on single physical properties of the
sample and include thermal conductiv-
ity, electrochemical sensors and surface
acoustic wave sensors. In addition, sev-
eral analytical techniques common in
laboratories and in process environments
have been used to provide full gas stream
composition in addition to the measure-
ment of H2. These techniques include gas
chromatography, mass spectrometry and
laser-based gas analyzers.3 Full composi-
tion analyzers have a benefit over simple
physical property measurements because
they allow for the calculation of other gas
properties, such as specific gravity (SG),
heating value and Wobbe index.
Measuring H2 streams with specific
gravity. SG is a measure of the density
of a gas sample relative to air at standard
temperature and pressure (0°C, 760
mmHg). More recently, it has become
common to use relative density, which
is SG using a ratio with air at the same
temperature and pressure as the gas being
measured. Several technologies are used
to measure gas density, with a common
one based on a vibrating element.4
While the density of a gas mixture can
be readily measured by these devices, the
ability to provide composition informa-
tion is generally limited to binary gas mix-
tures. It is also possible to provide some
composition information for what might
be called “quasi” binary gas mixtures,
where the mixture contains two major
components, with one or more additional
components present in very small concen-
trations relative to the main components.5
One class of H2-specific sensors used
for the measurement of H2 purity and H2
recycle streams in refineries is based on
solid-state sensor technology utilizing
palladium alloys. These sensors can pro-
vide direct H2 measurement in a variety of
multi-component backgrounds. For low-
H2 concentration streams, these sensors
use a metal-oxide semiconductor capaci-
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 71
 Process Control and Instrumentation
tor with a palladium alloy plate as one of of radiation by molecular bonds. Molecu-
the electrodes, with capacitance changing lar vibrations must generate a change in the
proportional to the H2 concentration. For dipole moment of the bond during a vibra-
high H2 concentration streams, these sen- tion to be infrared-active.
sors use thin-film palladium alloy resis- Raman spectroscopy is based on a
tors, with the resistance changing in the scattering phenomenon. Molecular vibra-
presence of H2.6 Since these devices are tions must have a change in the polariz-
specific to the measurement of H2, they ability of the bond to be Raman-active.
are unable to provide information about The symmetric stretch of homonuclear
the other components in the gas stream. diatomic gas species, such as oxygen (O2),
nitrogen (N2) and H2 , are not IR-active
Optical spectroscopy vs. physical but are Raman-active. Thus, Raman spec-
property measurements. Vibrational troscopy is uniquely suitable for the mea-
spectroscopic techniques—including surement of H2 in process gas streams.
near-infrared (NIR), infrared (dispersive Raman spectroscopy is a high-resolu-
and Fourier transform) and Raman spec- tion optical technique capable of provid-
troscopy—have been developed for the ing composition information for both
measurement of single gases in a complex gaseous and condensed phase mixtures.
mixture and for the composition measure- Laser light interacts with molecular vibra-
ment of gas mixtures. NIR and infrared tions of the components of the gas sam-
spectroscopies are based on the absorption ple, with some of the incident light los-
ing discrete amounts of energy to excite
TABLE 1. Process conditions and vibrational modes in the molecules of the
composition for the PSA unit H2 stream sample. The resulting Raman-scattered
light has a different color than the origi-
Temperature, °F 120
nal laser light, and each different type of
Pressure, psig 350 molecule generates one or more colors
Cycle time, min 2 unique to that molecule.
H2, mol% 99 The Raman detection module strips
out residual scattered laser light to simul-
Methane, mol% 0.5
taneously measure both the color and in-
N2, mol% 0.4 tensity of Raman-scattered light from each
CO2, mol% 0.1 chemical in the sample mixture. The wave-
FIG. 1. Typical Raman spectra of the PSA H2 stream before (a) and after (b) correcting the
pressure drop issue was resolved. The inset shows an expanded view of the N2 and CH4
Raman peaks.
72 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
length (color) of each Raman peak is used
to identify a component in the sample, and
the intensity of the peak is proportional to
the concentration of that component.
With gas-phase samples, the Raman
peaks generated are often sufficiently nar-
row and isolated from one another that
simple, peak-area-based quantitative meth-
ods can be used instead of complex chemo-
metric models, greatly simplifying the de-
velopment and maintenance of methods.
Case study: Captive H2 purity mea-
surement in a US refinery. Many refin-
eries produce captive H2 for use in the nu-
merous hydrotreating and hydrocracking
processes essential for refinery operation.
The majority of this H2 is produced via
steam methane reforming (SMR) of natu-
ral gas inside the refinery battery limits.
The output of the SMR is syngas, which
is a mixture primarily of H2 and CO. The
CO in the syngas is combined with water
and converted into carbon dioxide (CO2)
and additional H2 using water-shift reac-
tors. When recovery and sequestration
of CO2 are required, further processing
purifies the syngas by removing CO2 via a
CO2 absorber. In many refineries, pressure
swing adsorption (PSA) units play a ma-
jor role in the final H2 purification process.
A US refinery has installed a variety of
technologies to measure H2 purity at the
outlet of a PSA process unit. Initially, the
plant used a commercial SG meter for this
measurement. However, due to the non-bi-
nary nature of the stream and the presence
of other trace contaminants, the SG meter
would often produce spurious results. In
addition, process engineers needed infor-
mation on both the H2 measurement and
details of the contaminants, which this
sensor was unable to provide. The site
investigated alternative approaches and
settled on one based on solid-state sens-
ing technology. This analyzer was installed
and was found to be very sensitive to pres-
sure and flow variations, and ultimately
was deemed not sufficiently repeatable.
The site evaluated process gas chroma-
tography (PGC) and optical technologies,
and selected process Raman spectroscopy
due to its unique ability among optical vi-
brational techniques to measure the H2 in
the stream. While PGC systems are also
capable of providing composition infor-
mation, the site chose to deploy a process
Raman system due to the high cost of
maintenance and consumables experi-
 Process Control and Instrumentation

enced with previous PGC installations. In creases catalyst life and lowers overall op- formed to control flow and supply the re-
addition, the customer had a strong pref- erating costs. Generally, the best practice cycle gas at a constant pressure. Pressure
erence not to send the effluent from the at this facility has shown that the highest drop across the orifice of the recycle com-
analyzer to the flare system. The Raman HTU efficiency occurs when the H2 pu- pressor is the direct function of gas den-
system analyzes samples at higher pres- rity is greater than 96%. sity. Any changes in gas density, typically
sure than the PGC and other sensor tech- One function of the recycle compres- due to a change in composition, must be
nologies considered, allowing the facility sor is to control the flow of recycle gas compensated to maintain a constant pres-
to find a lower pressure point in a location to the HTU, which controls the H2-to- sure drop across the orifice.7
downstream to return the sample to the hydrocarbon ratio, an important process The goal of the facility is to run at
process, obviating the need for flaring. variable. The key parameter of interest maximum throughput. The high target
TABLE 1 shows the process stream con- at the input of the recycle compressor is throughput and H2 purity requirements
ditions and composition for the H2 purity gas density, normally measured as SG or mean the facility is usually running H2 lim-
product stream from the PSA process unit. relative density. This measurement is per- ited. The plant utilizes the H2 composition
Two other key measurement points that
were considered are the feed stream to the
PSA and the tail gas, which is often added
to the fuel gas of the refinery. Having a reli-
able H2 purity analyzer is critical to the site,
especially following an absorbent change-
out in the PSA. Without the purity analyz-
er, there is the potential to poison the new
absorbent in the PSA vessels. For this site,
the economic loss of a single event of this
type could be as high as $3.5 MM.
During the early testing after instal-
lation and commissioning of the Raman
analyzer, the site observed a steady pro-
cess pressure drop over a period of several
days. After fixing the pressure issue, the
output of the PSA was brought into line
with the design expectations shown in
TABLE 1. Typical Raman data and compo-
sition results before and after the pressure
correction are shown in FIG. 1. The inset in FIG. 2. The H2 recycle process in the hydrocracker showing a typical measurement point (AX).
the chart expands the spectral region for
the N2 and methane (CH4) Raman peaks,
showing the ability to detect CH4 levels at
a few hundred parts per million (ppm).

Case study: H2 recycle measure-

ment for a hydrocracker. A US refin-
ery was using Raman analysis in the H2
recycle processes in its hydrocracking and
hydrotreating process units. The typical
measurements used to monitor and en-
hance the operation of the hydrotreater
and hydrocracker with the Raman ana-
lyzer are recycle H2 , hydrocarbon and
H2S content. These are measured after
the high-pressure separator (HPS) unit,
upstream of the recycle compressors.
At this facility, there are two recycle
streams, one of which is used when ad-
ditional cracking is required due to the
composition of the feedstock being pro-
cessed. The recycle stream is fed to the
hydrotreater unit (HTU). Higher H2
purity in the feed to the HTU improves FIG. 3. Light integration, including rack, sun shield, PLC, power distribution, Raman analyzer
and connections for both process and validation gases.
efficiency and reduces coking, which in-
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 73
 Process Control and Instrumentation

measurement to monitor the operation of sures enough pressure to allow the effluent rack (FIG. 3) and integrating pneumatic
the HPS to improve H2 output and opti- to be returned to a lower pressure point in switches into the overall solution. At the
mize H2 partial pressure. With an optimal the process, avoiding flaring. request of the customer, a programmable
H2 partial pressure, less of the expensive For the streams associated with the logic controller (PLC) was integrated into
makeup H2 needs to be added to the re- other two compressors, pressure reduc- the overall solution to allow programming
cycle stream feeding the compressor. tion stations were installed so that all three of the validation sequencing.
This facility is analyzing stream compo- streams would provide similar overall sig- The analyzer’s interface for the fiber-
sition in three locations. The first measure- nal levels, and to reduce the probability of optic probe and pressure/temperature
ment point is at the startup compressor, condensation at the fiber-optic probe in- sensor is shown in FIG. 4, prior to full in-
which is used mainly after a catalyst chan- terface. Sample lag time from the process stallation, and shows the integration of
geout in a turnaround period. The goal pipe to the fiber-optic probe sensor is ap- conventional and SP76-compliant com-
of this measurement is to help improve proximately 1 min, and the analysis time ponents into the sample interface and con-
process visibility at startup. This compres- was chosen to be 42 sec, yielding a total ditioning system.
sor is used for low-pressure cooldown, as update time of approximately 1.75 min, al- Prior to installation of the Raman ana-
well. The other two measurement points lowing near-real-time operation. lyzer, this refinery monitored the H2 recycle
are upstream of the recycle compressors. As part of this installation, automatic compressors based on SG measurement.
FIG. 2 illustrates the location of these two validation of each probe was enabled by The H2 partial pressure was back-calculat-
measurement points. This location en- integrating a proprietary analyzera into a ed using feed data and past analysis results.
This assumed that the stream consists only
of H2 and hydrocarbons. Due to the uncer-
tainty of this assumption, the plant was of-
ten using additional makeup H2 to ensure
that the target purity for the recycle com-
pressor was exceeded. The SG meter was
located downstream of the recycle com-
pressor and would become fouled with
seal oil on a regular basis. When the SG
system was offline, the site relied on com-
pressor amperage and other parameters for
process monitoring.
Using the Raman measurement, the
facility can monitor the complete compo-
sition of the HPS output. The measured
composition is used to calculate both H2
partial pressure and SG. Any changes in
SG can be directly correlated to changes
in the process gas composition to better
enable optimization of the HPS, which al-
lows the site to run the recycle compressor
FIG. 4. The proprietary analyzer sample interface showing the integration of SP76 and closer to its design value while simultane-
conventional components, a probe, a combined pressure/temperature sensor, a heater to raise ously lowering the requirement for addi-
the temperature of the gas at the measurement point above its dewpoint, and a pneumatic tional makeup H2.
switch for automating validation, contained in an insulated, temperature-controlled housing.
Raman analysis also allows the site to
monitor H2S in the stream, which is of
interest, as H2S is corrosive to the HTU.
An additional benefit derived from having
full composition measurements was iden-
tified by the machinery group, which uses
the data to optimize the recycle compres-
sor curves and performance, and to evalu-
ate long-term compressor health.
FIG. 5 shows typical process data for
the major components of a H2 recycle
gas stream over a period of approximately
3 mos. Data shown includes CH4 , eth-
FIG. 5. Trend chart of an H2 recycle stream for a period of 85 d. The range of concentration ane (C2H6), H2 and H2S. In addition,
values (Y-axis) for each compound is shown on the left side of the graph, with minimum the composition was used to calculate
and maximum values (mol%) in a font color matching the relevant trace: 0.1–0.4 for Ideal SG, the SG, which is also monitored by the
65–95 for H2, 1–11 for C1, 0–4.5 for C2, and 0.4–2 for H2S.
distributed control system (DCS). For
74 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Process Control and Instrumentation

this process, CH4 level is a key parameter
used to indicate if the process was within
operational specification. A threshold of
6 mol% was determined to be a strong
indicator of whether the process was op-
erating properly.
During the measurement period
shown, the CH4 level is stable and well
below the threshold value for a period of
3 wk–4 wk. The CH4 concentration then
rises rapidly over a period of approximate-
ly 1 wk to exceed the threshold, where it
remains for 3 wk–4 wk. A drop in the CH4
level can be seen about halfway through
this period, and then it drops back down
below the target value at about the 2-mos
timeframe of this data set.
With the composition and derived val-
ues plotted simultaneously, it is evident
that the SG value tracks proportionally
with the CH4 and C2H6 values, tracks in-
versely with the H2 concentration and has
intermittent correlations with the H2S
composition. Having full composition
data allows the facility to not only moni-
tor the change in SG, but to determine
what composition changes are causing it
to vary, providing improved levels of con-
trol over the HPS operation.
Takeaways. The management of H2 with-
in refineries is an essential part of efficient
operation. Process Raman spectroscopy
is an excellent analytical tool for the mea-
surement of H2 and other gases associated
with the various hydroprocessing units
within a refinery operation. The success-
ful installations at the facilities described
in this article provide supporting evidence
that this method supplies essential data
and performance benefits for monitoring
and control of key process units within
these plants. The ability of this technology
to rapidly yield composition information
is essential as refineries look for more feed-
forward strategies to fine-tune H2 produc-
tion and use within their facilities.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to thank the two US refiner-
ies for providing information on the performance and
benefits of process Raman spectroscopy at their facilities.
NOTES
a
Refers to SpectraSensors’ Optograf TM analyzer with
an OptoASTTM sample interface
LITERATURE CITED
1
Robinson P. R. and G. E. Dolbear, Hydrotreating
and Hydrocracking: Fundamentals, In: Hsu C. S.,
Robinson P. R. (eds) Practical Advances in Petroleum
Processing, Springer, New York, New York, 2006.
2
Davis, R. and N. Patel, “Refinery hydrogen manage-
ment,” PTQ, Spring 2004.
3
Soundarrajan, P. and F. Schweighardt, “Hydrogen
sensing and detection,” Hydrogen Fuel—Production,
Transport, and Storage, CRC Press, 2009.
4
McDonough, Jr., “Instruments for the determination
of specific gravity/relative density of gas,” American
School of Gas Measurement Technology, 2002.
5
SBS-3500 Digital Hydrometer Instruction Manual
09-15-TI3500, Storage Battery Systems LLC.
6
“Recycle gas hydrogen measurement,” Application
Note, H2scan.
7
Hengstebeck, R. J., “Process for controlling recycle
hydrogen gas,” US Patent 2,849,379, 1958.
SCOTT SUTHERLAND is the
Product Line Marketing Manager
at SpectraSensors Inc., an
Endress+Hauser company. He is
responsible for all aspects of
marketing the Optograf™ analyzer
and its applications in the oil and
gas and chemical industries, including ammonia and
methanol production, hydrogen generation, synthetic
natural gas and liquefied natural gas. Dr. Sutherland
has BS degrees in physics and chemistry and a PhD
in analytical chemistry. He has spent more than
28 yr designing Raman analyzers and developing
Raman solutions.

LIVE WEBCAST
Tuesday, June 25, 2019 | 10 a.m. CDT / 3 p.m. UTC

Taking the Digital Twin from Design into Operations

by leveraging an EPC 4.0 strategy
Vaseem Khan As EPCs shift from a document-centric approach to data-centric approach, the potential value realized
Global Vice President Engineering by both the EPC and owner/operator is almost limitless. Digital twins contain 3D models, engineering
McDermott and process data, and operational processes that are the foundational building blocks for a suite of
value-added applications in production optimization, visualization, artificial intelligence, automation,
and predictive maintenance, etc.
Vaseem Khan, Global Vice President Engineering at McDermott, will share his end state vision for the
Design and Operational Twin, explaining how Design Twins created and refined during engineering,
procurement and construction will become the Operational Twins once assets go live.

Register for Free:

HydrocarbonProcessing.com/Webcasts
Lee Nichols
Editor/Associate Publisher
Hydrocarbon Processing

Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 75

GLOBAL DOWNSTREAM PROJECT DATA
WHEN YOU NEED IT
Track global construction projects with the world’s most
comprehensive dataset

• Track refining, petrochemical, gas processing

and LNG projects
• Enhanced project details and leads across
more than 1,000 global projects
• Track facilities throughout the project
lifecycle
• Improved search functionality for quicker
project insights.

EXPANDED DETAIL AND SCOPE

For more information, visit ConstructionBoxscore.com

 Maintenance
and Reliability
A. ANWER, Contributing Editor,
Ruwais, UAE

Equipment life assessment—An exercise to help

ensure plant equipment integrity and reliability
Numerous plants around the world operate with hazard-
ous oil and gas, petrochemicals and refining fluids that have
surpassed their design life. The default design life of a plant
and its major pieces of equipment is normally 30 yr. A plant
reaching this design life must go through inspections to con-
tinue its operation. Failure to do so may lead to catastrophic
consequences. However, when equipment has been inspected
for years, what should be checked when the plant is close to
reaching its design life? The facility will continue operating
the way it has been since commissioning, so why should there
be a need for a separate exercise?
The answer is that the records, procedures and systems
that have been operating the plant may require a special check
to ensure that each unit is safe to operate. This is an exercise/
study that is called different things (such as an equipment life-
cycle study or an asset life extension) in various parts of the
world. However, it should be followed in the best way possible
to ensure that aging equipment units are fit to operate. FIG. 1. Stages to obtain a list of black equipment.
The questions that must be asked include:
• Where to start?
• What to look for? tion, the next step is to investigate the operation, maintenance
• Who is going to check the equipment? and inspection records. These records may not always be avail-
Personnel operating the aging equipment may know ev- able from the plant’s commissioning, and may not provide the
erything about its performance, but may undermine some of full picture required to make a correct equipment life assess-
the pending issues, since nothing has happened to date. An ment. A procedure is required here to plan which records will
examination is required to identify any and all potential issues be examined and, if they are unavailable, to determine the next
associated with all plant systems and to issue recommenda- step to bridge this gap and perform a reliable assessment.
tions to address the same. A reliable assessment is one that has few or no unknowns
during the assessment process—everything has been assessed
A list of black equipment. The stages to obtain a list of based upon the full data available and by the right person on
black equipment are shown in FIG. 1. These steps include: the team. At this point, the team will narrow down the records
1. Forming a multi-disciplinary team related to the static equipment of the plant. Once this is com-
2. Examining operations, maintenance and pleted, the target is to ensure the life assessment of the plant’s
inspection records static equipment. First, the team should consult the defect reg-
3. Consulting the defect register of the facility ister of the facility. Typically, the defect register is meant to be a
4. Meeting with site inspection engineers should list of static equipment units that have been subject to damage
equipment reports be unavailable affecting their performance (e.g., equipment corrosion forcing
5. Identifying the type of repair that will be needed the inspection and maintenance team to perform necessary re-
6. Making a list of black equipment at the site. pairs before the equipment is put back into operation).
After assembling a team of multidisciplinary individu- Facilities that have this kind of list for their assets will be
als—from process design, inspection, mechanical and mainte- able to get a jump start on assessing equipment life. For cases
nance—who all have a fresh perspective for the plant in ques- where this data is unavailable in a discrete form (e.g., in the
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 77
 Maintenance and Reliability
form of a list clearly indicating the problematic static equip-
ment at the site), a discussion with the concerned engineer is
a great place to start.
After obtaining a list of static equipment having issues re-
lated to inspection and repair, the first to-do item is to identify
the type of repair—a temporary repair is one meant to last for a
specified time, and a permanent repair is one designed to make
the equipment like new. If it is a temporary repair, then equip-
ment validity can be confirmed through online monitoring and
inspection. Whether it has passed its operational lifespan or
there have been findings during online monitoring, equipment
is still vulnerable to failure. Start making a list of black equip-
ment at the site. If a permanent repair was completed, then a
cause of failure should be determined (such as through a root
cause analysis). If this exercise is not completed, the specified
piece of equipment should move to the black equipment list.
While these checks are performed, it is also important to
confirm that the repair work suggested was in line with inter-
nationally acceptable standards. If the suggested repair was
not in line with acceptable standards and/or if the actual re-
pair did not follow the suggested procedure, then this piece of
equipment should be moved to the black equipment list. Per-
sonnel should document equipment records while perform-
ing this exercise.
After obtaining the list of black equipment, each piece of
equipment should, at least, contain the following information:
1. Root cause of equipment failure
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING’S INDUSTRY OUTLOOK: 2019 UPDATE
>> LIVE WEBCAST: Thursday, June 20, 2019 | 9 a.m. CDT | 2 p.m. UTC
Over the past several years, the world has witnessed significant downstream
capacity growth in all sectors of the downstream hydrocarbon processing
industry (HPI). To satisfy increasing demand for refined fuels, petrochemicals
and natural gas, every region is investing to increase downstream processing
capacity. Although the Asia-Pacific, Middle East and US regions will be the
leaders in capacity growth, other regions have announced capital-intensive
projects to meet future demand. With more than $1.8 T in announced projects
globally, it is imperative that HPI companies receive the most up-to-date and valid
information on market trends, and the future development of the downstream
processing industry.
During this live webcast, Lee Nichols will provide a mid-year update on capital
projects around the world, as well as major economic, environmental and political
market trends that are shaping and influencing the industry in the near-term.
Register for this free webcast at:
HydrocarbonProcessing.com/Webcasts
78 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
2. Actions taken previously
3. Recommended actions
4. Expected life after recommended actions
5. Special inspections required for the expected life
6. Budget required for implementing recommended
actions.
Takeaway. Establishing the black equipment list after review-
ing inspection and maintenance records is a landmark in an
equipment life assessment exercise. Next, operational records
must be checked. A similar strategy should be adopted to find
the static equipment that has ceased operation due to damage.
Furthermore, operational exceedance records should be ob-
tained to determine if integrity operating windows have been
exceeded. Although a record for the lifetime of equipment may
not be available, a recent record can be taken with the assump-
tion that a similar operational envelope may have existed.
Having this assessment ready to be presented to manage-
ment for their information, review and approval will complete
this exercise. Implementation of the recommendations will
help the plant ensure its mechanical integrity and reliability.
ASHFAQ ANWER is an Inspection Professional with 13 yr of
experience in ammonia-urea complexes, petrochemical units,
and oil and gas industries. He has extensive expertise in material
selection, corrosion mapping and control, fitness-for-service
studies, defining inspection framework, and implementing
inspection plans for old and new units.
SPONSORED BY:
PRESENTED BY:
Lee Nichols Thad Pittman
Editor/Associate Sr. Research Analyst,
Publisher Data Services Division
 Project
Management
J. PRAJAPATI, Linde Engineering North America,
Houston, Texas; C. SHETH and N. MANGUKIA,
Linde Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara, India

The new normal in petrochemical revamp projects

You have made the decision to increase
plant capacity—with a change in feed—in
the existing facility. You have shortlisted
the licensor and engineering, procurement
and construction (EPC) contractors that
are best in quality and cost. As engineer-
ing work starts, you receive the bad news
that the existing furnaces and columns are
not designed for additional capacity; so,
the add-on furnace and columns must be
redesigned. Further complications are that
the feed contains certain compositions
that will result in the need for an additional
reactor and adsorber; therefore, additional
plot area is needed. These changes require
additional engineering, procurement,
construction, commissioning and cost.
The relatively simple job has now turned
into a more complex, more expensive and
delayed one.
Often, these types of projects seem
to be simple and easy jobs, but this sce-
nario has become the new normal dur-
ing the revamp of a petrochemical plant,
especially for cracker projects. The term
“revamp or brownfield project” describes
projects that are carried out to replace,
upgrade or increase production capacity
in the existing plant. A “new or greenfield
project” is a project that is carried out to
build a completely new facility and is not
constrained by any existing facilities. The
main challenges of revamp projects are:
• The existing facility’s license
technology design package and its
intellectual property (IP) rights
• The condition and operational
restrictions of the plant.
Cracker revamp projects have often
proved most difficult to execute effec-
tively due to common challenges, such
as process design, poor execution, and
cost and schedule overruns. In the cur-
rent “low-cost cracker project” scenario,
clients are looking to utilize the most of
their existing facilities.
It is important that revamp projects
are carefully assessed, planned and have
personal development planning (PDP) or
basic engineering completed with Class 3
(+10%) total installed cost (TIC) open-
book cost estimates to reach final invest-
ment decision for the project to material-
ize. This article defines some of the key
paths forward for the project execution
team to consider during petrochemi-
cal revamp projects. The key differences
between revamps and new projects are
shown in TABLE 1.
Execution model, strategy and ap-
proach. The main objective of the proj-
ect execution model is to perform the
work according to the plant’s turnaround
(TAR) schedule, functional safety and en-
vironmental requirements of the client’s

TABLE 1. Key differences between revamps and new projects

Main activities New projects Revamp projects Path forward
Basis of design Feed, product, byproduct and clearly Additional constraints due to Clearly define and discuss the basis
defined feedstock scenario and/or existing plant design and wide range of design in the KOM
target plant capacity with exact of potential solutions possible Laser scanning and geotechnical surveys
scope of work to verify existing documentation
Equipment and Known condition of new equipment The mechanical integrity of used Strength or brittle fracture analysis of
piping condition and piping equipment and piping may be unknown, equipment and piping needed to verify
the condition of existing equipment modification or replacement
and piping may be overlooked
Execution Project execution follows a standard Execution requires an assessment, Careful assessment of the debottleneck
methodology sequence from concepts to construction, planning, basic and detailed design, study with detail and exact planning of
commissioning, startup and PGTR construction, pre-TAR, TAR with hot long-lead equipment (LLE) procurement
tapings, commissioning and startup; Precise and accurate construction with
may be several shutdowns thorough planning
Site work Easy site work execution and project Plant is in production as the project Proactive and accurate coordination
execution management has full control of is executed; operations controls the required between the operation and
the facility work onsite; production activities execution team with planned shutdown
usually have priority over project work

Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 79

 Project Management

existing facility. The execution strategy
must be focused on:
• Meeting health, safety and
environmental (HSE) compliance
with the client’s HSE philosophy,
while adhering to project objectives
• Meeting the client’s project
schedule (e.g., key milestones)
and developing a reliable open book
cost estimate to support FID
• The contractor’s experience,
integrated project task force
and lessons learned from
previous projects
• Early involvement of construction
and commissioning personnel
during the engineering phase
to develop module/prefabrication
concepts, constructability
and operation and
maintenance expertise
• A dedicated project control
group to monitor progress and
cost development and to prepare
comprehensive project reports,
with a continuous focus on
activities identified as critical.
The project execution should be per-
formed in five staggered phases:
• Phase 1: Debottleneck study/
PDP/front-end engineering
design (FEED) engineering,
cost estimate Class 3 (+10%)
and Level 3 EPC schedule
• Phase 2: Bridging phase with value
engineering until FID by client,
including procurement activities
to finalize full scope purchase
orders of long-lead items
• Phase 3: Detailed EPC planning
• Phase 4: Construction, including
pre-commissioning to mechanical
completion (MC), and training in
cooperation with the licensor
• Phase 5: Commissioning, startup
and performance tests.
Global workshare execution and
high-value engineering center. Well-
established, long-standing global work-
share execution always ensures a seamless
workflow for cracker revamp projects.
Division of responsibility is a well-estab-
lished concept to all engineering disci-
pline deliverables and percentage work-
share between execution centers.
Design basis. The hidden items in a
revamp project can result in poor proj-
ect execution. If an item is missed (e.g.,
something important in the early design
phase), cost and schedule can be affected
significantly in later stages. Therefore,
a debottleneck study and FEED are the
most important items during cracker re-
vamp project execution.
Project specification. All revamp
projects are required to review the as-built
documentation, local codes and stan-
dards, project implementation plan (PIP)
standards, existing facility requirements
and licensor design requirements. The
execution team must develop minimum
requirements, with main cost drivers us-
ing cost-impact-checklist (CIC) lists. The
team must also review and apply lessons
learned from previous projects.
Scope of work and constraints.
Determine the current operating win-
dow and spare capacity of the existing
plant—primarily the equipment, instru-
ments and piping, which are the main
parts of a revamp project. This includes
the increase of the production and utility
system’s design capacity; the number of
tie-ins and their final location; electrical,
instrumentation and controls; and new

TABLE 2. Major elements for the revamp project’s execution

KSF
Project management
Design and engineering
Procurement and fabrication
Construction
MC, commissioning and startup
Parameters
Commitment, long professional experience and proactive leadership
Early establishment of a concurrent plan of all project phases, including construction, pre-commissioning,
commissioning and startup
Focus on critical activities from Day 1, established in the project execution schedule
Maintaining a schedule risk management system
Forming an integrated project task force, including the client right from the project’s beginning
Verification and implementation of project gate reviews for the different parallel phases of the engineering
process to minimize changes and iteration loops
Consideration of the client’s operation and maintenance requirements in the design
Active and early involvement of the client’s project team during engineering
Engineering and procurement of all equipment should be analyzed in early stages, especially for LLE
and complex equipment packages
Close coordination and early commitment with local authorities and suppliers
Establishment of a sufficiently detailed and finalized design base to support the start of equipment
fabrication, with state-of-the-art solutions
Develop a modularization and prefabrication strategy
Evaluate possible back-to-back agreements with local subcontractors to secure resources and local
availability of special erection equipment
Adequate manpower, progress control, hand-over system and material management onsite
Define and establish MC, commissioning system and procedures early in the project
Timely training of the client’s operating personnel in cooperation with the licensor
Close and proactive cooperation with the client’s commissioning and operations teams

80 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Project Management

and/or replaced transformers and the operations team. For example, the number ity to avoid later surprises. Successful exe-
control room. and location of piping tie-ins must con- cution always requires a healthy approach
Work closely with the existing plant sider the detailed design of the complete to understand the existing facility design
operations team to review and
ensure that actual capacities are
defined. Piping and civil struc- A proactive approach, good communication, high-value
ture constraints must be iden-
tified and analyzed in the early
engineering and an integrated team effort are key to
phases of the project and should successful execution of cracker revamp projects. Highly
be designed to align with the qualified and experienced design engineers play a
plant’s future capacity. The key
deliverables—especially piping crucial role in the execution team.
and instrumentation diagrams
(P&IDs), tie-ins list with loca-
tions, 3D models, etc.—should be devel- system, considering key factors such as and as-built documentation; proactive co-
oped to clearly define the revamp scope hot tapping or cold tapping, pipe cleaning, ordination and involvement of operations;
and changes in the existing plant. pipe material, strength, stress, supports, robust planning; stage-wise reviews of all
positive isolation, valve access, etc. engineering deliverables with construc-
Safety and integrity of the existing tion, commissioning and operations per-
plant. The project team must identify the Operations and maintenance. P&ID sonnel; and effective project management
mechanical integrity and lifespan of the ex- review, HAZID/HAZOP analysis and all to control and monitor the overall project
isting facility, especially the equipment and 3D design reviews should be carried out execution plan.
piping, where the tie-ins will be made, and with the client’s operations and mainte-
to check and confirm that items are not ob- nance teams to review and confirm that JAGDISH PRAJAPATI is a Lead
solete. This should include, but is not lim- the proposed designs are safe and reliable Systems Engineer for Linde
Engineering North America.
ited to, checking equipment sizing accord- to operate and maintain. He received a Bch degree in
ing to the revamp capacity; the thickness of chemical engineering from South
the pipe wall, especially at the tie-in joint; Construction and commissioning. Gujarat University and an MS degree
positive isolation; and confirming the siz- Construction and commissioning teams He began his careerfrom Dharmsinh Desai University.
as a process engineer at Larson &
ing of control valves for better controlla- should have early and continuous input Toubro-Chiyoda in Vadodara, India. In 2010, he joined
bility and an acceptable noise level. This on the design in the engineering phase. the petrochemical group at Linde Engineering India
activity will help identify hazards. Hazard A constructability review must be done and led several projects on conceptual process design
and systems engineering. In 2014, he joined Linde
analysis, risk assessment and mitigation with a 3D model with all possible engi- Engineering North America and is responsible for the
must be carefully planned, reviewed, de- neering disciplines and client personnel. process systems engineering in petrochemical plants
signed and considered as an integral part of The demolition and installation scope for cracking furnaces, cracker recovery section and
the overall petrochemical revamp project. must be planned, reviewed and frozen polypropylene plants. Mr. Prajapati is a licensed
professional engineer in Alberta, Canada. He is also
during the engineering phase. working as a proposal manager and engineering
Management of change (MOC). All manager for olefin recovery plants and hydrogen and
revamp projects must be subjected to Key success factors (KSF). Major ele- synthesis plants.
the MOC process, which ensures that a ments for the revamp project’s execution CHETAN SHETH is the Vice President
design change is managed safely by iden- are described in TABLE 2, with a special and Unit Head-Engineering for Linde
tifying risks, developing measures to miti- emphasis on the organization and techni- Engineering India. He has more than
gate them and developing or updating the cal execution. Based on experience, some 25 yr of professional experience in
petrochemicals, gas processing,
documents to support the change. This success factors require attention as these refining, oil and gas, and fertilizer
process requires extensive reviews at vari- factors can determine the success of the projects in leading multi-national
ous phases of the project [e.g., P&IDs re- project’s execution. EPC companies in the areas of plant layout and piping
design, and project and engineering management.
view, hazard and operability (HAZOP); He manages engineering unit activities for local EPC
hazard identification (HAZID) and Takeaways. Revamp projects are an im- projects and global work share projects with various
quantitative risk assessment (QRA) stud- portant part in the lifecycle of any pet- Linde engineering entities around the world.
ies, and constructability reviews with the rochemical plant. A proactive approach,
NILESH MANGUKIA is Head of
design engineering team, the client’s HSE good communication, high-value engi- Process Engineering, Process and
and operations personnel]. neering and an integrated team effort are Environmental Safety and Sales
key to successful execution of cracker re- Engineering at Linde Engineering
India. He has more than 25 yr of
TAR. The planning of TAR/shutdown vamp projects. Highly qualified and expe-
experience, including concept
activities should be thoroughly assessed rienced design engineers play a crucial role development, process and safety
and carefully reviewed with the operations in the execution team. It is the execution design, and basic and detailed engineering, pre-
team. The shutdown sequence of the exist- team’s responsibility to develop a smart commissioning and commissioning of hydrogen and
ing plant must be developed from the de- approach that can fit within the constraints synthesis gas plants, ammonia plants, PSA units,
air separation, acid gas, sulfur recovery, cryogenic
sign phase by both the execution team and imposed by the existing systems and facil- gas units, etc.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 81
 Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference
11 – 14 November 2019
One global industry. One city. One meeting place.
Supporters

CREATING A NEW BLUEPRINT

FOR THE OIL & GAS INDUSTRY
Launched by ADNOC at ADIPEC 2018, Oil & Gas 4.0 acts as the guiding platform for the industry as it evolves to embrace and navigate the
opportunities enabled by the fourth industrial age. Building on a framework encompassing four pillars, the Oil & Gas 4.0 programme brings forth
unprecedented dialogue, insights and thought leadership across enhanced innovative digital technologies creatively positioned to move at pace
and accelerate execution, and value led agile business models and new partnership ecosystems.

Global mega trends impacting the industry Industry responses: Oil & Gas 4.0

Global supply & demand responses Creating the Oil & Gas company of the future

Presented and Discussed in:

KEYNOTES PANEL SESSIONS LIVE! SESSIONS

JOIN THE OIL & GAS 4.0 CONVERSATION AT ADIPEC 2019

10,400+ 900+ 160+

Conference Delegates* Speakers Strategic & Technical
Conference Sessions

145,000+ 2,200+ 42
Trade Visitors Exhibiting Companies* Exhibiting National and International
Oil Companies
* Based on unique and repeat delegates to all conference sessions

PURCHASE YOUR DELEGATE PASS BEFORE

FRIDAY 14 JUNE 2019 AND SAVE $800
www.adipec.com/confreg
Official Hotel ADIPEC Venue Official Broadcast Official Media ADIPEC
Partner Host City Partner Partner Partner Organised By

Can nuclear power plant methodologies help
improve hydrocarbon processing reliability?—Part 2
Safety requirements within nuclear
power plants (NPPs) have encouraged
the development of several rigorous
methodologies that, in turn, have stimu-
lated excellence in operability, reliability,
availability and maintenance (RAM) to
the extent that numerous guides and
standards now regulate that industry.
Part 1 of this article, which appeared
in the May issue of Hydrocarbon Process-
ing, compared the safety requirements
for nuclear facilities and the hydrocarbon
processing industry (HPI), indicating
that the two industries have similar ob-
jectives. Part 2 focuses on the results of
RAM simulation of the pump/reactor/
agitator system and the evolution of a
maintenance strategy.
It is known that un-spared compo-
nents in a system design contribute to
unreliability. System design is affected
not only by the system’s weakest com-
ponent but also by an aggregate of “un-
reliabilities” of all the components. In
practical situations, multiple failures of
redundant components, as well as out-
lier events or extreme events, may also
S gear 1 Transf 1 AgiM
Start N1
S gear 2 Transf 2
FIG. 2. Block diagram of the designed pump/reactor agitator system.
S. A. PRADHAN, Consulting Engineer, London, UK;
and A. ABDELKHALIQ, Tecnicas Reunidas,
Madrid, Spain
contribute to unreliability and loss of
system function.
Assessing reliability. In the Fuku-
shima Nuclear Accident in Japan,5 the
spared heat transfer pumping system was
rendered inoperable by the tsunami. PSA
and extreme value analysis afford tools
to assess the impact of such scenarios. It
is outside the scope of this article to con-
duct extreme value analysis, but results
are presented of simple probabilistic
simulations of a pump/reactor/agitator
system (FIG. 2) to assess the reliability of
the designed system and how proactive
maintenance design steps can help meet
target reliability/availability. Probabilis-
tic simulations were made for a mission
time of 8,760 hr (1 yr) for pessimistic
and improved meantime between fail-
ures (MTBF) of the as-designed system
components. An additional simulation
was made with average component MT-
BFs and the main high-pressure pump
out for repair for 5 d/10 d (120 hr/240
hr) and the system operating with the
standby pump.
LoPPto 1 To press pump 1 H press P 1 HPPLo 1
1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2
N2 N4 N5 N6
LoPPto 2 To press pump 2 H press P 2 HPPLo 2
Environment
and Safety
Simulation results, observations and
comments include:
1. Pareto (FIG. 3) shows that system
unreliability is likely due to
failures of un-spared equipment.
2. The system reliability improves
from 20% to 60% when MTBF
is improved to average. To
achieve the target reliability of
96% would require substantial
redesign; increased QA/QC
and equipment testing to weed
out manufacturing defects and
early failures and upgrade of
pumps, gearboxes and associated
systems to API standards.
3. The predominant failures are
in the agitator (FIG. 3) bottom
bearings (inferior metallurgy,
shaft misalignment) and
improper shaft design with
stress-raisers around keyways
in bearings, paddles and seals.
4. These failure modes suggest that:
a. Improvement of shaft/bearing
designs by early design
reviews will significantly
AgS pump 1 AgiBXLo 1 AgiBbox
1/2 1/2 1/2
N7 N8 N 11 N9 Agitator End
AgS pump 2 AgiBXLo 2
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 83
 Environment and Safety
reduce failure probability.
b. Designed maintenance/
replacement of equipment
can reduce maintenance
downtime. Examples of this
are modular replacement of
agitator bottom bearing for
the rapid-replacement bearing
sleeve, and a swivel design of
the agitator motor/gearbox
for seal replacement.
c. A planned inspection repair
downtime (IRD) to replace
bottom bearings, motors,
pump bearings, seals and their
secondary sealing components,
such as O-rings and gaskets;
QC of agitator paddles and
shaft for fatigue; fretting around
critical stressed areas; and the
inspection of gearboxes, motors
and pumps. Similar planned
IRDs would benefit static
equipment, including those
in severe corrosive services
or where high or low
temperatures can lead to
degradation of components
and the entire system. Note:
All major HPCI complexes
have a planned IRD. However,
the proposal here is to evaluate
equipment/components
systematically with PSA/
D-in-D methodologies to
develop mini-IRDs to attend to
those equipment/components
where lifetimes are shorter
than a full-cycle IRD.
Run 1: Pareto of all equipment failures
4 1.2
Component
3 Cumulative
Component
2 0.6
1 0.5
0 0.0
Agitator Agitator/ Seal Switch Agitator Trans-
motor gear box former
FIG. 3. Simulation results.
TABLE 3. Simulation results
reliability
Run 1: Pessimistic MTBF for all components
Run 2: Average MTBF for all components
Run 3: Average MTBF for all components
and main pressure pump-out for repair,
120 hr/140 hr
84 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
d. Agitator seal design
suggests that a planned
seal replacement will lead
to improved reliability and
safety. Seals operating at high
temperatures and pressures
have the potential of higher
seal-face wear and degradation
of their secondary sealing
components, such as gaskets
and O-rings. Such degradation
could remain hidden and
lead to unexpected failures.
Proactive seal replacement
during a mini-IRD would
avoid such hidden failures.
5. Simulation Run 3 shows that if a
standby machinery is in service
while the main machinery is out
for repair/service (up to 120 hr),
zero probability of failure exists
during such an un-spared machine
operation. Additional simulation
could help in the formulation
of a risk-based deployment
plan for a maintenance strategy
to manage the repair of failed
equipment. Such an approach
would be of enormous importance
in situations where logistics are
challenging (pipeline pumping/
compressor stations, etc.).
6. This system has 13 electric
motors, many of them in auto-
switching services. The system
reliability is dependent on robust
electrical feeders. The agitator
motor is un-spared and also
supplied from a single feeder.
Run 2: Pareto of all equipment failures
2.0
1.0 Component
1.5 Cumulative
0.8
Component
Cumulative
1.0
0.4
0.2
0.0
Agitator Agitator Agitator/ Seal
box motor
System Mean numbers of Max number of
system failures/yr system failures/yr
0.2 1.2
0.6 0.5
1 0
Unreliability in a motor/feeder
will likely cause a major outage
and should be redesigned during
the early design phase.
Takeaway. These examples show that
both NPPs and HPI facilities share com-
mon methodologies to achieve safety
and reliability excellence. The differ-
ences are mainly in the formality and
rigor of the methods employed. In the
HPI, the incremental steps necessary to
reach the level of rigor of NPPs are not
insurmountable. In the authors’ experi-
ence, the EPC alone would be unable to
make the appropriate design decisions to
achieve the rigor of NPP methodologies.
Such rigor in the HPI would require a
multi-team approach that includes safety,
electrical, machinery engineers and op-
eration/manufacturing support.
LITERATURE CITED
Complete literature cited available online at
HydrocarbonProcessing.com.
SHIRAZ PRADHAN is a mechanical
engineer with extensive experience
in high- and low-speed machinery
and associated systems designs. He
has worked in the steel, oil and gas,
and petrochemicals industries and
has been involved in several
petrochemical megaprojects for ExxonMobil in the US,
the Far East and the Middle East (joint ventures). With
his experience in engineering designs, machinery
maintenance and life extension, and failure avoidance,
he has developed specialization in risk and reliability
engineering and simulations of large, integrated,
industrial complexes with demonstrable and significant
improvements in uptime and failure and cost reductions.
Mr. Pradhan has one patent, has authored several
technical papers and has contributed engineering texts
for well-known authors. He earned a BSc degree from
the University of East Africa and an MS degree from
1.2 Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
1.0
0.8
Cumulative
ALI ABDELKHALIQ ZAMORA is
0.6
a Project Engineer for Tecnicas
0.4
Reunidas and has worked on
0.2
0.0 several megaprojects for clients
that include ExxonMobil, BP
in Spain, and KEMYA/SABIC
and ARAMCO in Saudi Arabia.
He has extensive experience working on energy,
petrochemicals and oil and gas projects focusing
on project management, including the mechanical
design, installation and startup of critical machinery
and associated systems. Mr. Abdelkhaliq also acts
as project advisor for mechanical model reviews
for maintenance/reliability optimization of critical
machinery and associated systems and static
5 equipment. With his extensive experience with critical
2 machinery, he provides valuable input to HAZOP
studies, as well. He earned an MSc degree in process
0 systems engineering from Cranfield University in
the UK and a BSc degree in mechanical engineering
from the American University in Cairo, Egypt.
MIKE RHODES, MANAGING EDITOR
Mike.Rhodes@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Wearable camera
improves oil and
gas industry safety
Librestream and ecom, a Honeywell has introduced the next-
Pepperl+Fuchs brand, have collaborated
on an innovation for asset analysis and
safety inspections in hazardous loca-
tions: the Onsight Cube-Ex wearable
camera (FIG. 1). The companies worked
together to design, build and certify the
inspection tool for oil and gas workers in
Ex-rated environments.
Using the Cube-Ex, workers on an
oil rig, in a process facility or beside an
aircraft can safely inspect processes and
analyze complex assets. By pairing the
Cube-Ex with the intrinsically safe ecom
4G/LTE smartphone Smart-Ex or tablet
Tab-Ex, workers can remotely control
the camera, view HD video and thermal
imaging, or capture and annotate pic-
tures or recordings from a safe distance.
The versatile design of the Cube-Ex
allows workers to wear it securely on a
hardhat for hands-free inspections, at-
tach to a monopod for hard-to-reach lo-
cations, or mount to equipment to view
from afar.
The partnership also includes a distri-
bution agreement for ecom to offer the
product under the brand ecom Ex-Cam-
era Cube 800. Highlights of the Cube-Ex
include HD digital and thermal imag-
ing cameras, including Fusion blended
mode; flexible design enabling hand-
held, head-worn, mounted and mono-
pod use; remote control of the Cube-Ex
camera functions through paired ecom
mobile devices; built-in illumination for
high-quality visuals in low light environ-
ments; annotation of pictures or record-
ings using shapes, text overlay and spot
temperature; rugged design with Zone 1
and Class 1, Div. 1 Ex-certified models
(certifications pending); optional cloud
content storage, remote expert collabo-
ration and digital work instruction ca-
pabilities available through the Onsight
augmented reality platform.
Select 1 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Innovations
Control solution for compact housing. The four-digit display
industrial multi-burner shows vital information, such as program
status, unit parameters and flame signals.
applications All models possess a manual mode to ad-
just the burner and its diagnostics.
generation Kromschröder® BCU 4 The control solution fulfills the re-
Series, an all-in-one control solution quirements of the most important in-
for multi-burner applications (FIG. 2). dustry standards and has Industrial
Replacing an earlier product line, the Internet of Things (IIoT)-ready PRO-
BCU 4 Series 460, 465 and 480 models FIBUS, PROFINET and EtherNet/IP
incorporate a range of refinements and network connections to enable faster
new features designed for simplified connectivity.
engineering, installation and startup. Select 2 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
They also provide various options to
increase the utility and effectiveness of
the control solution, including a space-
efficient design that allows the unit to
be mounted close to a burner rather
than in a separate cabinet, enabling bet-
ter system integration.
The BCU 4 Series offers industrial
designers, engineers, operators and
service technicians a multi-functional,
modular control solution. It is designed
for directly ignited or pilot/main burn-
ers of unlimited capacity in intermittent
or continuous operation, and for modu-
lated or step-controlled gas burners. The FIG. 1. The Cube-Ex intrinsically safe
wearable camera.
BCU 4 Series was developed for furnace
builder original equipment manufactur-
ers (OEMs), burner manufacturers and
end users in sectors such as metals, ce-
ramics, food and automotive.
The three models in the series pro-
vide different functions:
• The BCU 460 model controls,
ignites and monitors modulating
or stage-controlled gas burners
for intermittent or continuous
operation, making it ideal for
frequent cycling operations.
• The BCU 465 incorporates
airflow monitoring and pre-
and post-ventilation for use
with recuperative burners.
• The BCU 480 can monitor pilot
and main burners independently.
The BCU 4 Series comes equipped
with an ignition transformer, burner con- FIG. 2. The Honeywell Kromschröder
trol and an embedded human-machine BCU 4 Series control solution for multi-burner
interface (HMI), all arranged within applications.
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 85
 Innovations
Single-phase pump
solutions
Single Phase Power Solutions, a manu-
facturer of high-hp, single-phase electric
motors, introduces single-phase pump
solutions (FIG. 3) that do not require a
phase converter or variable frequency
drive (VFD). The company incorporates
its Belle Single-Phase MotorTM, which
uses Written-Pole® technology to deliver
up to 100 hp to power standard suction
end centrifugal pumps, rotary gear pumps
and turbine pumps in both horizontal and
vertical configurations.
Compatible with readily available sin-
gle-phase utility services, these pump so-
lutions are ideal for wastewater pumping,
wastewater collection, wastewater treat-
ment and discharge, irrigation, drinking
water distribution, well pumps, aquifer
FIG. 3. Single Phase Power Solutions’ single-
phase pump solutions do not require a phase
converter or VFD.
FIG. 4. The Rosemount 9295 DP flow meter.
86 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
management, water treatment, and other
water and wastewater processing appli-
cations. With expertise in pump systems
design and manufacture, the Single Phase
Power Solutions team helps determine
the correct materials and style of pump to
suit specific application requirements.
Available in ratings from 30 hp–100
hp, Belle MotorsTM are ideal for many in-
dustrial, agricultural, mining, municipal,
and oil and gas applications. In addition
to pumps, they are ideal for compressors,
injection wells, blowers, fans, dryers, wa-
ter and wastewater processing, and more.
The company’s Written-Pole® technol-
ogy frees customers from the restrictions
of only having access to a single-phase
power line. Single-Phase Power Solu-
tions also manufactures a 1-to-3 Power
SourceTM solution that generates clean,
high-quality, three-phase power from a
single-phase line for packaged equipment
requiring a three-phase power source.
Select 3 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Pre-assembled DP flow
metering solution
Emerson has introduced an integrated
differential pressure (DP) flow meter
solution, the Rosemount 9295 process
flow meter (FIG. 4). While DP is the most
widely used flow measurement technolo-
gy across process industries, this solution
combines existing advancements and pat-
ented technologies to deliver three main
benefits for end users with hydrocarbon
and other harsh environment applica-
tions: streamlined installation, reduced
downtime and elimination of required
straight-run piping.
The Rosemount 9295 helps end users
streamline procurement, installation, op-
eration and maintenance. Design and pur-
chasing consists of specifying and buying
one assembly rather than specifying up to
15 individual components, creating a cus-
tom design and assembling these compo-
nents. Installation is similarly simplified
and speeded as most field welding, cut-
ting, fabrication and other tasks are not
required because all components are fully
assembled and leak checked.
Although the Rosemount 9295 is a
single assembly, it is designed to allow re-
placement of its individual components
while in service, reducing downtime.
The new solution eliminates the com-
mon DP flow meter requirement for up
to 44 pipe diameters of straight-run up-
stream and six diameters downstream of
the meter by including Emerson’s patent-
ed conditioning orifice technology in the
assembly. This greatly simplifies installa-
tion, cuts costs and allows use in applica-
tions with pipe run restrictions.
While Emerson currently offers nine
other integrated DP flow metering solu-
tions, this is the industry’s first integrated
DP flow meter assembly designed to
withstand the challenging environments
and piping requirements found in refiner-
ies, chemical processing and other heavy
industrial plants.
Rosemount 9295 unique features in-
clude:
• Welded spool section design
for drop-in installation
• All-welded design meets piping
requirements for hydrocarbon
applications and reduces potential
leak points
• Roddable impulse lines allow
removal of impulse line blockages
without a process shutdown
• Optional integral RTD provides
critical temperature reading to
assist mass flow calculations
• Dual-tap configurations support
fully redundant DP transmitter
assemblies for safety instrumented
systems
• Isolation valves meet API 602
requirements and are designed
to operate through years of
continuous service
• Uses the proven Rosemount 3051S
DP transmitter to deliver accurate
flow readings and device diagnostic
information via HART.
Select 4 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Expanded range of
FMCW-based radar level
measurement products
AMETEK Drexelbrook has expanded
its open-air radar level offering with the
addition of the DRX400 (24 GHz) and
DRX500 series (80 GHz) level transmit-
ters (FIG. 5). Both incorporate state-of-
the-art features and components.
The DRX400 series consists of three
new models (DR5400, DR6400 and
DR7400). This set of 24-GHz radar
transmitters covers a broad range of ap-
plications, including liquids and sol-
ids. These products will be replacing

the Drexelbrook DR7000 and DR6300
open-air radar models.
The DRX500 series consists of three
new models (DR3500, DR6500 and
DR7500). This set of 80-GHz radar
transmitters covers applications with liq-
uids, slurries and solids for both hygienic
and non-hygienic requirements. All 80-
GHz radar transmitters are particularly
beneficial for level measurements in nar-
row tanks with internal obstructions due
to their small beam angle. The DRX500
transmitter, with its flush-mounted poly-
ether ether ketone (PEEK) lens antenna
and wide process connection options, is
ideal for hygienic liquids.
Both series products feature a large,
backlit LCD screen with 4-button key-
pad that can be assessed with a bar mag-
net without opening the housing cover.
Each uses software that has a quick setup
assistant for easy installation, and they
conform to NAMUR recommendations
NE 21, NE 43 and NE 53 and can mea-
sure fast-moving processes. The trans-
mitters are available with aluminum or
stainless-steel housings.
Eric Scappazzoni
Operation Methods Engineer
Total
Mike Rhodes
Managing Editor
Hydrocarbon Processing
Innovations
Radar is among the most accurate global manufacturer of electronic instru-
technology choices for process level and ments and electromechanical devices.
storage tank applications for continu- Select 5 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
ous level measurement under demand-
ing conditions. These transmitters utilize
frequency modulated continuous wave
(FMCW) technology that offers superior
signal processing capabilities and a more
reliable measurement than other tech-
niques. The state-of-the-art signal pro-
cessing capabilities of these transmitters,
along with their frequency range, helps to
ensure optimum application coverage.
Both additions to the DR series mea-
sure distance, level and volume of liq-
uids, slurries and solids. They also offer
an empty spectrum function that filters
false reflections caused by equipment and
other tank obstructions.
AMETEK Drexelbrook level measure-
ment instruments are used in a wide range
FIG. 5. AMETEK Drexelbrook DRX400
of industries, including petroleum, chem- (24 GHz) and DRX500 series (80 GHz)
ical, petrochemical, food/beverage, wa- level transmitters.
ter/wastewater, power, pharmaceutical,
pulp/paper, mining, aggregates and feed/ An expanded version of
grain, among others. AMETEK Drexel- Innovations can be found online
brook is a unit of AMETEK Inc., a leading at HydrocarbonProcessing.com.
ON DEMAND WEBCAST
Training for Tomorrow at Total
Any plant is only as good as the people operating it. A poorly trained operator can undo the most
advanced engineering, placing the company’s profit at risk and, more importantly, its people.
Total, 2018’s most profitable oil major, sees training as a key enabler to achieving its goals for safety,
sustainability and profit. Total’s OLEUM training centers provide tailored technical courses that
address safety, process operations, and more.
The next-generation program uses AVEVA Operator Training Simulators deployed in the cloud on
AVEVA CONNECT to reach operators everywhere. AVEVA’s Cloud OTS enables widespread use
of dynamic, high-fidelity simulation models that mirror the controls and behavior of actual site
operations.
In this webinar, Eric Scappazzoni from Total will share how they are bringing digital transformation
into operator training with AVEVA Operator Training Simulators in the cloud.
Listen for Free:
HydrocarbonProcessing.com/Webcasts
Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 87
ADVERTISER INDEX  /  HydrocarbonProcessing.com
The first number after the company name is the page on which an advertisement appears. The second number is the Reader Service Number. There are two ways readers can obtain product and service information:
go to www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS, follow the instructions on the screen, and your request will be forwarded for immediate action, or go online to the advertiser's website listed below.

Company Page RS# Company Page RS# Company Page RS#

Website Website Website

ADIPEC ...................................................... 82 HP Circulation .........................................49 Neste Engineering Solutions Oy................... 45 (160)

Advanced Refining Technologies ................. 42 (55) HP Marketplace ...................................... 89 www.info.hotims.com/73420-160
www.info.hotims.com/73420-55 HP Sustainability..................................... 66 Pepperl + Fuchs ..........................................57 (161)
Ametek Process Instruments ........................13 (78) HP Webcasts .................................75, 78, 87 www.info.hotims.com/73420-161
www.info.hotims.com/73420-78 Harbison Walker International .................... 35 (81) Pyromation, Inc. ........................................ 25 (156)
Ametek Process Instruments .......................46 (74) www.info.hotims.com/73420-81 www.info.hotims.com/73420-156
www.info.hotims.com/73420-74 Hargrove ................................................... 69 (163) Roth Pump Company.................................. 65 (162)
Ashcroft Inc. ...............................................15 (152) www.info.hotims.com/73420-163 www.info.hotims.com/73420-162
www.info.hotims.com/73420-152 Heat Transfer Research, Inc. ........................ 32 (158) Saint-Gobain NorPro .................................. 28
Atlas Copco .................................................14 (151) www.info.hotims.com/73420-158 Shell Catalysts and Technologies ..................16
www.info.hotims.com/73420-151 John Zink Hamworthy Combustion ...............61 (64)
Axens ........................................................ 92 (51) Sinopec Tech ...............................................41 (59)
www.info.hotims.com/73420-64
www.info.hotims.com/73420-51 www.info.hotims.com/73420-59
Koch Specialty Plant Services, LLC. ............... 30 (157)
Chevron Lummus Global ............................. 39 (159) www.info.hotims.com/73420-157
Tubacex Group ........................................... 24 (155)
www.info.hotims.com/73420-159 www.info.hotims.com/73420-155
Magnetrol International, Inc........................ 50 (73)
Elliott Group .............................................. 53 (54) www.info.hotims.com/73420-73 TLV Corporation ......................................... 59 (56)
www.info.hotims.com/73420-54 McDermott Technology ................................. 2 (75) www.info.hotims.com/73420-56
FTC ............................................................ 22 (96) www.info.hotims.com/73420-75 W. R. Grace & Co......................................... 26 (89)
www.info.hotims.com/73420-96 Merichem Company...................................... 5 (84) www.info.hotims.com/73420-89
Gulf Energy Information www.info.hotims.com/73420-84 Wood ........................................................ 20 (153)
Construction Boxcore Database ................ 76 MOGAS Industries, Inc. .................................21 www.info.hotims.com/73420-153
Energy Web Atlas .................................. 6–7 Nalco Water ................................................18 (67) ZymeFlow Decon Technology ........................8 (79)
Events .......................................... 62, 70, 91 www.info.hotims.com/73420-67 www.info.hotims.com/73420-79
This Index and procedure for securing additional information is provided as a service to Hydrocarbon Processing advertisers and a convenience to our readers. Gulf Energy Information is not responsible for omissions or errors.

RUSSIA/FSU INDONESIA, MALAYSIA, SINGAPORE, THAILAND

Lilia Fedotova Peggy Thay
Anik International & Co. Ltd. Publicitas Singapore Pte Ltd
Phone: +7 (495) 628-10-333 Phone: +65 6836-2272
Catherine Watkins, Publisher E-mail: Lilia.Fedotova@GulfEnergyInfo.com E-mail: Singapore@GulfEnergyInfo.com
Phone: +1 (713) 520-4421
E-mail: Catherine.Watkins@ TURKEY, WESTERN EUROPE JAPAN
HydrocarbonProcessing.com Hamilton Pearman Yoshinori Ikeda
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com Phone: +33 608 310 575 Pacific Business Inc.
E-mail: Hamilton.Pearman@ Phone: +81 (3) 3661-6138
SALES OFFICES—NORTH AMERICA GulfEnergyInfo.com E-mail: Japan@GulfEnergyInfo.com
EASTERN UNITED STATES, EASTERN CANADA UNITED KINGDOM/SCANDINAVIA KOREA
Merrie Lynch Patrick Djuma YB Jeon
Phone: +1 (617) 594-4943 Phone: +44 20 3409 2243 Storm Associates Inc.
E-mail: Merrie.Lynch@GulfEnergyInfo.com E-mail: Patrick.Djuma@GulfEnergyInfo.com Phone: +82 (2) 755-3774
E-mail: Korea@GulfEnergyInfo.com
GULF COAST, SOUTH TEXAS
SALES OFFICES—OTHER AREAS
Austin Milburn BRAZIL
Phone: +1 (713) 525-4626 AFRICA, MIDDLE EAST Evan Sponagle
E-mail: Austin.Milburn@ Tanya Mbaluli Office: +55 (21) 2512-2741
HydrocarbonProcessing.com Twiga Media Partner Mobile: +55 (21) 99925-3398
Phone: +254 722 376 972 E-mail: Evan.Sponagle@GulfEnergyInfo.com
MIDWEST, NORTH TEXAS E-mail: Mbaluli@GulfEnergyInfo.com
Josh Mayer CLASSIFIED SALES
Phone: +1 (972) 816-6745 CHINA—HONG KONG
E-mail: Josh.Mayer@GulfEnergyInfo.com Laura Kane
Iris Yuen
Phone: +1 (713) 412-2389
Phone: +86 13802701367 (China)
WESTERN UNITED STATES, WESTERN CANADA E-mail: L.Kane@GulfEnergyInfo.com
Phone: +852 69185500 (Hong Kong)
Rick Ayer
E-mail: Iris.Yuen@GulfEnergyInfo.com DATA PRODUCTS
Phone: +1 (949) 366-9089
E-mail: Rick.Ayer@GulfEnergyInfo.com INDIA J’Nette Davis-Nichols
Manav Kanwar Phone: +1 (713) 520-4426
SALES OFFICES—EUROPE Phone: +91-22-2837 7070/71/72 E-mail: Jnette.Davis-Nichols@
ITALY Mobile: +91-98673 67374 GulfEnergyInfo.com
Riccardo R.C. Laureri E-mail: India@GulfEnergyInfo.com
REPRINTS
Office: +39 02 2362500
Mobile: +39 335 6962477 Jill Kaletha, Foster Printing at Mossberg & Co.
E-mail: Riccardo.Laureri@GulfEnergyInfo.com Phone: +1 (800) 428-3340 x 149
E-mail: JKaletha@Mossbergco.com

88 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 MARKETPLACE / L.Kane@GulfEnergyInfo.com / +1 (713) 412-2389

Does This Look Familiar?

WE WON’T
LEAVE YOU
HANGING!!

100% AUTOMATIC SELF CLEANING

WATER FILTRATION SYSTEMS
2672 S. La Cienega Bl vd, Los Angeles, C A 90034 USA
(800) 336-1942 (310) 839-2828 www.t ekleen.com inf o@t ekleen.com
Select 201 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

ABRASION RESISTANT Flexware ®

Silicon Carbide Filled Epoxy ®

Turbomachinery Engineers

Adhesive Supreme 45HTQ-4 Turbomachinery Training

Compressors Steam Turbines
■ Robust chemical resistance Performance Analysis, Evaluation, Troubleshooting
Problem Resolution, Case Studies, Maintenance, Reliability

■ Serviceable from -100°F to +450°F Shaft End Seals, Bearings, Vibration & Balance, Lube & Seal Systems
EXPERT INSTRUCTOR WITH YEARS OF GLOBAL EXPERIENCE

■ Very high compressive strength

www.flexwareinc.com sales@flexwareinc.com

■ Exceptionally long pot life Select 203 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

MPLE
SA

CU RED
Detailed and up-to-date
information for active
construction projects in the
refining, gas processing,
and petrochemical industries
across the globe
Select 204 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
+1.201.343.8983 • main@masterbond.com
ConstructionBoxscore.com Visit HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Select 202 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS for daily news, trends and FREE e-newsletters.

Hydrocarbon Processing | JUNE 2019 89

ALISSA LEETON, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR
Alissa.Leeton@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
JUNE
ILTA, June 3–5, George R. Brown
Convention Center, Houston, Texas
P: +1 703-875-2011
www.ilta.org
IIoT and Digital Solutions
for Oil & Gas, June 6–7,
Okura Hotel, Amsterdam,
the Netherlands
P: +44 203-567-1349
j.sinko@globuc.com
www.globuc.com
IRPC EurAsia, June 5–7,
Gulf Energy Information Events,
Helsinki, Finland
HPIRPC.com/Europe
(See box for contact information)
Energy Drone & Robotics Summit,
June 12–13, Woodlands Waterway
Marriott, The Woodlands, Texas
P: +1 713-489-6773 ext. 704
sues@stonefortgroup.com
stonefortgroup.com
ASME Turbo Expo, June 18–20,
Phoenix Convention Center,
Phoenix, Arizona
P: +1 973-882-1170
CustomerCare@asme.org
event.asme.org/Turbo-Expo
Valve World Americas Expo
& Conference, June 19–20,
George R. Brown Convention
Center, Houston, Texas
P: +1 416-361-7030
j.gillen@kci-world.com
www.valveworldexpoamericas.com
JULY
ARC Industry Forum India,
July 4–5, Bangalore, India
www.arcweb.com
Asia Turbomachinery & Pump
Industry Summit, July 10–11,
Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
P: +1 979-845-7417
Info@turbo-lab.tamu.edu
turbolab.tamu.edu/
industrysummit
Gas Indonesia Summit &
Exhibition, July 31–Aug. 2, Jakarta
Convention Center, Indonesia
P: +65 6422-1155
gis.marketing@dmgevents.com
www.gasindosummit.com
90 JUNE 2019 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
AUGUST
Maintenance & Reliability
Forum (MaRS), Aug. 7–9, Moody
Gardens Hotel & Conference
Center, Galveston, Texas
P: +1 832-876-3226
CCedro@hunterbuildings.com
www.smrphouston.org
Valve World Expo & Conference
Asia, Aug. 28–29, Shanghai World
Expo Exhibition & Convention
Center, Shanghai, China
P: +86 21-6351-9604
h.wang@kci-world.com
www.valve-world.net
ECC Conference, Aug. 28–31,
The Broadmoor, Colorado
Springs, Colorado
www.ecc-conference.org
SEPTEMBER
Turbomachinery & Pump
Symposia, Sept. 10–12,
George R. Brown Convention
Center, Houston, Texas
P: +1 979-845-7417
info@turbo-lab.tamu.edu
Gastech, Sept. 17–19,
George R. Brown Convention
Center, Houston, Texas
www.gastechevent.com
HP Awards, Sept. 19,
Gulf Energy Information Events,
Houston, Texas
HydrocarbonProcessing.com/
Awards
(See box for contact information)
International Rotating
Equipment Conference,
Sept. 24–25, Congress Center,
Wiesbaden, Germany
Nicole.Potz@gzf-expo.de
www.introequipcon.com
IRPC Americas, Sept. 25–26,
Gulf Energy Information Events,
Houston, Texas
HPIRPC.com/Americas
(See box for contact information)
Easyfairs, Tank Storage Asia,
Sept. 25–26, Marina Bay
Sands Expo and Convention
Centre, Singapore
P: +44 0-20-3196-4300
Info@turbo-lab.tamu.edu
www.easyfairs.com
Gas Machinery Conference,
Sept. 29–Oct. 2,
Henry B. Gonzalez Convention
Center, San Antonio, Texas
www.gmrc.org
OCTOBER
AFPM Operations & Process
Technology Summit,
Oct. 14–16, Marriott Rivercenter,
San Antonio, Texas
(See box for contact information)
Bentley Year in Infrastructure,
Oct. 21–24, Marina Bay Sands,
Singapore
P: +1 610-458-5000
yii.bentley.com
Chem Show, Oct. 22–24,
Javits Convention Center,
New York, New York
P: +1 203-221-9232
info@chemshow.com
chemshow.com
GasPro Webcast, Oct. 24,
Gulf Energy Information Events,
Houston, Texas
(See box for contact information)
AFPM Environmental Conference,
Oct. 27–29, The Grand America
Hotel, Salt Lake City, Utah
(See box for contact information)
Women’s Global Leadership
Conference, Oct. 29–30,
Gulf Energy Information Events,
Royal Sonesta, Houston, Texas
WGLconference.com
(See box for contact information)
Gas Asia Summit, Oct. 30–31,
Marina Bay Sands Expo and
Convention Centre, Singapore
gas.sales@dmgevents.com
www.gasasiasummit.com
NOVEMBER
CRU, Sulphur and Sulphuric
Acid, Nov. 4–7,
Hilton Americas, Houston, Texas
P: +44 0-20-7903-2167
Conferences@crugroup.com
events.crugroup.com
HP Forecast Breakfast, Nov. 8,
Gulf Energy Information Events,
Houston, Texas
(See box for contact information)
Events
AIChE Annual Meeting,
Nov. 10–15, Hyatt Regency,
Orlando, Florida
2019annual@aiche.org
www.aiche.org
ADIPEC, Nov. 11–14,
Abu Dhabi, UAE
www.adipec.com
API Cybersecurity Conference for
the Oil and Natural Gas Industry,
Nov. 12–13, Woodlands Waterway
Marriott, The Woodlands, Texas
(See box for contact information)
API Fall Refining and
Equipment Standards Meeting,
Nov. 18–21, Hyatt Regency,
Atlanta, Georgia
(See box for contact information)
East Africa Oil & Gas Conference
& Summit (EAOGS), Nov. 26–27,
The Intercontinental Hotel,
Nairobi, Africa
P: +254 20-6000-823
info@eastafricanchamber.org
eaogs.com
DECEMBER
Natl Aboveground Storage
(NISTM), Dec. 10–11,
The Woodlands Waterway
Marriott, The Woodlands, Texas
P: +1 800-827-3515
mail@nistm.org
www.nistm.org
Hydrocarbon Processing/
Gulf Energy
Information Events
P: +1 713-520-4475
Melissa.Smith@
GulfEnergyInfo.com
EnergyEvents@
GulfEnergyInfo.com
American Fuel
& Petrochemical
Manufacturers (AFPM)
P: +1 202-457-0480
info@afpm.org
www.afpm.org
American Petroleum
Institute (API)
P: +1 202-682-8195
registrar@api.org
www.api.org
 REGISTER
TODAY!

AMERICAS
September 25–26, 2019 | Crowne Plaza—Houston NRG | HPIRPC.com/Americas

Exploring innovations in the Downstream

IRPC Americas provides refining and petrochemical

professionals from around the world with a forum
to highlight technological innovations, share
regional market insights and experience exceptional
networking opportunities with leaders in the Featured Keynote Featured Keynote
hydrocarbon processing industry. Speaker Speaker
For 2019, IRPC Americas will be held in Houston,
Texas on September 25-26. Keith Couch Lance Medlin
Senior Director, Executive Vice President,
Technology Sales and Projects
Integrated Projects Meridian Energy Group
Honeywell UOP

Questions about sponsoring/exhibiting at

REGISTER NOW IRPC Americas?
at HPIRPC.com/Americas Please contact your sales representative or Hortensia
“Tish” Barroso, Business Development Manager at
Hortensia.Barroso@GulfEnergyInfo.com or by phone at
+1 (713) 520-4404.
 POWERING
A COMPLETE
OFFER

Select 51 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

Building on its latest acquisitions, Axens Group offers a broader

range of solutions that enhances the profitability and environmental
performance of its clients. www.axens.net
Technology and Business Information for the Global Gas Processing Industry

GasProcessingNews.com | MAY/JUNE 2019

PIPELINES AND
TRANSPORTATION
Selecting pretreatment technologies for FLNG projects
Balancing Europe’s natural gas supply and demand

COMPRESSORS
Predict centrifugal compressor performance
in off-design condition

LNG
Improve liquefaction efficiency
with vortex feed gas precooling

Special Supplement to
Meeting Your Total
Turbomachinery Needs
We know you’re no stranger to pressure. At Atlas Copco Gas and Process,
we transform industrial ideas into solutions that help you thrive under
extreme conditions. Backed by more than seven decades of extensive
experience and technical expertise, our full spectrum of compressors and
expanders provides the reliability and efficiency you need.

Handle the Pressure

Whether you need turboexpanders, refrigeration, regen or residue
compressors, Atlas Copco Gas and Process is the total turbomachinery
provider for your gas processing operation, helping you handle
today’s pressures while creating a sustainable future.

Find out how Atlas Copco Gas and Process can help you
handle the pressure at atlascopco-gap.com
 EDITORIAL COMMENT
CONTENTS
On the changing landscape of global GasProcessingNews.com | MAY/JUNE 2019
natural gas trade, the US has magnified its
export power by remaining a net exporter
for 13 months as of February 2019. Along-
side increasing shipments of LNG from its
startup export terminals in Texas, Louisi-
ana and Maryland, the country continues
to send even larger volumes of gas to both
A. BLUME, Canada and Mexico by pipeline.
Editor The US exported 4.6 Bft3d of natural
gas in February, with a record 3.3 Bft3d
going to Canada. Deliveries to Canada have expanded since last
November, when the second phase of the Rover pipeline and
the NEXUS pipeline commenced operations. The two pipe-
lines send gas from the Marcellus and Utica shale plays to the 5
Dawn Hub in Ontario. Average gas exports to Canada in 2018
were 2.3 Bft3d.
While gas exports to Canada largely fill winter heating SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES
needs, US gas meets more than half of Mexico’s power genera- AND TRANSPORTATION
tion demand. Last year, US gas deliveries to Mexico averaged 13 Optimal gas pretreatment technologies
5.2 Bft3d, up from 4.2 Bft3d in 2017, due largely to increased for developing FLNG projects
exports through new and expanded pipelines from the Permian
S. Mokhatab, S. Doong, R. Palla and T. Smith
basin. Several new gas-fired power plants have recently started
up in Mexico, increasing demand. 19 The insoluble equation: How to balance
Meanwhile, US LNG exports averaged 3 Bft3d in 2018, with Europe’s natural gas supply and demand
steady increases to a high of 4.1 Bft3d in January 2019, as three A. Blume and M. Harrison
new liquefaction trains came online. The three trains, with a
combined capacity of 1.9 Bft3d, brought US nameplate LNG COMPRESSORS
export capacity to 4.3 Bft3d at the end of last year. By the end of 29 Predict centrifugal compressor
2019, an additional 4 Bft3d of new capacity is expected to start
performance in off-design condition
up, further expanding US gas exports. GP
M. Di Febo and P. Paganini
P. O. Box 2608
Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA LNG TECHNOLOGY
Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301
Fax: +1 (713) 520-4433
37 Ef�iciency improvements in liquefaction
www.GasProcessingNews.com
Editorial@GasProcessingNews.com using vortex feed gas precooling
L. Tunkel and R. Gale
PUBLISHER Catherine Watkins
EDITORIAL
Editor Adrienne Blume
TREATING
Managing Editor Mike Rhodes 41 Case studies of troubleshooting
Editor/Associate Publisher, Lee Nichols
Hydrocarbon Processing
amine treating foaming—Part 1
MAGAZINE PRODUCTION D. Engel, B. Spooner and M. Sheilan
Vice President, Production Sheryl Stone
Manager, Advertising Production Cheryl Willis COLUMNS
Assistant Manager, Advertising Production Dasha Ivanova
Manager, Editorial Production Angela Bathe Dietrich Regional Focus..................................................................... 9
Assistant Manager, Editorial Production Lindsey Craun Nigeria moves to expand its liquefaction capacity
Artist/Illustrator David Weeks
Graphic Designer Krista Norman EWAnalysis ...........................................................................11
ADVERTISING SALES US LNG producers eye major growth
See Sales Offices, page 46.
Copyright © 2019 by Gulf Energy Information LLC. All rights reserved.
DEPARTMENTS
Gas Processing News ...........................................................5
Global Project Data ............................................................. 8
President/CEO John Royall US Industry Metrics ........................................................... 46
CFO Alan Millis
Vice President Andy McDowell
Vice President, Finance and Operations Pamela Harvey Cover Image: Gassco’s Kårstø plant in Norway.
Vice President, Production Sheryl Stone Photo: Øyvind Hagen/Gassco.
Vice President, Data Sales Harry Brookby

Other Gulf Energy Information titles include: Hydrocarbon Processing ®, World Oil ®,
Petroleum Economist ©, Pipeline & Gas Journal and Underground Construction.
Customer:
World-scale ethylene producer, China.

Challenge:
Maximize feed stock delivery and ethylene
transport to boost downstream output.

Result:
Ebara Cryodynamics is selected as the world’s
most trusted cryogenic pump supplier.

They turned to Ebara Cryodynamics

for unparalleled expertise in cryogenic pumps TM

for liquefied gas applications.

With thousands of installations worldwide, Ebara Cryodynamics is the recognized global leader
for submerged electric pumps and expanders in liquefied gas applications. For over four decades,
Ebara Cryodynamics has delivered continuous advances in equipment design and technology to
liquefied gas customers around the world. Who will you turn to?

www.ebaracryo.com

Cogent Midstream
to connect gas
complex to
GCX Pipeline
Cogent Midstream LLC will
construct an approximately 25-mi
pipeline to deliver residue gas
from its Big Lake natural gas
processing complex, located in
Reagan County in the Midland
Basin of West Texas, to Kinder
Morgan’s Gulf Coast Express
Pipeline (GCX Pipeline).
In addition to the GCX
Pipeline, Cogent’s residue pipeline
is expected to cross the proposed
Permian Highway Pipeline
and Whistler Pipeline projects.
Cogent’s 20-in. pipeline is
anticipated to come into service in
4Q 2019 and have a total capacity
of approximately 400 MMft3d.
The pipeline’s in-service
date coincides with Cogent’s 4Q
timeline for commissioning its
Big Lake II natural gas cryogenic
processing plant. Presently
under construction, the Big
Lake II plant has the nameplate
capacity to process 200 MMft3d
of gas and will bring Cogent’s
total processing capacity to
approximately 510 MMft3d.
Australia’s NSW
approves Port
Kembla LNG
import terminal
Australia’s New South Wales
state has approved plans by a
Japanese-backed consortium to
build a A$250-MM ($176-MM)
LNG import terminal at Port
Kembla, looking to cut gas prices
and avert a supply shortage.
The Port Kembla project is the
first of five proposed LNG import
terminals in Australia to receive
planning approval. The projects
should help plug a looming
supply shortage expected in the
country’s southeast in the 2020s.
Australian Industrial Energy
(AIE), the JV planning to build the
berth for a floating LNG import
facility at Port Kembla, about 100
km (60 mi) south of Sydney, said
the approval means it can now
focus on lining up gas customers.
AIE aims to make a final
investment decision around the
middle of this year. The AIE joint
venture partners are Squadron
Energy, JERA Co. and Marubeni
Corp. If the partners decide to
go ahead with the project in the
middle of this year, first gas could
be delivered by late 2020, the
partners said in a joint release.
GAS PROCESSING NEWS
A. BLUME, Editor
Air Liquide E&C, Samsung partner for methanol plant
Air Liquide Engineering & Construction has entered into a partnership with Samsung Engineering for a
front-end engineering and design (FEED) study of a methanol production plant for Sarawak Petchem, a state-
owned oil and gas firm in Malaysia.
The FEED study is a key step that will help decision-makers obtain the necessary information to convert
the contract into an engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contract in the future. Air Liquide
Engineering & Construction will be the technology licensor, while Samsung Engineering will design the
project’s utility systems and balance of plant.
The methanol plant, which will be located in Bintulu, Sarawak, eastern Malaysia, will come into operation
in 2023. The facility will produce 5,000 tpd of methanol based on Air Liquide Engineering & Construction
proprietary process technology, Lurgi MegaMethanol™, which converts natural gas into methanol.
Global LNG Services launches FLNG in China
Following a 6-yr concept
development and verification
program with support from
leading players in the LNG
field, Global LNG Services
has announced the technical
and commercial viability of a
liquefaction cost, safety and
environmental quality solution to
accelerate the development of
stranded gas.
The standardized, floating
liquefaction solution—the LIQUI-
MAX™ Vessel (LMV)—enables
faster, lower-cost, “plug-and-
play” development of LNG export
facilities. Global LNG Services
said it is particularly pleased
that its LMV solution will be able to support China’s Blue Sky Action Plan to replace coal with gas and
renewables on a scale large enough to save an estimated 1 MM lives from air pollution deaths and reduce
CO2 emissions by 1 Btpy by 2030.
Global LNG Services has also made significant progress on its wholly owned Main Pass Energy Hub
(MPEH) LNG export project in the Gulf of Mexico, which will eventually export as much as 48 MMtpy of
LNG. A leading LNG EPC contractor has been selected as the exclusive EPCIC for the first 12-MMtpy LMV, for
which Global LNG Services expects to reach a final investment decision by early 2021.
In June 2018, Global LNG Services and Baker Hughes, a GE Company, announced the selection of the
LM9000 gas turbine, which enables large-scale liquefaction when combined with Air Products’ C1 methane-
based refrigeration technology. The MPEH will become the highest-capacity and lowest-unit-cost floating
liquefaction facility in the world.
The MPEH project has fundamental advantages not found in other LNG export facilities. A well-defined
and previously permitted project site located 16 mi offshore the east coast of Louisiana, along with a
development plan that utilizes the LMV, places GLS in a highly competitive position. The Deepwater Port of
MPEH enables larger-scale, lower-risk and lower-cost logistics than any existing project in the Gulf
of Mexico.
Negotiations with Asian offtakers for the anchor position in the MPEH project center on a tolling fee that
includes an industry-lowest “anchor deal” of $1.50/MMBtu for part of the 12 MMtpy.
Atlas Copco to provide compressor technology
for LNG carriers
Drawing from its experience serving the LNG market,
turbomachinery manufacturer Atlas Copco Gas and Process Division
has secured a compressor order for the carrier LNG market. The order,
placed by Samsung Heavy Industries in Korea, is for a total of eight HD
centrifugal gas compressors and eight oil-free gas screw compressors,
along with the necessary heaters and vaporizers. The equipment will be
used on four 180,000-m3 vessels commissioned by Celsius Tankers. The
first units will begin shipping from Atlas Copco Gas and Process to the
customer beginning October 2019, with the remainder of the machinery
to be delivered in 2Q 2020.
The new vessels will utilize Atlas Copco’s oil-free gas screw
compressors to feed their XDF engines—a first in the carrier LNG
industry. The new compressor technology was specifically designed to
meet modern carrier needs, including the XDF pressure requirements
and reduced flow of boiloff gas from improved insulation measures. The oil-free design also allows for
significantly longer maintenance intervals compared to oil-flooded compressors, and can be used with a
reliquefaction system without any risk of oil contamination in heat exchangers or LNG cargo.
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 5
 Pipeline projects, contacts
most comprehensive
Now you can find all the information you need in one easy-to-use
global pipeline resource. The Energy Web Atlas gives you and your
company actionable project leads, project alerts, and data on
1.2 million miles of natural gas and liquids pipelines.
Introducing Energy Web Atlas/Pipelines, the world’s most comprehensive data set on global pipelines.

If you’re in the global pipeline market, this new service from Pipeline & Gas Journal and Gulf Energy Information
will help you do your job better by giving you not only a platform to visualize pipeline infrastructure, but to help
you track pipeline projects and the critical contacts for those projects.

The Energy Web Atlas offers the world’s most extensive set of pipeline data and information, including new
project announcements. A mapping capability allows you to visualize infrastructure, produce reports, and gather
critical information on natural gas pipelines and crude pipelines.

A web-based interface makes it easy to access information in the office

or in the field; all you need is internet access.

Energy Web Atlas is produced along with Pipeline & Gas Journal.
Readers and customers of Pipeline & Gas Journal may subscribe at
a discount, for a minimum of two users up to company-wide access.

For more information, call +1 (713) 525-4675

or visit EnergyWebAtlas.com.
and data from the world’s
pipeline dataset

Facility data includes

Operators/Shareholders,
Capacity, Diameter, Length,
Key Dates, Project Contacts
 GLOBAL PROJECT DATA
LEE NICHOLS, Editor/Associate Publisher, Hydrocarbon Processing

Energy Web Atlas is tracking more than 420 active gas pro-
cessing and LNG projects around the world. Approximately
23% of active gas processing/LNG projects are in the US. This
region has witnessed a significant increase in new gas process-
ing and LNG capacity additions over the past several years.
According to the US Energy Information Administration, the
lower 48 states have a total gas processing capacity of more
than 80 Bft3d. At approximately 32%, Texas has the largest
market share of total US gas processing plants in the US. Okla-
homa follows Texas with 16% market share for total number
of gas processing plants. The figure below shows gas process-
ing plants in Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana. GP

New gas processing/LNG project Active gas processing/LNG

announcements, May 2018–May 2019 project market share by region
18
6% Africa
13
14 22% US
12 12
11
10 10 10
11 36% Asia-Pacific
9 9
8 8% Middle East
4% Latin America
7% Western Europe
10% Eastern Europe, Russia, CIS
May- June- July- Aug.- Sept.- Oct.- Nov.- Dec.- Jan.- Feb.- Mar.- April- May- 7% Canada
18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 19

Detailed and up-to-date information for active construction projects and operational assets
in the gas processing, LNG and pipeline industries across the globe | EnergyWebAtlas.com

8 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
 REGIONAL FOCUS

Nigeria moves to expand

its liquefaction capacity
S. OIRERE, Contributing Writer

The award in July 2018 of long-await-

ed contracts for the front-end engineer-
ing design (FEED) of Nigeria’s Train 7
gas plant expansion project to two con-
sortia is the country’s latest attempt
to address the enormous challenges of
gas flaring and gas shortages for power
plants and domestic consumption.
The contract for the 8.5-MMtpy Train
7 at Nigeria’s LNG complex on Bonny
Island (FIG. 1) was awarded to the B7 JV
consortium and the SCD JV Consor-
tium by Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas
Ltd. (NLNG), which is owned by Nige-
rian National Petroleum Corp. (NNPC),
Shell Gas BV, Total Gaz Electricite Hold-
ings France and Eni International.
The successful completion of Train 7,
FIG. 1. An LNG tanker owned by Bonny Gas Transport, a subsidiary of NLNG. More LNG
estimated to cost $12 B, will not only
production is expected from the Bonny Island LNG plant after the Train 7 project is completed.
increase Nigeria’s LNG output from 22
MMtpy to slightly more than 30 MMtpy,
but it will also provide a sustainable use
for the large volume of gas flared in Nige-
ria, estimated at 8 Bm3y.

Bonny Island LNG expansion. NLNG,

which owns the six-train gas plant on
Bonny Island and anticipates a $25-B in-
vestment in the country’s gas sector over
the next 10 yr, expects the completion
and commissioning of Train 7 to utilize
more of the country’s wasted natural gas.
Other goals include expanding its liq-
uefaction capacity and gas pipeline net-
work at a time when Nigeria is attempt-
ing to remove itself from the list of the
highest-flaring nations in the world.
NLNG, which has generated more
than $25 B in revenue for the government FIG. 2. NLNG Managing Director Tony Attah signs a FEED contract agreement for Train 7
at the Bonny Island LNG complex. Photo courtesy of NLNG.
of Nigeria, in mid-2018 selected the Bon-
ny 7 JV consortium, led by US-contractor
KBR, for the basic design of Train 7 and velopment of the Bonny Island lique- combined capacity of nearly 18 MMtpy.
the engineering, procurement and con- faction complex, having constructed NLNG has picked the SCD JV consor-
struction (EPC) proposal for the project. the 4-MMtpy Train 6 and associated tium as the second contractor for the
Other partners are France’s TechnipFMC infrastructure, such as LNG storage, same FEED and EPC proposal contract.
and Japan Gas Corp. offsites and utilities. The US contrac- The consortium is led by Saipem and
KBR was earlier involved in the de- tor also constructed Trains 1–5, with a includes partners Chiyoda and Daewoo.
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 9
REGIONAL FOCUS
A final investment decision for the
Train 7 project had been expected in late
2018, but it has been delayed to 2019.
NLNG managing director and CEO, Tony
Attah (FIG. 2), told media in July 2018 that
although a FEED contract is normally
completed within 9 mos–12 mos, NLNG
opted for a dual FEED process by award-
ing the assignment to two prospective
engineering consortia, instead of one con-
tractor, to give a degree of freedom to start
EXPERT GAS PROCESSING
WA S T E S T R E A M M A N A G E M E N T.
A SAF ER, CLEANE R O P E R ATIO N W ITH O NE S IM PL E S T E P
Go with the company dedicated to making the impossible happen, on time and on budget.
Zeeco is your end-to-end, single-point solution for engineered equipment, 24/7
service, vapor emissions testing, rentals, and aftermarket parts.
Go with the leader – no one outperforms Zeeco.
Learn more at Zeeco.com/Products
Visit us at ILTA Booth 768
Zeeco Inc. | +1 (918) 258-8551 | +1 844 GO ZEECO | Zeeco.com
BURNERS | FLARE S | T HE RM AL OXI D I ZE RS | VAPO R CO N T ROL | R EN TA L S | A FT ER M A R K ET
© 2019 Zeeco Inc. All rights reserved.
10MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
FEED and then EPC bidding, with both
activities overlapping.
The two consortia will not only carry
out FEED for Train 7, but will also prepare
the EPC proposal for the project to expand
the six existing LNG trains and associated
facilities. The complete Train 7 liquefac-
tion train will be a replica of the existing
Train 6 and will feature a new, common liq-
uefaction unit for processing excess treated
gas from the existing trains into LNG.
Expansion benefits and other
projects. If Nigeria, with estimated
proven and unproven gas reserves of
187 Tft3 and 600 Tft3, respectively,
achieves the planned ramping up of its
annual LNG production with the suc-
cessful completion of the Train 7 proj-
ect, the country will likely mitigate
its electricity supply constraints. The
supply shortages have been linked to
deficiencies in gas supplies due to low
production, economic disincentives, in-
adequate infrastructure and theft.
Although Nigeria has an installed
power capacity of approximately
12,522 MW, 85% of which is powered
by gas, only 3,879 MW are operational
since the gas shortages, lack of mainte-
nance and constrained transmission ca-
pacity make unavailable a large share of
this nameplate capacity. This scenario
leaves nearly 55% of the West African
country’s population without access to
grid-connected electricity.
Alongside the liquefaction capacity
expansion plans, Nigeria is laying new gas
pipelines and revamping existing ones to
utilize more of its gas and reduce flared
volumes. Between 2012 and 2015, Ni-
geria reduced its volume of flared gas by
2 Bm3 and increased supply to the do-
mestic market from 500 MMft3d in 2010
to 1,500 MMft3d at present. NLNG also
supplies 40% of the country’s cooking gas.
Construction of the 127-km Obiafu-
Obrikom-Oben (OB 3) pipeline project
is ongoing to connect the eastern and
western regions of Nigeria. Also, the
614-km Ajaokuta-Kaduna-Kano pipeline
will deliver gas to electricity-generating
plants, particularly in the north.
Although many of the multibillion-
dollar infrastructure projects planned for
Nigeria will likely take a long time to be
realized or break ground, the involvement
of reputable international contractors in
the Train 7 NLNG project raises hope
that the country will soon achieve much-
needed additional LNG production. GP
SHEM OIRERE is a freelance
journalist based in Nairobi, Kenya.
He has spent more than 10 yr
covering various sectors of
Africa’s economy, and has had
numerous articles published in
several international publications
and websites. He earned a higher degree in
journalism from the London School of Journalism,
and is also a member of the Association of Business
Executives (ABE).

US LNG producers eye major growth
The US LNG market has experienced
rapid growth over the past decade due to
the availability of inexpensive feedstock
and increased worldwide demand. The
shale boom in the US has turned the coun-
try into a major exporter of natural gas
and LNG. Due to technological advances
like horizontal drilling and hydraulic frac-
turing, the US has significantly increased
its own production over the past decade.
According to the US Energy Informa-
tion Administration (EIA), the US has
been the leading natural gas producer
globally since 2011. US LNG export
capacity will reach 8.9 Bft3d by the end
of 2019, according to the EIA, making
it the third-largest LNG exporter in the
world behind Australia and Qatar. US
LNG export capacity ended 2018 at 4.9
Bft3d as two new liquefaction trains be-
came operational (FIG. 1). The growth of
the LNG export industry will be defined
by export capacity, market potential and
political considerations.
LNG export capacity in operation.
Most existing North American LNG
import/export terminals are in the US.
Many of these import terminals are ex-
pected to be converted to export facilities
over the next few years. The following
subsections provide details on operating
LNG terminals in the US.
Sabine Pass LNG. Owned by Che-
niere Energy Partners, the Sabine Pass
project has five trains in operation. The
fifth train came online in March 2019,
with first commercial delivery expected
in August 2019, and the sixth train is now
under development. The Sabine Pass site
can readily accommodate up to six lique-
faction trains capable of processing more
than 3.5 Bft3d of natural gas. Cheniere
Energy Partners has entered into a sale-
and-purchase agreement with Malaysia’s
Petronas for approximately 1.1 MMtpy of
LNG from Sabine Pass for a term of 20 yr.
EWAnalysis
EWA STAFF
12
Sabine Pass, Louisiana
10 Cove Point, Maryland
Corpus
Corpus Christi, Texas Freeport 3
Cameron, Louisiana Freeport 2
Christi 3
8 Elba Island 7-10
Export capacity, Bft3d
Elba Island, Georgia Cameron 3
Freeport, Texas Corpus Christi 2
Freeport 1
6 Cameron 2
Elba Island 1-6
Cameron 1
4
Corpus Christi 1
Sabine Pass 5
Cove Point
2 Sabine Pass 4
Sabine Pass 3
Sabine Pass 2
0 Sabine Pass 1
1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
FIG. 1. US LNG export capacity, 2016–2021. Source: US EIA and company investor presentations.
Cove Point LNG. Dominion/Cove planned for construction in the US, as
Point LNG is located in Cove Point, detailed in the following descriptions.
Maryland. It is a single-train LNG fa- Elba Island LNG. Elba Island LNG
cility, with both import and export ter- is located on Elba Island near Savannah,
minals attached. The export capability Georgia. Owned by Kinder Morgan, this
from Train 1 is 0.59 Bft3d. It has been brownfield plant (originally an LNG im-
in operation since February 2018, with port facility) is in the process of commis-
commercial deliveries beginning in sioning Trains 1–6, each of which has a
March of that year. baseload nameplate capacity of 2 Bft3d.
Kenai LNG. Owned by ConocoPhil- Train 7 and three other proposed trains
lips, Kenai LNG—the longest-operating are under construction. Trains 1–6 are
LNG terminal in the US—has an export expected to be in service in 2Q 2019.
capacity of 0.2 Bft3d. Train 7 has an estimated in-service date
Corpus Christi LNG. Owned by of 4Q 2019.
Cheniere Energy, Corpus Christi LNG is Freeport LNG. Similar to Elba Is-
the first completely greenfield LNG ex- land, the first phase of the Freeport LNG
port facility in the US. It will have three project transformed the existing LNG
trains, each with an output capacity of import terminal into an LNG export fa-
0.6 Bft3d of LNG. Train 1 came online in cility. Three trains, each with a baseload
December 2018, several months earlier nameplate capacity of 0.66 Bft3d, are in-
than expected. The first commercial gas cluded in the first phase. Train 1 is un-
delivery is slated for June 2019. Train 2 dergoing commissioning and is expected
is undergoing commissioning and is due to go online in September 2019. Train
to come online in 2Q 2019. Train 3 is 2 is expected online in January 2020,
expected to be completed in May 2021, and Train 3 is estimated to start up in
and more phases are in the planning and May 2020.
FEED stages. Cameron LNG. Cameron LNG, locat-
ed outside of Hackberry, Louisiana, will
Planned LNG projects. Several more consist of three liquefaction trains with a
LNG projects are either announced or nameplate total capacity of approximately
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 11
EWAnalysis

13.5 MMtpy (1.8 Bft3d of LNG. Train 1
is being commissioned and is expected to
be in service by 2Q 2019. Trains 2 and 3
are under construction, with a projected
in-service date for Train 2 of 3Q 2019 and
for Train 3 of 4Q 2019.
Port Arthur LNG. Sempra Energy’s
LNG plant in Port Arthur, Texas is get-
ting closer to construction. Port Arthur
will include two liquefaction trains,
three LNG storage tanks, the Texas Con-
nector pipeline and the Louisiana Con-
nector pipeline. When completed, Port
Arthur LNG will produce about 13.5
MMtpy (1.8 Bft3d) of LNG. The US
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
recently issued a final environmental im-
pact statement (EIS) for the project.
Rio Grande LNG. Located at the
port of Brownsville in South Texas, the
Rio Grande LNG project is part of the
“second wave” of US LNG export facili-
ties. This facility and its associated Rio
Bravo Pipeline are expected to receive
approval on July 25, 2019. In early April,
Rio Grande and Shell announced a 20-
yr, 2-MMtpy supply agreement. Rio
Grande also has an agreement to supply
LNG to the power grid of Cork, Ireland.
LNG industry future. As US LNG ex-
port capacity surpasses 10 Bft3d by 2023,
prices will continue to be pressured.
However, as long as prices remain above a
notional floor (i.e., the point at which the
production of LNG becomes uneconomi-
cal), the industry will continue to expand.
The biggest market for US LNG is
Asia. China and India have become ma-
jor importers of LNG, as has Japan in
the wake of downsizing its nuclear fleet.
Major competitors to the US are Austra-
lia, Qatar and Russia. Australia has three
LNG liquefaction and export facilities in
operation with a total production capaci-
ty of 24.1 MMtpy. Six more LNG produc-
tion projects are under development in
Australia with a total production capacity
of 61.1 MMtpy.
Shipping time has been important to
profitability in the LNG export market.
The voyage from Louisiana to Japan via
the Panama Canal takes about 40 d. By
comparison, the same shipment from
Australia to Tokyo takes 9 d–12 d, a
significant time advantage. Qatar has
similar advantages when shipping to In-
dia and western Asia. However, robust
growth in the LNG spot market is al-
lowing US companies to buy and deliver
LNG shiploads from and to many differ-
ent destinations.
However, political considerations
continue to cloud the future of the
LNG industry. Instability in Russia and
Ukraine, along with economic sanctions
by the US and other western nations,
could hamper Russia’s ability to become
a global LNG exporter. Tariffs levied by
the US and China on each other have
made US LNG exports to China—the
world’s largest LNG customer—prob-
lematic. Additionally, environmental
concerns in some US states over hydrau-
lic fracturing used in drilling shale gas
could hamper progress in certain areas.
Regardless, the US has become a
world leader in LNG exports in a very
short time. Assuming no great political or
environmental upsets, the outlook for the
US LNG market is highly positive. GP

Table Sales
Now Open!

September 19, 2019 | The Houstonian | Houston, Texas

The editors of Hydrocarbon Processing are thrilled to

announce the finalists for the upcoming HP Awards on
June 6, 2019.

The awards program honors the downstream energy

segment’s leading innovations, as well as outstanding
personal contributions to the industry.

Table sales are now open.

Visit HydrocarbonProcessing.com/Awards to learn
what technologies have been nominated.

For more information on sponsorship opportunities at the 2019 HP

Awards, please contact your sales representative or Hortensia "Tish"
Barroso, Business Development Manager at
Hortensia.Barroso@GulfEnergyInfo.com or by phone at
+1 (713) 520-4404.

VISIT HY DROCARBONPROCESSI NG.COM/AWARDS FOR MORE INFORMATION

12 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
 SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES
AND TRANSPORTATION

Optimal gas pretreatment technologies

for developing FLNG projects
S. MOKHATAB, Gas Processing Consultant, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada;
and S. DOONG, R. PALLA and T. SMITH, Honeywell UOP, Chicago, Illinois

Floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG)
technology is expected to be the next
technological breakthrough for monetiz-
ing offshore stranded gas fields and trans-
porting gas to areas of consumption. As
such, there is great interest in developing
robust, reliable and innovative natural gas
pretreatment and liquefaction solutions
for FLNG projects.
Pretreatment is a critical risk manage-
ment function that can represent a mean-
ingful portion of the costs of an FLNG
facility. This article describes the optimal
treatment technologies for designing a
simple, compact, energy-efficient, flexible
and robust pretreatment section in a float-
ing environment subject to rocking mo-
tion. It also shows how the integration of
treatment technologies and expert know-
how make a difference during technology
selection and design.
multiple fields introduces the need for ad-
ditional gas conditioning facilities when
the field gas quality varies (TABLE 1). Gas
processing equipment capable of han-
dling well fluids with varying conditions
adds to facility cost, equipment count and
operational complexity.
Once an FLNG facility is in operation,
moving decks may present major chal-
lenges to the operability and efficiency
of process equipment with two-phase
flow. As such, the process technology
options chosen for the FLNG facility
should encourage maintaining the high-
est availability possible. Sometimes this
may result in a less efficient design, but
it will enable robust operations during
changing sea states.
Flares
Gas pretreatment strategies. Feed gas
pretreatment, which ensures conditioning
of the feed gas to meet LNG sales specifi-
cations, is a vital part of any LNG process.
The specifications to be met are hydrogen
sulfide (H2S) removal to under 4 ppmv,
carbon dioxide (CO2) to below 50 ppmv,
total sulfur to less than 10 ppmv, water
(H2O) to less than 1 ppmv, and mercury
(Hg) to levels of 0.01 µg/Nm3. Also, heavy
hydrocarbons (HHCs) must be removed
to below freezing limits in cryogenic heat
exchangers. The allowable limits of heavy
hydrocarbons to the LNG plant (TABLE 2)
vary depending on the liquefaction tech-
nology and process conditions.2
The basic functional requirements for
designing gas pretreatment systems for

Basic design considerations. Float- Blast wall Helideck

ing above an offshore natural gas field, NGL Liquefaction Gas Inlet
an FLNG facility will produce LNG at recovery treating facilities Process Turret Air inlet
utilities swivel Power
sea (FIG. 1). Offshore gas is transported plant
via dual-insulated production flowlines Electrical rooms
and flexible risers to the FLNG facility, LPG
LNG storage tanks Cond.
tanks tanks Hull utilities/
where impurities are removed (in the gas Thrusters essential power
pretreatment section) and the gas is then Buoy
liquefied before being stored onboard the
facility. Pursuant to LNG, other liquid Riser Mooring
products (such as LPG and condensate) Well line
will be stored and subsequently offloaded
FIG. 1. Typical layout of an offshore FLNG facility.1
to marine carriers for delivery to market.
FLNG production facilities can use
conventional technologies and equip- TABLE 1. Gas composition variations in key regions
ment similar to onshore LNG production
Middle East Africa Pacific Rim
plants. However, there is a greater incen-
tive to minimize topside processing due Hydrogen sulfide, mol% 0.1–2.9 0–0.2 0–0.02
to the limited footprint and weight con- Carbon dioxide, mol% 2–7 2–7.5 9–45
straints, as well as the need for person- Mercaptans, ppmv 0–400+ 0 0
nel refuge and escape routes in FLNG
Carbonyl sulfide, ppmv 1–40 0 0
production vessels. Designing FLNG fa-
cilities intended to receive feed gas from Mercury, μg/Nm3 0–50 1–130 200–2,000

Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 13

SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION

FLNG facilities are more or less the same nents, such as H2S and CO2, from the feed Physical solvents, which can be applied
as an onshore LNG facility. On the FLNG gas stream. The removal of these compo- advantageously when the partial pressure
facility, however, there is a need for a sim- nents helps meet the LNG product total of the acid gas components in the feed gas
ple, compact, flexible, proven and energy- sulfur specification and avoid CO2 freez- is high (typically greater than 60 psi), will
efficient pretreatment package to allow op- ing and subsequent blockages in the cryo- reduce the energy consumption but will
timal uptime and avoid unwanted upsets to genic section of the FLNG facility. The also co-absorb more hydrocarbons. For
LNG production and project revenue. AGRU also removes some amount of car- this reason, physical solvents are generally
Acid gas removal. An acid gas remov- bonyl sulfide (COS), mercaptans (RSH) suitable to treat lean gases.
al unit (AGRU) removes acidic compo- and other organic sulfur species that con- If there is a need to treat rich gases,
tribute to sulfur emissions. then the NGL must be first removed
TABLE 2. Allowable limits of heavy
Three commonly used solvent absorp- by chilling. As an alternative, the use of
hydrocarbons to liquefaction unit2 tion processes for acid gas removal that hybrid (mixed chemical and physical)
also can be used in LNG plants include solvents is beneficial when they can be
Component Specification chemical absorption, physical absorption formulated to allow for complete CO2 re-
C 5+ < 1,000 ppmv and mixed solvents. Commonly, H2S and moval while achieving H2S removal com-
C6 < 100 ppmv CO2 are removed from the natural gas parable to alkanolamines.
feed stream in a chemical solvent unit, In hybrid systems, RSH and other or-
C7 < 10 ppmv
utilizing an aqueous amine solvent. ganic sulfur components, if present in
C8 < 1 ppmv With the exception of methyl dietha- the feed gas, can also be removed by the
C9 < 1 ppmv nolamine (MDEA), amines are gener- physical solvent portion. Generally, this
BTEX < 1 ppmv ally not selective and will remove both option will result in an expensive design
CO2 and H2S from the gas. When used in with a hydrocarbon co-absorption that is
Acid gas to SRU, (H2S, CO2, COS)
treating sour gases to meet the tight CO2 too large to be acceptable. The optimum
specification for LNG production, the ac- solution in many cases is the distribution
Dehydration, RSH Treated tivity of CO2 absorption is too slow with of RSH removal capabilities over the opti-
Feed gas Acid gas gas to LNG pure MDEA, which must be enhanced mized mixed chemical-physical solvent, or
and Hg removal
removal (amine)
(molecular with a promoter; whereas a feed gas with the chemical solvent alone, in the AGRU
sieve )
10 mol%–12 mol% CO2 can be handled and the molecular sieve unit (MSU).
Spent
by a promoted MDEA process. In this option, the MSU spent regen-
RSH removal regen gas The advantage of the amine technol- eration gas can be regenerated using an
Treated ogy is that the solubility of aromatics AGRU shared regeneration system, or
regen gas
Acid gas to SRU and heavy hydrocarbons in the aqueous treated in standalone physical solvent for
(RSH, H2S, COS) solvent is low, which translates into lower RSH removal. Mercury can be simultane-
hydrocarbon losses. However, the disad- ously removed in the MSU. The treated
FIG. 2. LNG pretreatment scheme with gas regeneration gas can then be recycled, ei-
vantage is the high energy consumption
phase mercaptans removal.
for the regeneration of aqueous amine. ther to the inlet of the MSU or the inlet of
the AGRU absorber (FIG. 2).
Sweet gas If the FLNG facility is expected to be
Two-stage relocated to a gas field with high concen-
amine trations of CO2 (as high as 20 mol%),
absorber Makeup water
then utilizing a single-stage amine process
Lean solution cooler for this range of CO2 will result in a large
Acid gas
AGRU to operate at turndown ratios of
Lean solution up to 20:1 for the solvent. This would be
pump
Flash gas Acid gas an inefficient set of conditions and would
to fuel header KO drum result in significant over-circulation of the
Acid gas
Feed gas Makeup cooler Filtration Amine solvent and higher reboiler duties than ac-
water system stripper
tually required for the process conditions.
Reflux
In this case, a good alternative is to use
pump a two-stage amine unit to meet final prod-
Rich flash
drum Makeup uct specifications. Solvent from the bulk
water removal absorber is flash-regenerated to
Rich flash
column form a semi-lean stream dedicated to the
bulk removal absorber (FIG. 3). The CO2
Lean/rich
Amine composition after the bulk absorber and
reboiler
Semi-lean Rich solution exchanger Lean solution before the trim amine absorber is opti-
solution pump pump booster pump mized to minimize the semi-lean solvent
rate and the corresponding size of the
FIG. 3. Two-stage amine absorber with semi-lean amine loop.3
bulk removal absorber, while avoiding sig-
14 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
Select 84 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION
nificant oversizing of the trim removal ab-
sorber and regenerator.3 Despite the large
capital cost requirement, a two-stage ab-
sorber process is still advantageous since it
offers the potential to substantially reduce
heat demand and additionally decreases
environmental emissions by utilizing
waste heat and eliminating fired heaters.
Although acid gas removal from natu-
ral gas using amines is a mature and widely
used technology in the LNG industry, the
use of amine processes for FLNG service
has raised concerns with respect to the
effect of sea motion on column perfor-
mance to meet the 50-ppmv CO2 prod-
uct specification. Therefore, depending
on sea motion conditions, significant
design margins must be added to the sol-
vent circulation rate and equipment sizes,
which will result in a negative impact on
the amine unit size, weight and cost. This
can be mitigated by conducting detailed
Rocking
pilot
plant
data
Land-
Project-
based
based Maldistribution
LNG parameters
design CFD
Project
motion
data
FIG. 4. Marinization process methodology for
optimal design of an offshore AGRU.3
Acid gas to SRU (H2S and CO2)
Acid gas
Feed gas removal Dehydration and mercury
(amine guard removal (proprietary
FS) molecular sieves )
FIG. 5. Typical integrated LNG pretreatment scheme with liquid-phase mercaptans removal.
16 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
marinization studies that include sophis-
ticated computer simulations via a com-
putational fluid dynamics (CFD) model
to determine the proper design margins.3
FIG. 4 shows the marinization pro-
cedure covering the evaluation of the
relevant motions and CFD studies for
calculating maldistribution of the scrub-
bing liquid under the prevailing condi-
tions. Based on this approach, a marinized
AGRU design was successfully commer-
cialized in 2017 for the first operating
FLNG facility, Petronas’ FLNG1.
The use of membrane technology for
acid gas removal from the feed natural gas
can be an appropriate solution in offshore
applications. Membrane separation,
which offers several advantages compared
to an amine unit (i.e., greater turndown
capability, reduced installation costs,
weight and plot space, and insensitivity to
rocking motion or static tilt conditions) is
suitable only for bulk CO2 removal, where
further treating with amine is required to
meet the H2S, CO2 and RSH specifica-
tions, which will also add significant com-
plexity and cost.
Membranes require a suitable pretreat-
Rigorous ment system to remove particulates and to
heat and
mass avoid liquid formation in the membranes.
transfer Improper pretreatment generally leads to
model performance decline rather than complete
nonperformance. The main limitation of
membrane systems is the significant loss
Project- of hydrocarbons in the permeate stream.
specific This is partly due to the relatively large
AGRU
design membrane surface area that is required to
reach a 50-ppm CO2 specification. Mem-
brane systems perform well at reduced
feed flowrates (from 1 MMsft3d–1,000
NGL recovery Treated gas to LNG
and fractionation
C5+ to hydrotreater
C2 Spent regen gas to fuel
Acid gas
(COS, H2S) RSH Dehydration
extraction (molecular sieves)
(Merox)
COS
removal
(amine)
Disulfide oil to disposal
MMsft3d), but their performance drops
when design flowrates are exceeded. In
this case, additional modules must be add-
ed in parallel to accept higher flowrates.
In some cases, a hybrid membrane/
amine system, which is a combination of
membranes for bulk CO2 removal and an
amine unit for polishing, will be the best
option. A hybrid system can reduce the
size and weight of the total pretreatment
unit, minimize the effect of sea motion on
the amine column performance and offer
a cost-effective AGRU solution.4
A detailed configuration study was
conducted3 to evaluate different acid gas
removal technologies. The amine-only
configuration was found generally eco-
nomically feasible up to 20 mol% CO2
concentration. This threshold may vary
from project to project, as it is also influ-
enced by such factors as feed gas flowrate
and design rocking motion requirements,
as well as waste heat availability in the en-
tire FLNG facility. Above the threshold
CO2 concentration, the hybrid configu-
ration offers significant space, weight and
capital cost advantages over standalone
amine units. For acid gas concentrations
below approximately 2 mol%, a solvent-
free pretreatment system should be con-
sidered. This is described in the integrated
pretreatment section later in this paper.
Water and mercaptans removal. Mo-
lecular sieves are used to dry the gas leav-
ing the AGRU to below 1 ppmv to avoid
hydrate formation and freezing in the
cryogenic section of the FLNG facility.
They can also be used for the removal of
mercaptans and other sulfur compounds
to meet a total sulfur product specifica-
tion of 10 ppm or lower. Molecular sieve
units, if properly designed, can economi-
cally handle only feed gases containing
maximum RSH of 1,500 ppmv.5
While moisture removal is tradition-
ally done with smaller-pore-sized 3A and
4A molecular sieves, mercaptans/sulfur
removal is done with larger-pored 5A and
13X types. The 5A type molecular sieve is
Treated C4 used for removal of light mercaptans (C1/
C2-SH) and trace removal of H2S, while the
13X molecular sieve is used for adsorption
Treated C3 of heavy/branched mercaptans. However,
co-adsorption on 13X molecular sieves of
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene
(BTEX) components, with concentra-
tions higher than 30 ppmv, will result in in-
creased length of the molecular sieve bed.
These components can also cause separa-
 SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION

tion problems in the physical absorption Typical recovery, %*

process used to recover the mercaptan spe-
Licensed turboexpander technology 99 + % 99 + % 99 + % 99 + % 98 + %

Higher pressure drop

cies from the spent regeneration gas.
The practical solution for such pur-
Open-art turboexpander designs 99 + % 99 + % 99 + % 95 + % 93 + %
poses is to use 5A molecular sieves for
removing light mercaptans in the gas
Joule-Thomson expansion 99 + % 85 + % 70 + % 35 + %
phase, as this product has no capacity for

Lower pressure drop

BTEX. The heavier mercaptans are then Mechanical refrigeration 99 + % 95 + % 90 + % 30 + %
removed with the liquefied petroleum gas
(LPG) and condensate (C5+) cuts, which
SeparSIV adsorption 99 + % 98 + % 20 + %
may be further treated downstream using
a caustic scrubber process (such as the Heavies C5+ Butanes Propane Ethane
Merox process, shown in FIG. 5), followed Primary hydrocarbon recovery goal
by an MSU to dry the treated liquids to
*Actual recovery depends on feed gas composition, pressures and flowrates
meet required product specifications.
To optimize the size and improve the
FIG. 6. Heavy hydrocarbons removal options.6
performance of the molecular sieve units
in FLNG projects, various techniques
Clean gas
have been developed in recent years. For
example, using multi-layer bed configura-
tions of dense molecular sieves of differ-
ent sizes can reduce bed voidage and ves-
sel volume. Use of high-quality molecular Adsorbing Regen gas blower Regen
bed gas cooler Regen
sieves with superior properties and im- gas
proved regeneration methods can extend Regen gas separator
heater
product life and improve reliability, while
also providing cost savings. Feed gas Particle Regenerating
Mercury removal. The removal of filter bed
mercury from the feed gas is required Filter
coalescer
to avoid the risk of stress cracking in the
aluminum heat exchangers, which are
utilized in the cryogenic section of the
FLNG facility. Mercury can be removed Liquids
using non-regenerative metal-sulfide sor- FIG. 7. Proprietary heavy hydrocarbons removal process.2
bents or regenerative metal-impregnated
molecular sieves.
A mercury removal unit can be po- a non-regenerative adsorber. However, Recycled regen gas
sitioned upstream or downstream of an this option may require a separate vessel Treated gas
AGRU. Installing vessel(s) of non-regen- of non-regenerative metal sulfide adsor- Feed gas to LNG
TSA PTSA
erative sorbents upstream of an AGRU bent for treating relatively high mercury
normally ensures no mercury contamina- content in the regeneration water, which ~10% of feed gas
tion through the rest of the FLNG facil- would result in additional costs. H 2O
CO2, H2S To fuel gas
(and C8+, BTEX)
ity. Compared to regenerative systems, it NGL recovery/heavy hydrocarbons (liquid) (and C5–C7) (gas)
is a simple and conservative approach for removal. Removal of NGL from the gas
handling mercury in the feed gas, since to be liquefied is necessary to avoid wax- FIG. 8. Proprietary all-in-one adsorption
no regeneration equipment is required. ing and plugging in the main cryogenic system.
Installing a non-regenerative mercury re- heat exchanger.
moval sorbent downstream of the AGRU, The usual solution is to use a scrub when the gas becomes lean in C2 or C3+,
just before the MSU, reduces the size of column ahead of the liquefaction unit, it is difficult for the column to operate
the molecular sieve beds to some extent, operating at liquefaction pressure and stably and efficiently due to insufficient
but poses the risk of mercury contamina- thermally integrated with the cryogenic liquid reflux in the column.
tion of the AGRU solvent system. heat exchanger. Although this method An alternative to using a scrub column
Adding a regenerative, metal-impreg- has been widely used, it has limitations in is to use an NGL recovery unit to recover
nated mercury sieve section to the mo- terms of inlet feed gas operating pressure the C2+ or C3+ hydrocarbons from the
lecular sieve beds allows for the simulta- and composition. In fact, a reduction in treated/dried gas. Conventional turboex-
neous removal of water, mercaptans and the scrub column pressure to below the pander technology can be used to produce
mercury. It also provides the option of critical point may be necessary, resulting a lean gas for liquefaction to comply with
having a potentially longer service life and in reduced liquefaction efficiency and in- LNG product specifications. Although
eliminating pressure drop from having creased power consumption. In addition, propane and butane pose no freezing prob-
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 17
SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION
lem, they are removed together with the
heavy hydrocarbons and can be separated
and sold as liquid products. In addition, the
extracted ethane is returned to the natural
gas stream, used as refrigerant makeup or
used to supplement the fuel gas.
Although a front-end NGL recovery
unit utilizing conventional turboexpander
technology can handle a wide variety of
feed gas compositions and effectively re-
move HHCs, it contains rotating equip-
ment that impacts the capital investment
and reliability of the FLNG facility. To-
day’s proprietary NGL recovery processes
may reduce capital costs through the use
of high-efficiency expanders/compressors
and compact heat exchangers; however,
they may prove difficult and complex to
operate. For these reasons, these processes
may be less desirable for most FLNG facili-
ties that prefer operational simplicity and
minimum maintenance designs.
Several technologies on the market can
effectively remove HHCs if the feed gas is
rich (FIG. 6). When feed gas is lean, mean-
ing less than 2 gal of C2+ NGL/1,000 ft3
(GPM) of feed gas, traditional methods
(such as scrub columns, expansion and
condensation) tend to be either non-eco-
nomic or difficult to operate.2
In response to these challenges, a flex-
ible, proprietary C5+ HHC removal solu-
tion was developed for projects utilizing
lean gas feed. It is a highly selective, mul-
tilayer, adsorbent-based thermal swing
adsorption (TSA) system that removes
the C5+ fraction, while leaving behind the
C4– fraction in the LNG product for Btu
heating value (FIG. 7). The technology
is an energy-efficient process because it
avoids the significant reductions in pres-
sure drop and cooling load typically expe-
rienced with cryogenic options. In addi-
tion, only the regeneration gas is cooled
to precipitate the HHCs. This can reduce
compression and/or cooling load, which
can result in significant cost savings.6
Integrated pretreatment schemes.
Commercial gas pretreatment technolo-
gies, like those discussed in this article, can
be integrated and configured into various
FLNG pretreatment schemes, each offer-
ing unique benefits. In an integrated treat-
ing scheme, the main objective is to achieve
an optimized, compact solution that can
provide great process flexibility with vary-
ing feed gas conditions. Additional objec-
tives include easy scalability based on feed
18 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
gas impurity concentrations and flowrates,
safety and systems reliability, and signifi-
cant energy and capital cost savings.
For acid gas concentrations below 2%
and with feed flow capacities up to ap-
proximately 250 MMsft3d, a simple and
cost-effective “all-in-one” adsorption
process has been developed for LNG
pretreatment. This proprietary, two-stage
process eliminates the need for an amine
unit and liquid solvents. The combined
TSA and pressure and thermal swing
adsorption (PTSA) system meets LNG
specifications for CO2, H2S, RSH and
H2O, and selectively removes C5+ hydro-
carbons and BTEX (FIG. 8). The process
is based on proven technology that selec-
tively removes impurities through a unique
combination of adsorbents and a compre-
hensive control system.
In the all-in-one process, feed gas is first
fed to the TSA process unit, in which the
impurities are adsorbed at low tempera-
tures in a fixed-bed adsorber and desorbed
by “swinging” the adsorbers from feed gas
temperature (low) to regeneration tem-
peratures (high) with hot regeneration gas.
With the proper portfolio of proprietary
adsorbents, multiple impurities can be re-
moved simultaneously. As shown in FIG. 8,
water, C8+ hydrocarbons and BTEX can
be removed. The treated gas exits the ad-
sorbers and is then filtered and delivered to
the PTSA process unit. In this unit, CO2,
H2S, RSH and C5–C7 hydrocarbons are
removed by the adsorbents and purged
by a thermal swing, followed by a pressure
swing. The treated gas exits the adsorbers
and is then filtered and delivered to the
customer’s downstream processes.
An “all-in-one” adsorption system is
ideal for FLNG applications. It meets
LNG specifications for acid gas, water
and C5+ HHC removal without the need
for an amine unit, which saves weight and
plot space; and with very little pressure
drop, which saves compression or cool-
ing load. Regeneration purge gas is mini-
mized by the PTSA to approximately 10%
of the feed flowrate, which can be used for
onsite fuel gas.
Takeaway. A key step in the develop-
ment of an attractive FLNG solution is
the selection of an appropriate gas pre-
treatment system that best meets the proj-
ect objectives. Several technology options
can be integrated into the design of the
gas pretreatment section of FLNG proj-
ects. When determining the optimal in-
tegrated pretreatment scheme, simplicity,
safety, weight, cost, reliability and opera-
tional flexibility must be considered. GP
LITERATURE CITED
1
Festen, L., J. Leo and R. Vis, “CB&I Lummus and
Partners to Turn LNG FPSO concept into a reality,”
LNG Journal, September 2009.
2
Smith, T. and S. Doong, “Selective C5+ removal for
lean feed gas,” LNG Industry, February 2016.
3
Kayat, Z., D. Farr, S. Doong, R. Subris and M. Schott,
“Pretreatment of acid gas in feed for Petronas floating
LNG facility,” 25th World Gas Conference, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, June 4–8, 2012.
4
Acikgoz, S. U., L. Zhou, S. Doong and P. Chen,
“Offshore gas treatment technology for natural gas,”
2012 AIChE Spring National Meeting, Houston,
Texas, April 1–5, 2012.
5
Mokhatab, S. and P. Hawes, “Optimal mercaptans
removal solution in gas processing plants,” GPA
Europe Spring Technical Conference, Hamburg,
Germany, April 22–24, 2015.
6
Smith, T. and R. Palla, “Pretreatment improvements,”
LNG Industry, December 2016.
SAEID MOKHATAB is a world-class
expert in the natural gas processing
industry who has been actively
involved in different aspects of
several large-scale gas processing
projects, from conceptual design
through plant startup and
operations support. He has presented on gas
processing technologies worldwide and has
published 300 technical papers and two handbooks,
which are widely read and highly respected.
SHAIN DOONG is the Senior
Manager of the Gas Processing and
Hydrogen Development Group at
Honeywell UOP in the US. He has
worked with UOP for 12 yr.
Previously, he worked for
ExxonMobil, BOC Gases and the
Gas Technology Institute. His background is in gas
separation and purification, with focuses on
adsorption, membrane and solvent processes.
RAJ PALLA is a Senior Business
Development Manager for
Honeywell UOP’s gas processing
division in the US. He has been with
UOP since 2006, working in
business development and technical
sales support activities for various
gas processing technologies. Mr. Palla has participated
in and directed research projects in sub-quality gas
upgrading, gas treating, gas dehydration, gas-liquid
membranes and H2S scavenging. He is the author/
coauthor of a number of presentations and articles
and holds seven US patents.
TREVOR SMITH is Senior Product
Line Manager for Honeywell UOP’s
gas processing and hydrogen
business unit in the US. He has been
with UOP since 2014, managing
licensed technology and equipment
offers for natural gas and liquid
hydrocarbon treatment for LNG and petrochemical
applications. Previously, he managed unconventional
gas research and training programs at the Gas
Technology Institute.
 SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES
AND TRANSPORTATION

The insoluble equation: How to balance

Europe’s natural gas supply and demand
A. BLUME, Editor, Gas Processing & LNG, Houston, Texas;
and M. HARRISON, PetroSkills, John M. Campbell, Yateley, Hampshire, UK

The European gas industry is not a homogenous entity; it is France

a patchwork quilt of countries with different energy portfolios,
different legislation and different energy mixes. Some are rich
in hydrocarbon and renewable energy reserves, while others
have few.
From this uneven starting point, the continent is bound by
two common challenges that form the addends to the sum of
Europe’s energy future:
• The need for more and varied energy imports, especially
natural gas.
• The EU’s promise to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
improve energy efficiency under the Paris Agreement.
Other than coal, Europe is in net deficit of fossil fuels. By 2035,
Europe’s gas supply mix is expected to be more heavily reliant on
LNG and Russian pipeline gas, with domestic gas production
falling as existing fields, particularly in the North Sea, mature.
On the climate change front, the EU is a single common
signatory to the Paris Agreement and is legislated to reduce
its CO2 emissions by at least 40% by 2030 compared to 1990
levels. Facing the challenges of energy balance and emissions
reductions will require some difficult decisions and inevitable
change. The dependence on coal in power generation and oil
in transport must be reduced, to be replaced by gas/LNG and
renewable energy. The decision to restrict or prevent the devel-
opment of shale reserves should also be challenged.
PART 1 OF THE EQUATION:
SOLVING EUROPE’S IMPORT NEEDS
In the last 10 yr, Europe’s primary energy demand has fallen
by around 5%. While large growth has been seen in renewable
energy, this growth has come from a small base. Fossil fuels still
meet 75% of primary energy needs, with oil predominantly fu-
eling the transport sector and gas feeding the power, residential
and commercial sectors.
Natural gas accounts for roughly 23% of Europe’s energy de-
mand. The EU imports approximately 70% of its gas demand.
This figure is anticipated to climb to more than 90% over the
next two decades.
FIG. 1 shows large differences in power generation between
countries. The region’s record on the use of renewables in pow-
er generation is impressive. At present, about 55% of Europe’s
power comes from renewable sources, including nuclear.
The growth in wind and solar power is impressive, but with
a dysfunctional system of carbon pricing, it has often displaced
gas instead of coal. To imagine that renewable sources could re-
Other Europe
Spain
United Kingdom
Germany
Italy
Turkey
Netherlands
Poland
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent
Oil Coal Hydroelectric Other
Natural gas Nuclear Renewables
FIG. 1. European power generation by fuel type, 2017.
place the 75% of primary energy provided by fossil fuels in the
short term is not credible. A pincer movement with gas is more
likely, but the scale of the change would be gargantuan.
To give an idea of scale, to replace 50% of the coal used in
power generation with gas would require an additional 33 Bsft3d
(0.934 Bm3d) of gas—a doubling of current imports—or 250
metric MMtpy of LNG import, which equals the combined
output of the world’s four largest producers. This will never be
achieved, but that Europe will see a revolution in gas and LNG
imports is inevitable.
The switch from coal to gas is forecast to be particular-
ly strong in the European power sector, with the use of gas
for power forecast to double on the year this summer, to 82
MMm3d (2.9 Bsft3d).1
WHY IS COAL NOT DYING?
Despite significant growth in the 1990s and early 2000s, gas
is used for less than 20% of power generation—i.e., less than is
generated by coal. When gas is traded in $/MMBtu and coal in
$/metric t, it is hard to compare the two. When both are con-
verted to $/MMBtu it can be seen that, in Europe, coal is half
the price of natural gas and 40% that of imported LNG. Coal
consumption in Europe will not fall significantly unless carbon
prices rise or governments legislate.
On this second point, as the gilets jaunes movement has
shown, governments that legislate energy price increases risk
their jobs. In France, public opposition to a rise in carbon taxes,
which was to coincide with a scheduled 25% increase in vehicle
fuel tax prices, resulted in the French government canceling the
fuel hikes at the end of 2018. The French government is exam-
Gas Processing | MAY/JUNE 2019 19
SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION

ining ways to reintroduce the fuel taxes at a later date, but op- The Netherlands, meanwhile, is in balance with gas for now,
position from consumers remains strong. while all other countries are in deficit. Germany, Italy, France and
Turkey import nearly all of their gas. Germany is also in the pro-
Europe has the wrong energy in the wrong places. Two cess of phasing out nuclear power from its energy mix by 2022,
reasons exist for why natural gas is not more popular in Europe. while France aims to reduce its nuclear power use by 75% of its
Firstly, Europe does not have very much gas of its own. Second- domestic energy mix to 50%, meaning they will need more gas.
ly, the gas that exists is in the wrong places. Gas imports come to Europe from three sources: intra-Euro-
At current consumption levels, Europe has nearly 100 yr of pean transfers; LNG imports; or imports from non-EU coun-
coal reserves, but only 2 yr of oil and 6 yr of gas. The gas that tries, predominantly Russia. Of Europe’s total gas import vol-
Europe has is also far from its consumers. Over the next 20 yr, ume, Russia supplies approximately 37% via pipeline; Norway
Europe’s domestic production is likely to be halved as output contributes around 30% via pipeline from within the EU; and
from the North Sea by Norway and the Netherlands dwindles. Algeria, Azerbaijan and Iran collectively represent about 25%.
Norway will be unable to sustain its production after the mid- The gas flowing into Europe enables it to act as a “balancer” for
2020s due to a lack of new projects and discoveries.2 global gas trade with its LNG trading hubs, spare import capac-
FIG. 2 shows that most countries are in net deficit of gas, and ity, and trans-shipment and re-export capabilities.
make up their deficits through imports. Only Norway has a sur- Among Europe’s gas import sources, cross-border EU trade
plus of gas, but this could change after 2025 if resource growth is unlikely to grow, as production and reserves are dwindling.
continues to slow and if the estimated undiscovered reserves in Increased pipeline imports, from Russia and other non-EU
the Barents Sea are not exploited quickly. Note: Insufficient re- sources, and LNG are the most viable areas of growth. An im-
serves replacement would also shackle Norway’s competition portant question remains: How dependent on Russian imports
with Russia in the LNG market. would Europe like to be?
15
The “cliffhanger” of Nord Stream 2. Some countries are sig-
Deficit
Gas production nificantly more dependent on Russian gas imports than others
Gas to consumption (FIG. 3). The Economist has classified Nord Stream 2, the planned
10 gas pipeline expansion from Russia to Germany, as an entirely po-
litical venture.3 Nord Stream 2 would allow Ukraine and Poland
to be bypassed, increasing the countries’ dependence on Russia
5 and boosting the total volume of gas on the Nord Stream network
from 55 Bm3y (1,942 Bsft3y) to 110 Bm3y (3,884 Bsft3y). It is
easy to understand the disparity of views on Nord Stream 2. The
1,200-km pipeline is set to bypass Ukraine and Poland, threaten-
Bft3d

0
ing the countries’ energy security to the benefit of Germany’s.
Existing pipelines from Russia via Ukraine have the capacity
-5 to meet Europe’s current and future needs (FIG. 4). As of March,
Gazprom’s Nord Stream 2 plan has been upended by Denmark’s
Energy Agency, which requested Gazprom to look into a more
-10 southerly route to pass through Danish waters. Although the
pipeline is already supported by German, French, Austrian,
Germany

Italy

Turkey

France

United
Kingdom

Spain

Belgium

Poland

Netherlands

Norway

FIG. 2. Gas deficits by country.

United Kingdom
Dependence on Russian gas imports
France
Italy
Greece
Turkey
Germany
Czech Republic
Poland
Finland
Austria
Hungary
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent

FIG. 3. European dependence on Russian gas imports. FIG. 4. Europe’s dependence on Russian pipeline gas.

20 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
Making our world more productive
You need a reason to trust us?
We have over 4,000.
You can rely on Linde Engineering to deliver the plants,
components and services that best fit your needs – anywhere
in the world. Industry leader in plant engineering, we have
already successfully delivered over 4,000 engineering
projects worldwide. Our aim is to enhance your plant lifecycle
productivity and innovate your operations through cutting-
edge gas processing technologies.
Discover why customers across multiple industries – from
natural gas and oil refining through petrochemicals and
fertilizers to electronics and metal fabrication – choose to
put their trust in us for their gas production and processing
requirements.
Discover more about how we can contribute to your success at
www.linde-engineering.com
SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION

Dutch and British companies, Danish approval is the last hurdle Spot purchases of LNG can help fill the gaps; however, at
needed to finalize Gazprom’s construction permit for the pipe- average or higher-than-average demand levels, Europe does not
line. Additionally, a Swiss court has blocked Nord Stream 2 op- have the storage capacity to survive a winter without Russian
erators from making payments to Gazprom as part of an ongo- gas exports (FIG. 5).5 Germany, France and Italy can stockpile
ing dispute between Gazprom and Ukraine’s Naftogaz.4 only one third of their yearly gas demand. Ukraine has the larg-
Nord Stream 2 likely will not meet its scheduled startup of est gas storage facilities in Europe at 32 Bm3 (1,130 Bsft3), com-
January 1, 2020. The setbacks could also cost years in nego- pared with the EU total of 146 Bm3 (5,155.2 Bsft3). To preserve
tiations and force Russia to begrudgingly renew its contract its energy future, Europe must strike a balance between low-
at year-end to send pipeline gas to the EU through Ukraine. If cost, high-risk Russian gas and higher-cost, low-risk LNG from
Russia chooses not to renew its contract with Ukraine, howev- the US, the Middle East and elsewhere.
er, then Europe’s gas storage will need to be filled to maximum
capacity ahead of the 2019/2020 winter, particularly if Nord SO WHERE DOES GAS FIT IN EUROPEAN ENERGY?
Stream 2 is still embroiled in legal turmoil. Among this muddle of history and disparity of approach
lies a quasi-certainty for gas and LNG: demand will grow
significantly. There are two good reasons for this: Europe is
100
Storage level running out of gas; and CO2 emissions, while falling, are not
90
Average 2014-2018 falling fast enough.
80
70 Mind the gap. Gas consumption is holding steady, but produc-
60 tion is declining and the gap is growing (FIG. 6). Despite recent
Percent

50 encouraging finds in the North Sea,6 reserves have fallen 40%

40 in 10 yr. The gap between gas production and consumption is
30 currently 28 Bsft3d (0.792 Bm3d), equivalent to the total LNG
20 exports of Qatar and Australia combined. As production con-
10 tinues to fall, the gas gap will grow as first coal, and then oil, are
31-Jan.

28-Feb.

31-Mar.

30-April

31-May

30-June

31-July

31-Aug.

30-Sept.

31-Oct.

30-Nov.

31-Dec.

displaced. But where will the gas come from? Europe’s growing
need for gas imports (FIG. 7) can be satisfied by four scenarios,
FIG. 5. At end-year 2018, European gas storage levels were near the as outlined in the following sections.
5-yr average, mainly due to sluggish demand at the start of the winter
heating season. The problematic promise of Russian gas. Russia has the
world’s largest gas reserves. At current consumption levels, they
110 are adequate to meet 100 yr of demand. Of Europe’s total gas sup-
ply, approximately 37% comes from Russia. If the Nord Stream 2
100
pipeline moves forward in a timely manner, it can easily compete
The gas gap is growing

90 with imported LNG. Gazprom will be able to supply gas to the

80
German market at a cost of $4 MMBtu–$5/MMBtu. Few lower-
cost options are likely to emerge, and none will be able to meet
70 Gas consumption the volume requirements. However, Russia has been known to
Gas production use gas supplies as a strategic weapon in the past and could do
60 Gas reserves
50
so again.3
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 As FIG. 3 shows, many of Europe’s countries are already
highly dependent on Russia for their gas. At present, Gazprom
FIG. 6. The gap between gas production and consumption is growing. pumps 190 Bm3y (6,709 Bsft3y) of gas to Europe through ex-
isting pipelines. To put this figure into perspective, Gazprom’s
600 pipeline volumes are four times the current capacity of all US
LNG export terminals combined.
500
Europe gas supply outlook, Bm3y

400
Russia also has LNG. Russia is now also a large and fast-grow-
ing LNG player. Independent producer Novatek, quietly and
300 without fanfare, has been changing the world of LNG. Yamal
LNG surprised the industry by not only shipping its first cargo
200
on time at the end of 2017, but by ramping up all three of its
100 5.5-metric-MMtpy trains to full capacity in the space of 12 mos.
Additionally, the location of the Yamal fields makes it easy for
0
2010 2015 2020 2025 Novatek to ship LNG west or east.
Domestic production Algeria pipeline Russia pipline Novatek has announced plans to expand its capacity to 70
Norway pipeline Other pipeline LNG metric MMtpy—equivalent to Qatar’s current export capacity
and 20% of the world’s current export capacity—by 2030. The
FIG. 7. Outlook for European gas supply through 2025 (Source: Shell).
company will achieve this with the addition of a fourth train at
22 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
Our equipment is
efficient, proven, robust,
and now, seaworthy.
When Petronas built the world’s first FLNG
vessel, they brought Air Products aboard.
We put 45 years of LNG expertise and 20
years of FLNG development to work in our
process technology and equipment for
offshore use. So whether you have a small
peak-shaving plant or a large base load facility,
our proven capabilities will make any LNG
project — especially offshore — a success.
Call +1-610-481-4861 or visit us online.

Coil Wound
Heat Exchanger

tell me more
airproducts.com/LNG

Photo credit: Petronas | ©2017 Air Products

SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION

Yamal over the next few years, in addition to its planned Arctic
LNG 2 venture, located on the Gydan Peninsula in Northern
Siberia, across the Gulf of Ob from Yamal LNG. Arctic LNG 2
will bring online three LNG trains of 6.6 metric MMtpy each in
2022/2023, offering additional LNG supply from Russia.
Furthermore, Gazprom is planning to launch a third LNG
train at its existing Sakhalin 2 LNG terminal in Russia’s Far East
in 2021. If both Arctic LNG 2 and Sakhalin 2 reach a positive
FID in 2019, then Russia’s LNG production capacity will ex-
pand by 25.2 metric MMtpy.
Europe is the local market for much of this LNG—particu-
larly France, which has a 20% stake in Yamal. However, Novatek
also has access to China and other Asian markets, for which
Norway is competing in the LNG space. Europe has little choice
but to increase LNG imports. A surge in new LNG import ter-
minals, pipelines and storage capacity can be expected (FIG. 8),
with many being FSRUs rather than onshore terminals.7
The region has 28 large-scale LNG import terminals (includ-
ing four FSRUs) and eight small-scale LNG terminals in opera-
tion, with around 26% of total regasification capacity utilized.
The EU is supporting 14 LNG infrastructure projects (includ-
ing pipeline connections) that could collectively increase the
bloc’s import capacity by 15 Bm3 of gas (529.65 Bsft3) by 2021,
compared to Europe’s existing LNG import capacity of 210 Bm3
(7,415.1 Bsft3).8 Of note is that several terminals are planned for
countries that do not already have a large-scale LNG terminal in
place (TABLE 1).9
New regasification capacity is a good medium-term strategy
for Europe, but supply constraints remain over the near term.
With Norway’s production level maxed out since 2010, con-
strained pipeline gas supplies from Algeria and Libya, and almost
no new gas coming to Europe from Azerbaijan via the Southern
Gas Corridor, it may seem that Russian gas is the most viable way
to meet Europe’s demand. However, other options are available.
Uncle Sam to the rescue? With Henry Hub gas prices at
around $3.5/MMBtu, plus $3/MMBtu to liquefy and $1/
MMBtu to ship, LNG can be landed in Europe for about $8/
MMBtu. Will this be attractive to Europeans? The answer is
maybe not, or at least only for peakshaving, niche or strategic
purposes. Gas on the UK National Balancing Point (NBP)
trades above this point only in mid-winter.
Cheap Yamal imports ruled Europe’s LNG import market in
1H 2018, but a fivefold increase was seen in US LNG exports
to Europe over the winter of 2018/2019 (FIG. 9). The increase
came about as prices for US exports to Asia fell sharply on low-
er-than-expected demand; those cargoes were then funneled to
Europe (FIG. 10).
Although a temporary glut of LNG has emerged globally,
pressuring down prices,10 this is expected to reverse around the
middle of next decade as spare production capacity is limited by

Total European LNG imports by source

8 100
7 90
80
6
70
5 60
LNG, MMt

Percent
4 50
3 40
30
2
20
1 10
0 0
Dec. Jan.-18 Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan.-19
Yamal Qatar Other
US Algeria Total
FIG. 8. Ongoing and future gas pipeline, storage and LNG import
FIG. 10. Total European LNG imports by source, metric MMt.
terminal projects in Europe (Source: European Commission; edited to
add Nord Stream 2).
700
Emerging LNG supply-demand gap, MMtpy

Russian Yamal vs. US LNG exports to Europe 600 LNG supply in operation
100 1.2 LNG supply under construction 2018
90 Yamal 500 Demand forecast range
Yamal percent to Europe 1.0 outlook
80 range
70 US 400
0.8
Total exports, %

60 US percent to Europe
LNG, MMt

300
50 0.6
40 200
30 0.4
20 0.2 100
10 0
0 0.0
Dec. Jan.-18 Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan.-19 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

FIG. 9. LNG exports to Europe from Novatek’s Yamal LNG vs. from US FIG. 11. The world could see a growing gap of LNG supply approaching
LNG terminals. 2025 (Source: Shell).

24 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
 SPECIAL FOCUS

high CAPEX for new projects. Several frontrunners are sched-

uled to take FIDs this year. The LNG export industry must grow
beyond that time, as evidenced by the forecast gap shown in
FIG. 11. Note that this forecast supply-demand gap is dependent
on global LNG consumption remaining steady or strengthening.
The US offers high-cost, low-risk LNG, but it will have to
compete strategically with lower-cost, high-risk gas from Rus-
sia, as well as expanding LNG supply from Qatar and other sup-
pliers, for Europe’s demand. By 2030, forecast supply growth
from Russia (50 metric MMtpy), the US (50 metric MMtpy)
and Qatar (40 metric MMtpy) could introduce an additional
140 metric MMtpy of LNG into the market. However, Europe
has one remaining option for meeting its gas needs.

The shale question. A shale revolution of the type seen in

the US will not happen in Europe, but a much quieter and
smaller-scale adaptation could fit the bill if drilling restric-
tions are relaxed. The US Department of Energy11 estimates
that Poland, France, Ukraine and others have large recover-
able reserves, while the UK, Netherlands and Germany have
smaller reserves. To put the figures in TABLE 2 into perspective,
they equate to five times Europe’s current proven gas reserves
and are not far from the estimated reserves volume of major
shale producer the US.
Yet, fracing has been banned in France, the Netherlands, Lux-
embourg, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria, and stopped in Ger-
many. The UK has limited the maximum amplitude of seismic
activity as a result of fracing to Richter level 0.5, which is 3,000
times less the limit imposed in the US. The southeast of the UK
regularly sees shocks at Richter value 3 without harm or damage.
Producers Cuadrilla and INEOS are awaiting relaxation on
tremor regulations to continue exploiting shale gas reserves
in northern England. Meanwhile, IGas has announced a shale
gas discovery in the central part of the country amounting to
37 Tm3 (1,306.47 Tsft3).
Aside from environmental concerns, high drilling and pro-
duction costs are a major limiting factor in the exploitation of
Europe’s shale reserves. Shale gas production costs in Europe
are likely to remain at least 60% higher than US production
costs, until understanding of the geology improves. New drill-
ing and extraction technology developments may, in the future,
help develop shale formations in Europe at lower cost. Our industry doesn’t require blast testing
Without drilling appraisal wells, which require fracing, the on blast-resistant structures. But we do.
figures in TABLE 2 are far from bankable. However, they are suf- And it makes all the difference in terms
ficiently large, and the alternatives sufficiently risky, to justify
further work. of performance and peace of mind.

WHERE DOES THIS TAKE US?

Europe has three options for increasing its gas supply: con-
tinued reliance on Russian gas; greater imports of LNG from
Russia, the US, Qatar and elsewhere; and its own shale reserves.
A combination of the first two options is most likely.
Fluctuations in supply attractiveness (for political and price TESTED FOR LIFE
reasons) and availability could be seen, as new LNG projects
are either stalled or fast-tracked, amid the ongoing debate over 855-733-4827 | redguard.com
Nord Stream 2. The combination of growing supply potential
and geoplitical uncertainty in energy dominance makes for a
riveting debate on Europe’s natural gas future. However, it is
only one part of the equation. The EU’s signature of the Paris
Gas Processing | MAY/JUNE 2019 25
SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION

Agreement, and its intended adherence to its emissions targets, total carbon emissions to achieve a maximum global tempera-
have vast implications for Europe’s energy mix. ture rise of 2°C and make every effort to limit the rise to 1.5°C.
The events of COP 21 in Paris in late 2015 are significant. The agreed goal was for greenhouse gas emissions to peak as
One hundred and ninety-seven countries agreed to reduce their soon as possible, and to achieve net zero emissions in the sec-
ond half of this century. Can this be achieved? Likely not, but
the target should not be ignored.
TABLE 1. Planned LNG regasification terminals in countries Pierre Friedlingstein, a climatologist at Exeter University,
with no large-scale LNG import capacity calculates that to achieve the 2°C target, the world can emit
Startup Targeted about 3,200 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide in total. The tally so
Country Project capacity, Bm3y startup year far is 2,000 gigatonnes. If annual emissions remain at 2015 lev-
Albania Eagle LNG FSRU 8 – els, then the budget will be exhausted in just 30 yr.12
Croatia Krk Island FSRU 2 2019
As FIG. 12 shows, globally, emissions are not remaining at
2015 levels; they are rising. Last year, carbon emissions from
Cyprus Vassiliko FSRU – 2019 fossil fuels hit a record high worldwide of 37.1 metric Bt. Over
Estonia the last 10 yr, only Europe and North America have reduced
Padalski LNG 2.5 2020 their CO2 emissions. North America has mitigated its emissions
Muuga (Tallinn) LNG 4 2019
through shale gas production, which has, through commercial
drive, displaced coal; Europe has done it through the heavy
Germany Brunsbüttel LNG 5 2022 subsidy of wind and solar power, which have also displaced gas.
Ireland Each will benefit the other. Low gas prices in North America
Shannon LNG 2.7 – will spur European LNG imports and give Europe an alterna-
tive to Russian gas imports. The springboard that the EU has
Cork LNG – –
given to renewable energy means that it can now look after itself.
Latvia Riga LNG 5 2019 FIG. 12 reveals two self-evident truths:
Romania Constanta LNG 8 2025 • The targets of the Paris Agreement will not be met
Ukraine Kaliningrad LNG – 2019 by all signatories
• However fast the growth of solar and wind power,
fossil fuels are here for some time, and gas will be
TABLE 2. Estimated shale gas recoverable reserves, Tft3
increasingly needed.
Country Estimated shale gas reserves, Tft3*
PART 2 OF THE EQUATION:
Poland 145.8
EUROPE’S CLIMATE COMMITMENTS
France 136.7
Add to the need for more and varied energy imports the
Ukraine 127.9 EU’s promise to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under the
Romania 50.7 Paris Agreement, and the complexities of Europe’s “insoluble
Denmark 31.7 energy equation” begin to emerge.
The EU is a single common signatory to the Paris Agreement
Netherlands 25.9
on Climate Change and is legislated to reduce its CO2 emis-
UK 25.8 sions. The EU’s nationally determined contribution (NDC)
Germany 17 under the Paris Agreement is to reduce greenhouse gas emis-
Total Europe 561.5 sions by at least 20% by 2020 compared to 1990 levels, and by
at least 40% by 2030.
US 622.5
The EC’s 2030 Energy Strategy names targets for renewable
*According to the US Energy Information Administration
energy use (32%, revised upward last year from 27%) and in-
creases in energy efficiency (32.5%, revised upward from 30%).
140
North America South and Central America
If these agreed EU-level policies are fully implemented, then
130
Europe CIS EU emissions could be cut by as much as 45% by 2030, accord-
Middle East Africa ing to the EC. This is unlikely to happen, however, according to
Asia-Pacific The world
120 data from the European Environment Agency (EEA) (FIG. 13).13
Total greenhouse gas emissions from EU members are ex-
110 pected to decrease by 26% from 1990 levels by 2020, surpassing
the 2020 target. This is good news. However, only a 32% reduc-
100 tion in emissions can be achieved by 2030, which falls well short
of the 40% base target, according to the EEA.
90 Ahead of COP 24 in December 2018, the Grantham Re-
80 search Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, in
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 collaboration with the World Resources Institute, released a
study14 finding that only 16 of the 197 countries signed to the
FIG. 12. CO2 emissions are rising worldwide.
Paris Agreement have defined climate plans ambitious enough
26 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com

under their current NDCs to meet their emissions reduction
targets for 2030.
According to the study, a significant gap exists between
projected emissions in 2030 and emissions reductions that
are compatible with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Existing
NDCs are collectively consistent with global warming in the
range of 2.7°C–3.7°C. The gap for limiting the global tempera-
ture increase to 2°C is 11–13.5 gigatonnes of CO2, while the gap
for limiting global warming to 1.5°C is even higher.
From 2014–2018, EU emissions decreased by 3%. Most of
the reductions have taken place in the energy supply sector,
where an 11% drop was seen. However, emissions from trans-
port, agriculture and international aviation have increased over
the last 4 yr. Transport emissions have increased by 7%, or 60
metric MMt, as compared to 2013, mainly due to growing emis-
sions from road transport. Emissions from industrial processes
have varied from year to year, showing no clear trend.15 The
historical dysfunction of the EU’s Emissions Trading System
(ETS) has contributed to the lack of clarity and drive for emis-
sions reductions.
Emissions trading uncertainty. The EU ETS, which came
into force in 2005, is the foundation of EU policy on mitigat-
ing climate change by cost-effectively reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. It is the first multinational cap-and-trade system im-
plemented at the facility level and covers 45% of EU CO2 emis-
sions at nearly 13,000 installations. The 31 countries (i.e., all
28 EU countries plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) that
participate in the ETS account for 20% of global GDP.
The main goal of the EU ETS is to help EU members meet
their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol to limit or reduce
6,000
5,000 2020 GHG target: –20%
4,000
MMt CO2 equivlent
GHG target: –40%
3,000
2,000
Historic GHG emissions
GHG emissions (proxy)
Projections with existing measures
1,000 Projections with additional measures
2030 target: –78.6 Mt CO2 equivalent per year
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
FIG. 13. The EU will miss its 2030 emissions targets.
35
€/metric t, nominal
25
15
5
2008 2016
FIG. 14. CO2 prices could trend higher on ETS reform.
SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION
greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-effective way. The ETS does
this by limiting the overall level of emissions across EU nations
and permitting the trade of emissions allowances. Each allow-
ance gives the emitter the right to emit 1 metric t of CO2.
The ETS has suffered problems since its startup in 2005. Its
emissions caps are too high, international credits have been used
extensively, and economic downturns have been largely respon-
sible for the production and emissions reductions charted by the
system. As a result, a large number of surplus allowances have ac-
cumulated since 2008, weakening the system. So far, the ETS has
not succeeded in making electricity generation from high-pollut-
ing sources like coal more expensive, or spurring low-carbon in-
vestment and technology advances in the industry sector.
According to data released by the EC on April 1, CO2 emis-
sions regulated by the ETS fell an indicative 4% (70 metric
MMt) in 2018, led by reductions in the power generation sector
and helped by slower-than-expected growth in industrial pro-
duction. However, emissions from the 10 largest plants partici-
pating in the ETS—mostly lignite-fueled power plants in Ger-
many and Poland—dropped by only 0.6%.
To combat the flagging ETS system, EU legislators have
pushed through a number of reforms over the past 3 yr. These
reforms include a market stability reserve to remove 1.7 metric
Bt of emissions allowances from the market. The market stabil-
ity reserve, which became operational on 1 January of this year,
aims to make the scheme more resilient to imbalances in the
supply and demand of allowances.
Others simply sell you a product –
we offer a solution.
OHL Gutermuth
A control and shut off technique you can rely on.
2050 goal: –80%
2050 goal: –95%
Customized
Valve Design
„MADE IN GERMANY“
alves
ESD Best V 0
5
SOLAR since r1s
POWER Yea
OHL Gutermuth Industrial Valves GmbH
Helmershäuser Str. 9+12 · 63674 Altenstadt / Germany
2020 2025 2030
Phone +49.60 47. 80 06-0 · Fax +49.60 47.80 06-29
www.ohl-gutermuth.de · og@ohl-gutermuth.de
Gas Processing | MAY/JUNE 2019 27
SPECIAL FOCUS: PIPELINES AND TRANSPORTATION
Although the CO2 price had been hovering at around €7/
metric t for several years, it rose sharply in 2017/2018 and is
anticipated to increase further (FIG. 14). This provides more in-
centive to push coal off the power grid.
In an alternative scenario, however, the surplus of CO2 al-
lowances could grow through 2030, despite the recent ETS re-
forms. Economic growth has the highest bearing on the health
of the ETS system; therefore, sluggish growth would have a
significant negative impact on ETS trading. Another potential
problem is the “waterbed effect,” wherein national legislation to
cut emissions from the power sector simply results in allowanc-
es being transferred between emissions cutters in one country
and allowance buyers in another. Also, a no-deal Brexit would
unleash a flood of unneeded CO2 allowances on the market.
Any of these scenarios would weigh on CO2 prices and stall the
recent progress made by the ETS.
The takeaway from all this is that Paris Agreement signato-
ries are floundering in their commitments, the EU included.
The ETS could easily be knocked down again, after recently
struggling to its feet. Cleaner energy in the form of gas and re-
newables, along with more aggressive reductions in coal use,
will be needed to get emissions reductions back on track and
prevent a catastrophic rise in global temperature of above 2°C.
GAS AS A SUPPLEMENT TO RENEWABLE ENERGY
Some European nations are rich in hydrocarbon and renew-
able energy reserves, while others have few. At one end of the
spectrum, France produces 90% of its electricity from renew-
able sources (including nuclear); at the other, Poland produces
less than 15% from renewables. The Netherlands, home of the
windmill, generates 40% of its power from gas but still relies
heavily on coal.
Gas is an important backup for solar and wind power, as the
sun does not always shine and the wind does not always blow.
Furthermore, LNG-powered ships could assist in Europe’s fight
against climate change, as LNG produces up to 80% less emis-
sions than fuel oil. In the EU, €135 MM have already been in-
vested in LNG maritime projects under the Motorways of the
Sea initiative.
However, renewable power generation is displacing both gas
and coal in Europe. Last year, renewable energy made up 37% of
Germany’s power demand, overtaking coal for the first time. Re-
newables accounted for 35% of the UK’s power generation, with
coal falling to a low of 5%. Overall, Europe’s primary coal demand
slid 2.6% in 2018. Gas use for power generation also decreased
last year, although this was partly due to lower heating demand.
Recent studies suggest that biomethane and hydrogen use will
play larger—and cheaper—roles than previously expected in Eu-
rope’s energy use through 2050, particularly for heating and elec-
tricity. Furthermore, the electrification of transportation (and
possibly heating) could result in an 85% increase in power de-
mand across the region through 2040, by which time renewables
could satisfy more than 60% of Europe’s total power supply.16
HOW WILL EUROPE BALANCE ITS GAS EQUATION?
While dwindling, the age of coal is not yet over in Europe
with some countries, notably Germany and Poland, facing large
socioeconomic challenges. As yet, renewables and gas have had
little impact on the transport sector. Oil is here for decades, al-
28 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
beit in reducing quantities. The near-term future will see growth
in two energy sources: gas and renewable energy.
While the use of renewables in power generation has grown
significantly, it is from a small base. That renewables can displace
all fossil fuels within 40 yr is inconceivable. For the time being,
gas and renewable energy will work in a pincer movement to
displace first coal in power generation, and then oil in transport.
Europe’s gas will arrive by pipeline, often from Russia; it will
also arrive by ship. Perhaps Europe will also wake up to recog-
nize the large volumes of shale gas under its feet. New drilling
and extraction technology developments may help develop
shale formations in Europe at lower cost in the future.
Uncertainty of supply from Russia is perhaps the key vari-
able in Europe’s gas equation over the short term. Large growth
is needed in LNG regasification facilities to counter the risk of
Russian dependency. Investment in the construction of new
regasification terminals and LNG bunkering facilities presents
a major opportunity for Europe’s supply chain of contractors,
consultants, technology and equipment suppliers.
The world’s politicians have met every year for 25 yr; they
have made agreements, issued communiques, set targets and
consistently failed—although the EU less than any. The solu-
tions to climate change do not rest with politicians, but with
engineers and scientists. They must educate politicians, and
work to develop and commercialize the next generation of low-
carbon technologies.
The change will be led by Europe’s integrated energy com-
panies. They are not the problem, as perceived by some, but
rather the solution. Total, Shell and BP are already taking large
strides. They need the help of the best engineers and scien-
tists. What do they offer in return? Quite simply, the greatest
of challenges and the greatest of opportunities: The opportu-
nity to save the planet. GP
NOTE
This paper was presented at the GPA Europe Spring Conference in May 2019
Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
LITERATURE CITED
1
“Natural gas glut weighs on European energy Q2 outlook,” Platts, 29 March
2019.
Complete literature cited available online at GasProcessingNews.com.
ADRIENNE BLUME is Editor of Gas Processing & LNG and
Executive Editor of Hydrocarbon Processing at Gulf Energy
Information in Houston, Texas. She has more than 15 yr of
experience in energy media. She speaks and moderates at
energy conferences and events around the world and is
published in several industry journals. She also sits on the
advisory board of GasPro, an annual technology-focused event
held in Houston, and provides key support for the Eastern Mediterranean Gas
Conference (Cyprus) and Women’s Global Leadership in Energy Conference
(Houston and Vienna). Ms. Blume holds an MA degree in English and Publishing
from Rosemont College in Rosemont, Pennsylvania, as well as BA degrees in
English and Anthropology from Webster University in St. Louis, Missouri.
MALCOLM HARRISON, a retired chemical engineer, in 2014 set up
Harisiti Ltd., a company that trains and coaches people who have
recently joined the energy industry. He is also a PetroSkills/John
M. Campbell Instructor and delivers the flagship “gas conditioning
and processing” course. Mr. Harrison also manages the affairs of
GPA Europe Ltd. He worked for BP, BOC, Foster Wheeler and the
BG Group, with experience spanning research to building large
energy, refining and petrochemical projects. He holds a first-class BEng degree from
the University of Bradford and an MBA degree from Kingston Business School.
 COMPRESSORS

Predict centrifugal compressor

performance in off-design condition
M. DI FEBO and P. PAGANINI, International Power Components Srl, Giussano, Italy

Centrifugal compressors are vital components within process

Inlet conditions 1
plants. The capability to detect early indicators of malfunctions in
these machines, and to identify and understand their causes and Gas mixture
p1 , T1 composition
possible remedies in a timely way, helps minimize overall opera- mix (x1 ,..., x1 ,...xn)
tional costs. This trend is known as predictive maintenance. For
common centrifugal machines, predictive techniques are applied
to the vibrational and structural dynamic aspects of machine ro-
tor operation. On the operation floor, machine vibrational pa- Mixing rules Reference performances
rameters are measured and compared to acceptable limits and Po
used mainly for alarm triggering.
EOS
solution
Predictive maintenance for compressors. Predictive strat-
egies based on performance analysis are a tool for diagnosing Aeromechanical compressor
and evaluating machine health status during operation. For Gas mix model
thermodynamic p = C[ϕ Mu]
centrifugal pumps, for instance, the use of machine modeling to properties
compare measured performance and design performance is rel- calculation
atively easy and straightforward. For centrifugal compressors, 110
100
however, the same process is more complex due to the depen-
Pressure, bara

90
80 420
410
dency of compressor performance on the gas mix composition 70
Temperature, °k

400
60 390
50
and the operational inlet conditions (i.e., pressure and tempera- 2,000 4,000 6,000
Flow mch
8,000
380
370 Compressor performances for
360
350 inlet conditions 1
ture). An approach based on performance assessment for cen- Gas mix mole fraction
Ethane - C2H6
2,000 4,000 6,000
Flow mch
8,000
P1
trifugal compressors requires a more complex machine model. I-butane - C4H1O
Methane - CH4
N-butane - C4H1O
Analyzing the operating performance of centrifugal com- Nitrogen - N2
Propane - C3H6

pressors requires the ability to adjust the compressor perfor-

mance map to actual inlet conditions. Expected performance is
described in graphs of discharge pressure, discharge tempera-
ture, polytropic head, efficiency and absorbed power. However,
inlet conditions in the field may be different from the specifica-
tions defined on machine data sheets.
One practice attempts to reduce the complexity of this dis-
parity by considering the compressor head as invariant with re-
spect to inlet gas conditions, and applying simplified machine
formulas. This method works for very-low-pressure ranges and
constant gas mixes, but it introduces errors with rising pressure
and gas mix variability. In this situation, it is necessary to adjust
the compressor design performance to operating performance
and compare the results to measured values. This is basically
the approach indicated in ASME’s Performance Test Code on
Compressors and Exhausters 10 (PTC 10) standard.
A general method and calculation tool for the prediction of
centrifugal compressor field performance in off-design condi-
tion is presented here. All numerical evaluations executed with
Cmap software have been developed using thermodynamic
theories and machine aeromechanical models, in accordance
with ASME’s PTC 10.
FIG. 1. Diagram illustrating how Cmap works.
Process description. An explanation of the calculation pro-
cess used to evaluate compressor performance is needed for a
baseline. For a centrifugal compressor, performance is strongly
linked to inlet gas conditions. This consideration is valid for
both design and off-design performance.
Data to be used as a starting point include the centrifugal com-
pressor performance curve, the relevant gas mix composition
and the thermodynamic conditions (pressure and temperature).
After entering these data, the software calculates the expected
compressor performance for inlet pressure, inlet temperature
and gas mix composition for the design and reference scenarios.
Calculation algorithms are able to predict both machine behavior
and thermodynamic real gas properties in off-design conditions.
TABLE 1 shows a typical list of gas components to be configured.
From a fluid dynamics point of view, it is necessary to
achieve strict similarity of flow at each performance point. For
this reason, the parameters of head coefficient, flow coefficient
and Mach number must be conserved. The proposed method
requires the following inputs:
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 29
COMPRESSORS

• Reference/design compressor maps. In general, these indication of machine capability and are considered
maps (provided by the machine OEM) give a reliable as a starting point. Expected performance maps are
usually issued in the commercial/design stage, and
TABLE 1. Gas components analyzed in compressor test performance maps are issued at the end of the
performance calculation manufacturing process, after the compressor has been
Item Chemical name Symbol shop or field tested. The data from either map may be
used as inputs for the method, although “tested” maps
1 Acetylene C2H2
may be preferable.
2 Ammonia NH3 • Reference input conditions. Reference/design maps are
3 Argon Ar linked to specific inlet conditions, such as inlet pressure,
4 Benzene C6H6 inlet temperature and gas mix composition. This set of
data is needed to understand off-design calculations.
5 Iso-butane C4H10
• Off-design input conditions. These conditions at
6 n-Butane C4H10 the compressor inlet (pressure, temperature and gas
7 Iso-butylene C4H8 mix composition) indicate a new performance. Off-
8 Carbon dioxide CO2 design conditions can be considered for alternative inlet
parameters in the compressor design stage, or they may
9 Carbon monoxide CO
be the actual inlet conditions at some point during the
10 Chlorine Cl2 compressor operation.
11 n-Decane C10H22 Starting from the inputs described above, the compressor
12 Ethane C2H6 performance in off-design inlet conditions is calculated. Per-
formance referenced as “off-design condition” is design per-
13 Ethyl acohol C2H5OH
14 Ethylene C2H4
110
15 Helium He
16 n-Heptane C7H16 100
17 n-Hexane C6H14
90
Discharge pressure, bara

18 Hydrogen H2
n1 = 6,825 rpm
19 Hydrogen chloride HCL 80
20 Hydrogen sulfide H2S
21 Methane CH4 70 n2 = 6,485 rpm
22 Methyl alcohol CH3OH n3 = 5,850 rpm
60 n4 = 5,200 rpm
23 Nitrogen N2
n5 = 4,550 rpm
24 n-Nonane C9H2O 50
2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000
25 Iso-Pentane C5H12
Flow, m3/hr
26 n-Pentane C5H12
FIG. 2. Design map for Compressor 1 showing discharge pressure vs.
27 n-Octane C8H18
inlet flow.
28 Oxygen O2
29 Propane C3H8 380

30 Propylene C3H6 360

31 Sulfur dioxide SO2 340
32 Water vapor H2O n1 = 11,235 rpm
320
Discharge pressure, bara

33 1-Butene C4H8 300

34 2-Butene C4H8 n2 = 10,700 rpm
280
35 1.3 Butadiene C4H6 n3 = 9,630 rpm
260
36 Ethyl chloride C2H5Cl
240 n4 = 8,560 rpm
37 Methyl chloride CH3Cl
220 n5 = 8,025 rpm
38 Pentylene C5H10
200
39 Propadiene (allene) C3H4 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400
Inlet flow, m3/hr
40 Methyl acetylene (propyne) C3H4
41 Toluene C7H8 FIG. 3. Design map for Compressor 2 showing discharge pressure vs.
42 Freon R134a CH2FCF3 inlet flow.

30 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
 and avoid pain relievers altogether.
Call KOBELCO first
FOR THE CURE
in the morning.
and call KOBELCO.
Take a couple of aspirin
TEMPORARY RELIEF
manufacture a custom engineered compressor package that can be delivered and serviced anywhere in the world.
Simply stated, we know compressors. After consulting with you on the required specifications, Kobelco will
•T k

Houston Office: sales@kobelco-kca.com p. (713) 655-0015 f. (713) 982-8450

Providing our clients with the best possible solution and service is our top priority.

KOBELCO has been curing gas compressor headaches for almost 100 years.
n
•H
n Tx

Kobelco Compressors America, Inc.

• M ni h
rm n
•

TEMPORARY RELIEF
r n

Take a couple of aspirin

and call KOBELCO.
in

in the morning.
FOR THE CURE
r

Call KOBELCO first

•D

and avoid pain relievers altogether.

KOBELCO has been curing gas compressor headaches for almost 100 years.
i

Simply stated, we know compressors. After consulting with you on the required specifications, Kobelco will
. A. E.

manufacture a custom engineered compressor package that can be delivered and serviced anywhere in the world.
Providing our clients with the best possible solution and service is our top priority.

Kobelco Compressors America, Inc.

Houston Office: sales@kobelco-kca.com p. (713) 655-0015 f. (713) 982-8450

• Tokyo, Japan • Houston, Texas • Munich, Germany • Jurong, Singapore • Dubai, U. A. E.

COMPRESSORS

formance adjusted to off-design operational conditions. When conditions. These calculations are intimately connected with
reference is made to off-design performance in off-design op- the thermodynamics of gas compression and real gas mixtures,
erational conditions during operation, this performance is re- which means that variations in gas mixture components, pres-
ferred to as “actual” performance. sure or temperature can manifest with significant effects. The
Calculation of off-design performance requires extraction of connections among these different modeling areas allow the
invariant information related to the compressor behavior. This calculation method to provide an accurate prediction of com-
information is then used to rebuild the performance under new pressor performance.
The method does not require information about the ma-
chine internals. In this sense, it should not be considered as a
TABLE 2. Inlet design gas conditions for Compressor 1
design tool, but more correctly as an analysis tool (FIG. 1).
Condition Measurement
Pressure 40.2 bara Case studies: Performance in off-design condition. The
Temperature 50°C
compressors under study were running in off-design inlet
conditions. The analysis developed with Cmap allowed the
Gas mixture (19.24 g/mole)
machine operators to obtain compressor performance pa-
• Methane 80.51% rameters in off-design conditions, and to compare these per-
• Nitrogen 1.46% formance parameters to measured field values. Compressor
• Ethane 14.69%
performance maps for the design condition were available for
both machines.
• Propane 3.19%
• i-Butane 0.07%
TABLE 5. Inlet off-design gas conditions for Compressor 2
• n-Butane 0.08%
Condition Measurement
Pressure 154 bara
TABLE 3. Inlet design gas conditions for Compressor 2
Temperature 30°C
Condition Measurement
Gas mixture (20.1 g/mole)
Pressure 150 bara
• Methane 83.7%
Temperature 37°C
• Nitrogen 1.1%
Gas mixture (19.1 g/mole)
• Ethane 4.7%
• Methane 87%
• Propane 2.8%
• Nitrogen 1.2%
• i-Butane 0.4%
• Ethane 3.5%
• n-Butane 0.4%
• Propane 0.8%
• Carbon dioxide 4%
• i-Butane 0.5%
• i-Pentane 0.5%
• n-Butane 0.5%
• n-Pentane 0.2%
• Carbon dioxide 4.5%
• n-Octane 0.3%
• i-Pentane 0.1%
• Hydrogen sulfide 1.9%
• n-Pentane 0.1%
• n-Octane 0.1% 110
• Hydrogen sulfide 1.7%
100
Off-design condition
TABLE 4. Inlet off-design conditions for Compressor 1 90
n = 6,485 rpm
Discharge pressure, bara

Condition Measurement
Design condition
80
Pressure 43 bara
Temperature 47°C
70
Gas mixture (19.6 g/mole)
• Methane 78% 60
• Nitrogen 0.5%
50
• Ethane 17.9% 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000
• Propane 3.5% Inlet flow, m3/hr

• i-Butane 0.03% FIG. 4. Comparison of discharge pressures between design and off-
• n-Butane 0.07% design conditions for Compressor 1.

32 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
A PROCESS
PERFECTED
FROM THE START
From the foundry to the field, our American-made
compressors are built to maximize uptime for your fleet.
We maintain exacting standards in our state-of-the-art
manufacturing process, resulting in the best compressors
in the industry. Ariel manufactures quality!
COMPRESSORS

FIG. 2 and FIG. 3 show the design maps (discharge pressure vs.
inlet flow) for Compressor 1 and Compressor 2. TABLE 2 shows
the inlet design gas conditions for Compressor 1, and TABLE 3
shows the inlet design gas conditions for Compressor 2.
The expected performance curves in the off-design condi-
tions were also calculated.
TABLE 4 shows the off-design inlet conditions for Compressor
1, and TABLE 5 shows the off-design inlet conditions for Compres-
sor 2. FIG. 4 compares the performance curves (discharge pres-
sure vs. inlet flow) in the design and off-design conditions.
The Cmap software calculated, at the actual flow, the values
of expected pressure, temperature, head and efficiency in the
actual (off-design) conditions, and then compared these val-
ues to the measured ones. With reference to the field values,
400
380
Off design condition
TABLE 6 compares the pressures and temperatures, as read from
the transducers, to the values predicted by the Cmap software.
The same comparison has been executed for head and poly-
tropic efficiency. Note: In previous tables, the maximum error
calculated for Compressor 1 is less than 1%, while the error cal-
culated for Compressor 2 is approximately 9%.
The Cmap analysis indicates that the operating performance
of Compressor 1 was aligned with design expectations. Com-
pressor 2, however, was not performing in alignment with de-
sign expectations. This comparison gives an important quanti-
tative indication of the machine health status.
The analysis also allowed machine operators to obtain an eval-
uation of the efficiency deviation—the difference between the
actual compressor efficiency and the expected efficiency in the
operating condition. Time trends for the calculation results pro-
vided a useful analytical basis for compressor maintenance deci-
sions. The method has been profitably used to predict compres-
sor performance and support machinery maintenance planning.

360
n = 10,700 rpm TABLE 6. Actual pressure and temperature values compared
Discharge pressure, bara

to values from Cmap

340 Compressor 1
Property Field Cmap predicted Percentage
Design condition
320 value value error
Discharge pressure, bara 98 97.6 + 0.4
300 Discharge temperature, °C 122 123 – 0.8
Compressor 2
280
800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 Property Field Cmap predicted Percentage
Inlet flow, m3/hr value value error

FIG. 5. Comparison of discharge pressures between design and off- Discharge pressure, bara 240.5 263.7 – 8.8
design conditions for Compressor 2. Discharge temperature, °C 99 102 – 2.9

FIG. 6. Screenshot of compressor performance prediction in Cmap 2.0.

34 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
 COMPRESSORS

Cmap allows compressor performance predictions to be made
(FIG. 6), using different equations of state (EOS) and different gas
mixtures. For hydrocarbon gas mixtures, the Lee–Kesler method
or the Peng–Robinson EOS can be used. For freon R134a, the
modified Benedict–Webb–Rubin EOS is selected to determine
the thermodynamic properties of the operating fluid.
Recommendations. Experience with real machinery showed
that compressor performance predictions obtained with Cmap
software are in good alignment with OEM predictions and field
measurements for machines in good condition. Experience also
showed that, in most cases, the deviation of some parameter
(e.g., efficiency) indicates the likelihood of an impending prob-
lem with the machine.
The proposed calculation method may be used in a fully au-
tomated way and could provide significant benefits, especially
for machines that work in high-pressure and very-high-pressure
ranges, and under process conditions with rapid time variances.
The automated application of Cmap presents the possibility of
continuous monitoring of machine performance and, therefore,
testing at GE Nuovo Pignone.
offers automated surveillance and diagnostic capabilities. Pro-
tection of the compressor from surge can be automatically and
continuously updated to correspond with actual inlet condi-
tions, thereby overcoming the limitations of actual systems.
Methods described in this article offer a number of solutions
for various capabilities:
• Predict the performance of a centrifugal compressor in
off-design condition accurately, even at high pressures,
when the ideal gas commonly used introduces
considerable errors.
• Predict the modification of surge points in actual
operating conditions, with different inlet pressure and
temperatures and different gas mixtures, to implement
advanced protection from surge.
• Obtain useful indications (diagnostics) on the health
of the compressor, based on the ability to analyze the
performance and efficiency of the machine in a simple
and immediate way.
• Support decisions and planning for predictive
maintenance activity. GP
MASSIMILIANO DI FEBO is the Operation Manager for
International Power Components (IPC Srl). He holds an MS
degree in mechanical engineering and is a registered
Professional Engineer in the province of Bari, Italy. Mr. Di Febo
has more than 15 yr of industry experience, working with
specifications, applications, installations, diagnostics and
maintenance for IPC and having conducted centrifugal pump
PASQUALE PAGANINI is Technical Manager for IPC Srl. He holds
an MS degree in mechanical engineering and specializes in
thermodynamics and energy systems. He is a registered
Professional Engineer in the province of Bari, Italy. He has more
than 15 yr of experience in the automotive industry (testing,
instrumentation, manufacturing and quality), as well as
experience working with specifications and applications for IPC.

LIVE WEBCAST:
Tuesday, June 18, 2019 | 10 a.m. CDT / 3 p.m. UTC

Sami Tabaza
Gas Processing Market Manager
Atlas Copco
Reliable Operations & Saving OPEX for Gas Plant
Refrigeration—Selecting the right technologies
By selecting integrally geared turbocompressors for gas plant refrigeration duty
coupled with a mag bearing turboexpander, operators get the added values of
technology with highly reliable operations and reduced OPEX. Join Sami Tabaza
and Chris Blackmer from Atlas Copco Gas and Process for a presentation followed
by Q&A surrounding the turbocompressor and turboexpander technologies that can
Chris Blackmer efficiently and reliably fit your gas plant design and operation to get the advantages
Product Manager
Atlas Copco of both technologies.
Register for Free:
GasProcessingNews.com/Webcasts

Adrienne Blume
Editor
Gas Processing & LNG Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 35
 The Premier Event for the
Worlds Gas, LNG and
Energy Industry

gastechevent.com

Secure Your place at the World’s

Largest Gas, LNG & Energy Exhibition
At the forefront of the global energy value chain, Gastech hosts major IOCs, NOCs, global utility companies,
EPC contractors, shipbuilders, pipeline companies, manufacturers and technology providers, and service
companies for progressive discussions, business transactions and cross sector collaboration.

35,000 700 20 100 55,000

International International Exhibiting Countries SQM Exhibition
Attendees Exhibitors from Country Representing Space
the Up, Mid & Pavilions the Global Gas
Downstream Value Chain
Sectors

Purchasing Power of Visitors to Gastech*

80%
49 51
attendees to Gastech

% % Of Exhibition Space
*Survey of 2018

Already sold

Up to US$50M Up to US$50M & Above

Stand & Sponsorship Bookings Are Now Open

Contact us to find your ideal location, stand and sponsorship opportunities based
on your budget and objectives.

Alternatively email us sales@gastechevent.com or visit our

website www.gastechevent.com

Co-Hosted by Supported by Official Partner Organised by


Efficiency improvements in liquefaction
using vortex feed gas precooling
L. TUNKEL and R. GALE, Universal Vortex, Princeton, New Jersey
In today’s competitive energy environment, low-cost LNG
from North America, the Middle East and Russia/CIS is the
most economic way for energy-disadvantaged countries and
remote areas throughout the world to reduce their dependency
on higher-cost and dirtier fossil fuels. LNG terminals have been
around in various capacities for decades, with only incremental
improvements in the technology.
These facilities require significant energy consumption in
the refrigeration/liquefaction process to bring gas temperatures
to cryogenic liquid levels. Using its existing proprietary tech-
nology, one company has developed a solution to reduce the
energy required to make LNG by up to 62%, using the available
pressure differential off the incoming gas transmission line to
cool the incoming gas stream.
Natural gas conversion to LNG takes place at a gas tempera-
ture of –260°F (–162°C) and a pressure of approximately 4 psig
(0.28 bar). The large energy consumption associated with LNG
production can be substantially reduced by placing the LNG
plant in close proximity to a pipeline pressure letdown facility
(e.g., gate station or wellhead) and utilizing the available cool-
ing load ( Joule-Thomson temperature drop of the pressure-reg-
ulated main pipeline gas flow) to precool the LNG feed before it
enters the battery limits of the LNG plant.
Technology approach. Conventionally, the practical applica-
tion of this cooling load is complicated by the possibility of the
depressurized gas turning a standard pressure regulator into an
“ice ball,” restricting flow. The core technology eliminates this
obstacle by securing a non-freeze pressure reduction of non-
dried, non-preheated gas.
The core of the approach is a proprietary vortex tube that does
not freeze because it is self-heating. The vortex tube performs as
a pressure regulator of the main pipeline gas flow, or a portion of
the main flow, where the vortex tube, configured as a dual-stream
(hot/cold outlets) unit, chills the LNG plant’s feed gas, using the
vortex cold outlet flow. The gas temperature has been reduced
by both the Joule-Thomson and vortex phenomenon. The self-
heating vortex solution has been implemented in more than
4,000 installations globally across the natural gas industry, from
wellheads to conventional pressure regulation stations (PRSs),
farm taps, and in CNG cooling and pressure reduction.
The vortex tube in FIG. 1 is a custom cylindrical device with
no moving parts. In the tube, the high-pressure gas expands
in the tangential inlet nozzles down to the delivery pressure.
While in the vortex tube’s cylindrical section, the rotating, low-
LNG TECHNOLOGY
FIG. 1. Proprietary dual-flow self-heating vortex tube.
pressure gas undergoes energy division (vortex phenomenon),
forming two currents: the cold, located in the tube’s center, and
the hot, at the unit’s periphery close to the vortex tube’s walls.
The cold and hot currents exit the vortex tube separately via the
cold and hot outlets. The patented self-heating (non-freeze)
vortex tube has been in service in the natural gas industry for
nearly 20 yr.
In the self-heating vortex tube, the hot gas is used to warm
the unit inlet nozzles (spot heating) prior to exiting the tube,
thereby eliminating the likelihood of depressurizing gas freez-
ing (self-heating provision). This provision makes the vortex
tube technology unique among vortex devices.
The intensity of the vortex energy division is roughly pro-
portional to the ratio of the vortex tube inlet and outlet pres-
sures and is unaffected by the gas flowrate through the unit. The
actual temperatures of the vortex tube cold and hot outlet are
expressed as shown in Eqs. 1 and 2:
T cold = T inlet – ∆T Joule-Thomson
– ∆T (vortex, cold) (1)
T hot = T inlet – ∆T Joule-Thomson
+ ∆T (vortex, hot) (2)
A valve at the tube’s hot outlet is used to set a desirable ratio
between the tube cold and hot outputs to fine-tune the vortex
cooling load to maximize the net effect.
The self-heating vortex tube provides for efficient phase
separation in the non-dried vortex inlet gas flow. Water/hy-
drocarbon droplets, which either enter a tube with inlet gas or
condense in the tube’s central, low-energy (cooled) area, are
coalesced in a highly turbulent vortex flow and are then sepa-
rated (centrifuged) at the vortex tube hot periphery to evapo-
rate. Therefore, the vortex tube cold outlet exits the tube as a
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 37
LNG TECHNOLOGY

one-phase flow, dried to a low dewpoint; the tube’s hot outlet cold outlet under the aforementioned gas pressures and the es-
in pipeline applications is, generally, also a single-phase stream. tablished vortex cold/hot flows ratio is 80°F.
However, in vortex LNG feed precooled wellhead applications, With the added Joule-Thomson temperature drop value and
the tube’s hot outlet may still carry some liquid hydrocarbons the arranged recuperation created in the tube cooling duty, the
and water, and therefore shall be phase separated. gas temperature at the tube cold outlet drops as low as –99.6°F
A conceptual flow diagram of the vortex LNG feed precool- (a 179.6°F temperature decrease from the original 80°F), and
ing system at a typical city gate with typical flow and pressure pa- the LNG feed (10 MMsft3d) heat exchanged with the pressure-
rameters is shown in FIG. 2. In this arrangement, the vortex flow regulated PRS gate station gas is chilled to –87°F (–66°C). The
is a portion of the total pipeline gas flowrate. The self-heating –87°F, 1,000-psi gas is directed to the LNG plant.
vortex tube performance characteristics are calculated by UVI. The net energy efficiency benefit of the vortex LNG feed
precooling, which reduces the LNG feed temperature from
Single-stage LNG feed gas precooling. A hydrological pro- 80°F to –87°F, can be expressed as follows: –87°F – (–262°F)
cess simulation of the proprietary vortex LNG feed precooling ÷ 80°F – (–262°F) = 0.51. The energy savings in this case is
system at a city gate, utilizing the available gas pressure differen- 100% – 51% = 49%.
tial, is shown in FIG. 3.
The self-heating vortex tube in FIG. 3 operates as a primary Two-stage LNG feed gas precooling. The intensity of en-
pressure regulator under inlet and outlet pressures of 1,000 ergy division in a vortex tube at a fixed value of the inlet gas flow
psi and 45 psi, respectively, and is designed for a flowrate of 90 split is proportionate to the vortex tube inlet to outlet gas pres-
MMsft3h (9/10 of the total PRS flow capacity). The tube is set sure ratio. However, with a gas pressure ratio increase, the abso-
to split its inlet flow into a 60% (cold outlet) to 40% (hot out- lute value of the gas temperature increment (added ΔT cold and
let) proportion; this split produces the greatest possible vortex ΔT hot) steadily decreases.
cooling duty. The net “vortex” temperature drop in the tube Therefore, in cases when a large gas pressure differential
is available at an application site and the application goal is to
Pressure regulation maximize the gas temperature drop, it is more beneficial to ar-
Upstream pipeline gas station Downstream pipeline gas range a two-stage vortex tube operation in which each tube op-
54 bar, 7°C 7 bar, 7°C erates under a pressure ratio provided with a high thermal yield.
Gas
preheater In such an arrangement, the cold outlet of a first-stage tube per-
Dryer Combined forms as an inlet to a second-stage tube.
LNG feed VT outlet
Cold gas 54 bar, 7°C 7 bar, 9°C A process simulation of vortex LNG feed precooling at a
7 bar, -57°C
Heat exchanger city gate in a two-stage vortex cooling arrangement, using the
outlined case study data, is shown in FIG. 4. In the two-stage
LNG feed scenario, the self-heating vortex tube units, each set up for the
54 bar, -52°C 60:40 inlet gas flow split, collectively operate as a primary pres-
Votex
tube sure regulator, reducing gas pressure from 1,000 psi to 200 psi
Hot gas (first stage) and from 200 psi to 45 psi (second stage). The ther-
7 bar, 34°C
mally efficient gas pressure ratio of 5, maintained in both stages,
FIG. 2. Vortex LNG feed precooling system conceptual flow diagram.
provides approximately 60°F of “net” vortex temperature drop
in each stage.
Residue
15 to LP pipeline Residue to LP pipeline
Temperature 53.68 °F
17 Mix-100 Pressure 45 psig
MR LNG plant summary Recyle-1 Molar flow 90 MMsft3d
Total BHP 2,214 hp MR LNG
plant
BHP + gear loss 2,454 hp summary Fuel
Specific power (KW-hr/gal) 0.3903 16 Temperature 75.18 °F
Fuel
6 1 Vortex Pressure 14.30 psig
LNG-101 tube 2
Q-102 Molar flow 0.6743 MMsft3d
T
LNG product
Cold MR LNG
Pipeline gas fraction plant Temperature -251 °F
5 3 2 LNG product Pressure 15.3 psig
Treat/ Molar flow 9.225 MMsft3d
E-101 dehydration
Pipeline gas 5 Q-100 TEE-102 LNG feed
Temperature 80 °F Temperature 80 °F Temperature -87 °F
Pressure 1,000 psig Pressure 1,000 psig Contaminants Pressure 961 psig
Molar flow 100 MMsft3d Molar flow 10 MMsft3d 4 Molar flow 9.899 MMsft3d
LNG feed
LNG-100

FIG. 3. Vortex LNG feed precooling system simulation at a city gate station.

38 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
 LNG TECHNOLOGY

Residue
7 to LP pipeline Residue to LP pipeline
13
Temperature 70.691 °F
Hot fraction Mix-101 Pressure 35 psig
MR LNG plant summary 10 Molar flow 90 MMsft3d
Total BHP: 1,546 hp MR LNG
plant Mix-100 9
BHP + gear loss 1,786 hp summary Fuel
Specific power (KW-hr/gal) 0.284 JT-1 16
Fuel Temperature 76.31 °F
6 11 Vortex Pressure 14.3 psig
LNG-101 Q-101 tube 1 HP-2 Molar flow 0.6743 MMsft3d
JT-2 1 T
Cold fraction Vortex LNG product
tube 2 MR LNG
Pipeline gas Q-102 plant Temperature –251 °F
5 3 2 LNG product Pressure 15.3 psig
Treat/ Molar flow 9.225 MMsft3d
E-101 dehydration CF-2
Pipeline gas 5 Q-101 LNG feed
Temperature 80 °F Temperature 80 °F Temperature –130 °F
Pressure 1,000 psig Pressure 1,000 psig Contaminants Pressure 961 psig
Molar flow 100 MMsft3d Molar flow 10 MMsft3d 4 Molar flow 9.899 MMsft3d
LNG feed
LNG-100

FIG. 4. Two-stage vortex LNG simulation at a city gate station.

The total (vortex and Joule-Thomson) two-stage chilling,
supplemented with recuperation of the cooling duty, brings the
gas temperature of the second vortex tube cold outlet to –155°F
(total –235°F gas temperature change from the original 80°F at
the inlet). The LNG feed (10 MMsft3d, as in the vortex single-
stage case) heat exchanged with the pressure-regulated city gate
gas is chilled to –130°F (90°C). Finally, the –130°F, 1,000-psi
gas is directed to the LNG plant.
The net energy efficiency of two-stage vortex LNG feed
precooling by reducing LNG feed temperature from 80°F to
–130°F can be expressed as follows: –130°F – (–262°F) ÷
80°F – (–262°F) = 0.38, or 62% energy savings. Note: At a
PRS inlet gas temperature of less than the 80°F indicated in
this model, the LNG feed gas temperature would be propor-
tionally lower.
This vortex solution for decreasing the cost of LNG produc-
tion can be used at almost any PRS, including wellheads (on-
shore and offshore), provided that the LNG plant’s feed gas
is a fraction of the pipeline’s pressure-regulated gas flow. The
system must have a place to dump pressure-reduced gas down-
stream of the PRS.
In addition to the direct benefit of the vortex LNG feed gas
precooling technology, ancillary benefits emerge:
• At a pipeline PRS equipped with a line heater, the vortex
LNG feed gas precooling system set up as a bypass of the
main gas flow reduces the amount of high-pressure gas
to be preheated upstream of pressure regulation.
• At a wellhead with glycol treatment of high-pressure gas,
the vortex LNG system reduces the amount of inhibitor
injected into the gas.
Utilizing the vortex LNG feed gas precooling technology,
operators can significantly reduce the cost of their plants (on
a per-ton of LNG product basis) due to the reduced amount
of chilling needed, thereby increasing the economic viability of
such projects. For new plant applications, this will result in de-
creased costs for the liquefaction train design due to the smaller
temperature drop required to reach the critical –262°F LNG
temperature, or result in increased throughput/liquefaction ca-
pacity if all else is kept equal.
Fully scalable, this technology can be applied to micro-LNG
systems, mini-LNG, peakshaving and world-scale export LNG
plants. The only limiting factor of the technology is the avail-
ability of a downstream outlet for “hot” pressure-reduced gas.
The vortex LNG feed gas precooling system has obvious
economic and environmental impact benefits to any appli-
cable natural gas liquefaction project. In today’s competitive
market, all substantial economic and environmental improve-
ments should be considered for any new project or retrofit. A
vortex LNG adaptation to existing plants, or as an addition to a
new project, is sure to offer measurable returns to the liquefac-
tion plant. GP
LEV TUNKEL graduated from the Moscow Oil and Gas University
in Moscow, Russia with an MS degree in mechanical engineering
and a PhD in fluid mechanics. He has more than 30 yr of
experience in research and development, process design, and
engineering in gas production and gas transmission operations.
He pioneered the applications of the vortex phenomena for
thermal conditioning of natural gas and other industrial process
gases. Dr. Tunkel has served as Technical Director of Universal Vortex Inc. since
its inception. He has substantially contributed to refining the existing vortex
phenomena applications and to the development of a new concept of energy
saving and “green” vortex CNG and LNG technologies, as well as non-freeze
vortex pressure reducers and vortex heaters. Dr. Tunkel holds more than 20
Russian and US patents in the field, with publications in major professional
magazines published in Russia and the US.
ROSS GALE has served as the Director of Global Sales and
Marketing at Universal Vortex Inc. (UVI) since 2015. Tasked
with growing a small startup natural gas technology firm into
a world-known company with widely used solutions, Mr. Gale
has overseen the expansion of UVI’s customer base across six
continents, serving nearly 4,000 projects worldwide in just
4 yr. Since mid-2018, he has led the commercial development
plan for implementing UVI’s VortexLNG Feed Gas Precooling System. Mr. Gale
has been invited to speak on behalf of UVI at technological and commercial
events in the gas industry worldwide. He comes from an entrepreneurial
international business background, having served as the Director of Acquisitions
for a multinational industrial equipment company. He holds a degree in business
management from Babson College in Wellesley, Massachusetts.

Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 39

 JUNE 11-13, 2019
C A L G A R Y, C A N A D A
NORTH AMERICA’S LEADING ENERGY EVENT

R E G I S T R AT I O N
NOW OPEN!
REGISTER FOR YOUR
COMPLIMENTARY EXPO PASS
GLOBALPETROLEUMSHOW.COM/REGISTER

GPS IN NUMBERS GPS TECHNICAL &

STRATEGIC CONFERENCE
1,000+ 100+ EARLY BIRD
Exhibiting Companies Expert Speakers REGISTRATION
Three Day Technical $
600+
Conference Delegates
460,000+ Conference Pass
695
Gross sq ft

10 30
Three Day Strategic
Conference Pass
$
695
50,000+
NOCs IOCs Attendees

115+ Now offering GPS SUPER

60+
Technical Sessions
Countries PASS - Take advantage of
Represented
everything GPS has to offer!

INCLUDES: $
1495

Three day passes for Technical, Strategic

& CGEF Conference, Strategic Opening
Plenary, daily access to Global Market
Seminar Series and one ticket to GPS
Awards Gala & other networking events

GLOBALPETROLEUMSHOW.COM
Organized by:

Case studies of troubleshooting
amine treating foaming—Part 1
D. ENGEL, Nexo Solutions, Amine Optimization Division, The Woodlands, Texas; B. SPOONER, Sulphur Experts,
Amine Experts, Kemah, Texas; and M. SHEILAN, Sulphur Experts, Amine Experts, Calgary, Canada
Amine solution foaming is a phe-
nomenon that has been intensively stud-
ied and reported. Several foaming root
causes have been determined through-
out the years; however, the latest ex-
periments suggest that the predominant
mechanism for foaming is related to con-
taminants in the form of surface-active
materials, or surfactants.
These contaminants can enter the
unit in solid, liquid or gas phases and
often modify the solution properties in
such a way that foam (in gas contactors)
and emulsions (in liquid-liquid treaters)
are produced, leading to a series of nega-
tive effects that cause solution losses and
hinder the process from meeting specifi-
cations. Determining the source of foam-
ing requires thorough investigation of
several possible sources.
Following is a list of some of the many
contaminants and sources determined to
be the root cause of amine foaming:
• Ineffective inlet separation leading
to contaminant ingress
◦ Pipeline chemicals,
such as corrosion inhibitors,
hydrate inhibitors, fracture fluid
organic acids, dispersants,
soap sticks, etc.
◦ Liquids from pigging
◦ Compressor lubrication oils
• Ingress of gas-phase contaminants
carried with the feed gas
(such as BTEX)
• Hydrocarbon condensation inside
the contactor by not maintaining
an appropriate temperature
differential between lean amine
and inlet gas (or, more accurately,
the hydrocarbon dewpoint)
when processing heavy
hydrocarbon-rich feed gas
• Problems in the activated
carbon bed
TREATING
◦ Incorrect type of activated
carbon (exposed to
phosphorous-based activation)
◦ Spent activated carbon beds
releasing contaminants into
the outlet stream
• High concentration of suspended
solids in the amine
• High soluble iron in the lean amine
(resulting in fast and high solids
formation in the contactor)
• Problems with the antifoam
◦ Incorrect antifoam (some
antifoams will cause foam)
◦ Excess antifoam injection
(excess antifoam use can,
in some cases, stabilize or
induce foam)
• Contaminants present in the
fresh amine and/or makeup water
• Incompatible filter media or
materials of construction
• Cleaning chemicals not properly
flushed before filling system
with amine.
Since amine foam is stabilized by con-
tamination of one type or another, foam-
ing can be eliminated or greatly reduced
in severity and/or frequency if efficient
inlet separation is in place upstream of the
amine contactor. However, if the amine
solution does become contaminated,
then a proper amine filtration system
and activated carbon adsorption beds are
helpful in removing the contaminants.
Using antifoams. Antifoams are com-
monly used to temporarily control the
detrimental effects of foaming; however,
the effectiveness of a given antifoam may
be limited, depending on the type of
antifoam used and where it is injected.
Some plants use antifoams on a regular
basis, but this could harm the solution
and the plant over the long term. Root
cause analysis of foaming and the elimi-
nation of its source are the best ways
to deal with a foaming amine solution.
Nevertheless, antifoam may be required
when sporadic foaming incidents occur
and the source of the foaming agent has
not been identified.
When adding antifoam, plant person-
nel should proceed with caution to keep
the unit under control, especially when
operating at high production rates. The
antifoam will usually separate as a top
layer in the unit flash tank, sump or surge
tank surface. It also can be removed by
certain filters and carbon adsorption
beds (for most types of antifoam); there-
fore, their build-up in the circulating so-
lution can be controlled.
Typical antifoams used in amine ser-
vice fall into the following categories:
silicone-based, silicone esters, polyglycols,
high-molecular-weight alcohols and poly-
alkyl ethoxylates. The correct antifoam for
the system is best determined with onsite
foam testing. Silicone-based antifoams are
perhaps the most effective products, but
at the same time they are least chemically
compatible with amine solvents.
Field experience in amine unit foam-
ing, testing and troubleshooting are
critical factors to better understand the
foaming phenomenon, its origins and
how to combat its effects. Foaming can
be a tricky problem to solve, as it involves
investigation into the chemical, opera-
tional and design aspects of the unit. In
the following case studies, examples are
given of how thorough, disciplined re-
views of some foaming incidents result-
ed in mitigation of foaming problems.
Amine foaming Case 1: The foaming
CSI. A small amine unit in North Amer-
ica processed gas containing 0.07 mol%
hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and 1.6 mol%
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 41
TREATING
carbon dioxide (CO2) with a blended
MDEA solvent. The plant removed the
H2S and CO2 to pipeline specification,
and the acid gas was sent to an iron re-
dox unit for complete removal of H2S
and, subsequently, zero plant emissions.
Since startup after a plant turnaround,
the system experienced foaming epi-
sodes that frequently caused carryover
of amine to the sales gas scrubber and
the occasional regenerator burp of a
small amount of amine into the acid gas
scrubber upstream of the redox unit.
The plant-supplied antifoam appeared to
be effective in knocking down the foam
when the operator added it to the system.
The addition was made to the pump suc-
tion of the lean amine charge pumps. The
treated H2S gas typically sat at about 1
ppmv–2 ppmv; the treated gas CO2 typi-
cally sat at about 1,500 ppmv, both well
within the allowable 16-ppmv H2S spec
and the 2-mol% CO2 spec.
All foaming episodes could be han-
dled during the day while the operator
was onsite, but the plant was left unat-
tended at night, with alarms tied into the
operator’s home a few miles away. Invari-
ably, sometime between midnight and
2 AM, the plant would alarm on a low
surge drum level, resulting in a frantic
drive to the plant to turn on the antifoam
pump to again get absorber bottoms re-
turns and subsequent flow to the almost-
empty surge drum. A few problems with
handling the large influx of liquids in the
absorber sump and flash drum were ob-
served, but careful monitoring and con-
trol helped the plant get back on line.
After spending an hour or so to check
that the plant had levelled out, the op-
erator went home to try to get a couple
hours of sleep before heading back to the
plant at 6 AM. After weeks of interrupted
sleep, the operator came up with the only
solution that made sense to him—install
a surge drum with twice the fluid capac-
ity as the original drum. So, the larger
tank was ordered.
TABLE 1. Foam testing results
Sample Foam height, cm (in.)
Lean amine
Rich amine 9.5 (3.75)
Reflux water
Makeup water
Storage tank amine
42 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
After installation and hookup of the
new, larger surge drum, the operator was
pleased at no more alarms in the middle
of the night. He confidently drove to the
plant site to turn on the antifoam pump,
as the amine was again hung up in the
absorber. However, with the larger vol-
ume of amine now in the column, the an-
tifoam addition resulted in such a large
mass of liquid crashing to the absorber
bottoms that it overwhelmed the absorb-
er and flash drum level control valves.
This sent a wave of amine through the
acid gas scrubber and into the redox unit.
The event was catastrophic for the
acid gas cleanup unit, resulting in an
emergency plant shutdown to clean up
and replace the contaminated inventory.
What appeared to be an ingenious solu-
tion to the aggravating foaming problem
turned out to be the genesis of a worst-
case scenario event. Management was
not pleased with the cost of replacement
inventory and the lost production, and
strongly suggested to the operator that
he seek outside technical support to
solve the foaming issues.
Root causes. Evaluation of the con-
tactor showed that the vapor capacity
was not being exceeded; this would have
resulted in high entrainment and carry-
over, resembling foaming. Simulations
showed that the tower was operating at
approximately 50% of flood. Assuming
no internals damage, the hangup and
carryover events did not appear to be
caused by mechanical limitations. The
lean amine temperature was warmer
than the feed gas temperature to ensure
that hydrocarbons were not being con-
densed in the column, leading to a higher
foaming tendency. All system tempera-
tures checked out, with the lean amine
consistently operating 5°C–10°C (8°F–
15°F) warmer than the feed gas.
Carryover of inlet separator fluids is
often the main cause of plant foaming
episodes. No sign indicated that any
significant carryover of fluids was oc-
Breaktime, sec
9 (3.5) 150
160
1 (2.5) 12
0 (0) 0
9 (3.5) 156
curring; the large separator collected
bulk fluids, and the upper chamber of
the vertical coalescer dumped regular-
ly. During the evening foaming events,
there was some amine loss to the scrub-
ber upstream of the ethylene glycol
(EG) refrigeration plant, leading to a
small amine level in the analyzed EG
solution. If possible, the captured amine
was returned to the system flash drum,
and makeup amine was added. Con-
sumption of amine was higher than in
the past, but not enough to raise alarms
with either operations or management.
To successfully solve a foaming event,
it is necessary to understand the se-
quence of smaller events that led up to
the eventual large event, including:
• Was there a foaming trigger point,
and was this the same trigger point
in every foaming event?
• In what order did the following
events occur?
◦ Differential pressure increase
◦ H2S increase in treated gas
(discussed in more detail later)
◦ Loss of bottoms level
◦ Low-level surge drum alarm
◦ Carryover of amine
◦ Is there a pattern to the
sequence that will allow
for a more rapid recognition
and response?
◦ Temperature profiles in the
contactor before and during
the foaming event.
A review of the vendor lab results
showed, as expected, that for the relatively
new solvent and frequent solution make-
up requirements, the solvent appeared to
be in good chemical condition [appear-
ance was pale straw color, heat-stable salts
(HSS) were low, solution was well regen-
erated, and there were no visible solids,
cloudiness or hydrocarbon layer].
To solve foaming problems, samples
should be gathered of any possible pro-
cess fluid or contaminant stream that
could enter the amine unit, with the pur-
pose of running a series of foam tests.
These samples usually include lean and
rich amine, makeup water, reflux water,
storage tank amine, and potential con-
taminants like inlet separator or sweet
gas knockout fluids. Depending on the
foam test results, fluids may be elimi-
nated as a source of foaming, or definite
problem fluids may need to be con-
trolled, cleaned or replaced.

The plant had differential pressure
gauges on both the absorber and regen-
erator, which appeared to be reading ac-
curately (based on the number of trays
and liquid load in the column, and when
compared to simulator-predicted values).
The plant also had a treated gas analyzer
that measured both the sales gas H2S and
CO2, which turned out to be one of the
most valuable tools for subsequent foam
prevention in the unit. Level control
valves appeared to recognize the loss of
bottoms level and respond properly to
foaming episodes. The flash gas rate off
the flash drum was not measured, but the
pressure of the flash drum did respond to
what appeared to be higher flash gas rates.
The first observed sign of foaming
was a slight closing of the absorber level
control valve to re-establish the setpoint
level, with some indication of the flash
drum pressure increase. The second sign
was a sharp decline in treated gas CO2.
The third sign was a bounce in the dif-
ferential pressure (dP) measurement.
The fourth sign was a gradual increase
in treated gas H2S. The fifth sign was el-
evated dP and indication of carryover in
the downstream knockout drum.
The recommended plant corrective
action for antifoam addition was to wait
for the treated gas H2S to hit 4 ppmv (on
a 16-ppmv specification) to shot-dose the
system with antifoam. Historically, it took
about 10 min–15 min for the H2S to move
from 4 ppmv to 16 ppmv in the treated
gas. To avoid adding antifoam for the day-
to-day excursions to 2 ppmv–3 ppmv H2S
in the sales gas, 4 ppmv was chosen as the
appropriate value for antifoam addition.
The 4-ppmv target was also early
enough in the foaming cycle that a man-
ageable amount of amine would be hung
up in the absorber column. This response
required trust in the efficacy of the an-
tifoam product to handle the foaming
condition. Up until the site visit, it had
proven effective. TABLE 1 shows the foam
tests performed on the solutions in the
system and the results.
Normally, samples of non-foaming
storage tank amine would have been used
as a comparative baseline to test against
the change in foaming tendency between
the fresh baseline sample and the sample
after the addition of other possible con-
taminants, including feed separator flu-
ids, reflux water, makeup water, treated
gas knockout drum fluids, etc.
However, the initial test results
showed that the storage tank amine was
the most likely cause of the system foam-
ing episodes. A small contribution may
have come from inlet carryover, and the
lean-side carbon bed appeared to help
marginally in reducing the foam. Ulti-
mately, however, the most problematic
amine appeared to come from the fresh
storage tank. The surfactant did not ap-
pear to be volatile, as the reflux water did
not exhibit a high foam height or stability.
Subsequent mix tests were not attempted.
Fresh storage tank amine foam in-
vestigation. If the fresh amine foams
badly, the usual causes fall into two basic
considerations:
• Pre-existing contamination in
the storage tank
• Contaminated product shipped
from the vendor.
Prior to the turnaround, the storage
tank was supplied with the initial charge
of amine and assumed to be clean, al-
though no corroborating data could
be found. Performance of the amine
system prior to the shutdown showed
normal occasional foaming episodes—
most likely related to feed contaminant
ingress—but no persistent foaming, as
noted after the turnaround.
During the turnaround, fresh amine
was purchased to top up the storage tank
for the next production run. It was this
blend of the original tank residue and
the fresh charge that showed high foam-
ing tendency and severe foaming stabil-
ity. Considering the lack of foaming from
the original load of amine in the plant, it
was assumed that the contamination was
not pre-existing in the storage tank. That
meant that the most recent shipment of
amine was contaminated with a surfac-
tant that gave the amine a stable foam-
ing condition and that caused significant
hangup in the contactor, loss of levels in
the system and, ultimately, the carryover
of amine into the downstream ethylene
glycol refrigeration process. Fortunately,
the plant had an excellent antifoam that
could control the foaming when added.
To determine the contaminant in the
amine, the retention sample from the last
amine shipment was tested. It is recom-
mended to always take and store a reten-
tion sample from any amine shipment to
ensure that the product can be re-tested
if problems arise due to the quality of the
TREATING
amine. Unfortunately, the plant did not
take a retention sample.
The vendor, as required, had retained
the shipment sample for the facility. It
was analyzed for composition, contami-
nants and foam testing, and found to
have no foaming tendency and to be in
excellent chemical condition. That result
was expected (because vendors test their
shipments for these very issues), but it
now eliminated what was considered the
answer to the problem.
That left the one final link in the ship-
ment—the truck—as the only viable
contaminant source. The truck driver
was tracked down for questioning. It was
determined that, prior to delivering the
amine to the plant, the driver had deliv-
ered a shipment of corrosion inhibitor
to another facility. Since certain compo-
nents of corrosion inhibitors can cause
severe foaming in amines, the investiga-
tion was furthered via discussions with
the corrosion inhibitor manufacturer.
A sample of the inhibitor was obtained
and foam-tested with fresh amine. The
sample was found to cause an aggressive,
stable foam in the vendor retention sam-
ple. The “smoking gun” had been found.
Now that the cause of the foaming
had been determined, the storage tank
sample needed to be tested for the inhibi-
tor. The corrosion inhibitor vendor gra-
ciously offered to conduct comparative
gas chromatography–mass spectrometry
(GC–MS) runs with its product and the
storage tank amine. Residual corrosion
inhibitor was indeed found in the sample,
but only at a few-ppm strength. It was
assumed that this would not have been
enough to raise the kind of foaming ten-
dency and stability seen in the plant sam-
ple. Via dilutions with micro-syringes, a
reasonably low residual ppm inhibitor
level was reached in a clean amine solu-
tion and then foam-tested.
The foam tendency and stability mir-
rored the actual foam tests on the storage
sample. The cause of the foaming was de-
termined to be the trucker’s failure to suf-
ficiently clean the inhibitor residue from
the truck prior to reloading with amine.
However, the trucker kept meticulous
records, including tank cleaning steps be-
tween loads. The records were reviewed,
and the cleaning steps were found to be
as good as can be expected; two water
flushes, a steam-out and a final steam
condensate flush.
Gas Processing & LNG | MAY/JUNE 2019 43
TREATING
How had a clean delivery truck man-
aged to ship contaminated product to
the plant? The final puzzle piece fell into
place when further discussions with the
driver revealed that he had never cleaned
the hose used to transfer product from
the truck to the storage tank. The corro-
sion inhibitor, being a heavy surfactant,
had clung to the inside of the hose and
when the amine flowed through it, some
of the residue in the hose was picked up
and transferred into the storage tank. An
entire plant shutdown had occurred due
to foaming caused by a contaminated 50-
ft (15-m) length of hose!
Solutions and mitigations. Several
takeaways from the investigation were
used to ensure future smooth opera-
tion of the facility. The plant purchased
a dedicated amine hose to be used for
all transfer of product from the deliv-
ery truck to the plant storage facility. It
would no longer rely on a potentially
contaminated hose.
Plant personnel would also take and
store a retention sample of the latest
amine delivery. They asked the vendor
to run a quick foam test on any product
shipped to the plant so that the non-
foaming tendency of the product prior
to delivery would be confirmed. The
plant also instituted a policy that deliv-
ery trucks were not to have shipped po-
tential surfactants prior to amine ship-
ment. Dedicated amine and glycol trucks
became the new norm. Plant personnel
now run monthly foam tests to ensure
that the incumbent antifoam still works
to kill the foaming tendency and stability
of the foam.
Most importantly, the plant now uses a
different indicator for antifoam injection.
In the past, the plant would wait for the
H2S to creep from 1 ppmv to 4 ppmv in
the sales gas before adding antifoam. This
usually occurred about 15 min after the
first sign of foaming in the system—i.e.,
a variation in the absorber dP measure-
ment, a slight closing of the absorber level
control valve, a hint of extra flash gas, etc.
This procedure had not given the opera-
tor much of a window to walk out to the
antifoam pump, turn it on and hope the
product made its way to the absorber in
time to prevent the gas going off-spec
(12-ppmv alarm on 16 ppmv allowable).
Since the plant also measured CO2 in
the sales gas and it reacted much quicker
44 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
to CO2 than to the tower differential and
H2S, it became the new antifoam addi-
tion trigger. Historically, the treated gas
CO2 would average 1,500 ppm but drop
to around 600 ppm as the amine foamed.
[Note: A foaming methyl diethanol-
amine (MDEA) will absorb more CO2
than a non-foaming MDEA, because
CO2 absorption is liquid-phase depen-
dent and the added amine hung up in the
column was reacting with the CO2].
At 1,000 ppm CO2 in the treated gas,
about 5 min after the first signs of foam-
ing, the antifoam pump was turned on
automatically. This quicker response
time meant far less hangup and no occur-
rences where the system approached go-
ing off-spec on H2S. By hooking up the
pump to inject automatically, it also took
away from the operator’s poor response
time if business was being conducted in
another part of the plant.
Takeaway. This foaming story was mem-
orable because of the level of investigation
involving three separate companies and
the in-depth analytical support and full
cooperation from all parties involved.
The willingness of the inhibitor vendor
to help in the investigation, and the truck-
ing company’s willingness to release its
records, made for a successful conclusion
to the mystery. It also conveyed the recog-
nition that contaminants can come from
many different sources and that it may
only take ppm levels of contaminants to
make amine foam. A major event, such as
inlet separator carryover, does not always
cause an amine to foam uncontrollably.
A multitude of factors can cause an
amine unit to experience foam. Only in
some cases is a single factor the main cause
leading to foaming; often, several items
contribute to foaming. One of the most
important factors in foam promotion is
inlet contaminants, so contamination con-
trol at the unit entry is a critical step for en-
suring minimal foaming episodes.
Most of the plants that do not con-
sider this step often fight against foaming
in addition to high operating costs, low
reliability of equipment, and many other
adverse incidents with economic and
environmental impacts. Other sources
of foaming should be considered, such
as operational practices and the materi-
als used within each piece of amine plant
equipment. Sometimes the culprits can
be found where least expected. There-
fore, a comprehensive testing plan, with
systematic analysis protocol, should
always be performed, not only to deter-
mine the cause(s) of foaming but also
to form a plan for effective, long-term
foaming mitigation.
Part 2 of this article will present a sec-
ond case study of troubleshooting of an
amine unit with foaming problems. GP
DAVID ENGEL is the Managing
Director of Nexo Solutions and
Technology Leader for Exion
Systems. He has more than 25 yr of
industrial experience in a variety of
areas of chemical engineering and
chemistry, and he specializes in
chemical engineering, process optimization and
contaminant separation technologies. Dr. Engel holds
a BS degree in industrial chemistry, an MS degree in
chemistry and a PhD in organic chemistry. He is also
6-Sigma and Project Management certified.
He is President of the American Filtration Society,
Southwest Region and a member of GPA Technical
Section M. Dr. Engel is also the named inventor in 22
US patents and the author of many technical and
scientific papers. He has developed business and
technology for Eastman Kodak, Eli Lilly, Pentair,
General Electric and Sulphur Experts.
BEN SPOONER has been working in
the amine industry since 1998 as an
operator and engineer. He joined
Amine Experts in 2003 and has
worked in more than 25 countries
and on hundreds of amine systems,
providing expert assistance and
advice regarding plant operations, troubleshooting,
optimization and operator training. Mr. Spooner is one
of the primary speakers at Amine Experts’ amine
treating seminar, which has been presented in dozens
of locations around the globe. Prior to joining Amine
Experts, he worked as an operator at a gas processing
plant in northern Alberta, and as an engineer in the
technical service department of a large amine vendor
based out of Edmonton, Alberta.
MICHAEL SHEILAN has been
involved in the gas processing
industry for 39 yr. He has a long
history of expertise in training
operators and engineers in gas
processing, as well as
troubleshooting all aspects of
upstream gas treating processes. More recently,
Mr. Sheilan has focused on dehydration and amine
sweetening as a senior staff engineer for both Amine
Experts and Dehydration Experts. He is one of the
Principal Speakers of Amine Experts’ five-day amine
treating and sour water stripping courses, as well as
the four-day dehydration course. He has provided
technical support to more than 500 facilities on
every continent (except Antarctica). Mr. Sheilan is a
registered Professional Engineer in Alberta (APEGA)
and is a member of the Gas Processors Association
of Canada (GPAC) and the National Association of
Corrosion Engineers (NACE). He has multiple
publications on topics as far-reaching as inlet
separation and filtration, amine sweetening,
glycol dehydration and sour water stripping.
 Technology and Business Information for the Global Gas Processing Industry

GasProcessingNews.com | MARCH/APRIL 2019

UNCONVENTIONAL
GAS PROCESSING
Gas and the energy transition—
repurposing the system with hydrogen
Export potential and challenges
for North American LNG
from unconventional gas

CATALYSTS
Remote, robotic removal
of catalysts from reactors

PROCESS CONTROL
Online optimization of utility systems
at Australian gas plant

Special Supplement to

rocessing.com
| HydrocarbonP
APR IL 2019
HYDROCARBO
N PROCESSING

ELS
APRIL 2019

CLEAN FU nal changes

to boost gaso
line octane
FCC operatio line:
n of FCC gaso
desulfurizatio
Ultra-deep
CLEAN FUELS

rption strategy
Reactive adso
NG design
ENGINEERI ng reactor
PROCESS tor internal
s for optimizi gn
t of reac ection desi
Developmen pressure prot
n system over
and blowdow
Coke drum
TRENDS
BUSINESS could
waste recycling
How plastics- stry
chemical indu
transform the
 INDUSTRY METRICS
ADRIENNE BLUME, Editor

Strong natural gas production, along with rapidly rising demand, US gas production (Bft3d) and prices ($/Mcf)
resulted in record-high NGL production of 4.7 MMbpd in February 2019.
100 7
Growth in NGL production, was led by ethane, which also set a new
production record of nearly 130,000 bpd higher than in January 2019. 6
80

Gas prices, $/thousand ft3

The US Energy Information Administration estimates that domestic 5

Production, Bft3d
demand for ethane expanded by 360,000 bpd in the past 2 yr as a result 60 4
of new ethylene crackers and expansions of existing facilities. Since
2017, four new ethylene plants have entered service. Four new crackers 40 3
and one major cracker expansion are expected to come online in 2019, Monthly price (Henry Hub) 2
representing 260,000 bpd of additional ethane demand. Furthermore, 20 12-month price avg.
Production 1
ethane exports are expected to increase. GP 0 0
O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A
2016 2017 2018 2019
US natural gas spot prices at Henry Hub Production equals US marketed production, wet gas. Source: EIA.

and NGL spot prices at Mont Belvieu, $/MMBtu

US natural gas plant field production
25 of NGL, LPG, ethane and propane, Mbpd
Natural gasoline Propane
Isobutane Ethane 50
20 Butane Natural gas spot prices (Henry Hub)
NGPL composite

US gas plant field production, Mbpd

40
15
$/MMBtu

30 NGL
LPG
10 Ethane/ethylene
Propane/propylene
20
5

10
0 Feb.- Mar.- April- May- June- July- Aug.- Sept.- Oct.- Nov.- Dec.- Jan.- Feb.-
Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April May 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2019 2019
2017 2017 2017 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 Source: US EIA

SALES OFFICES—EUROPE ADVERTISER INDEX

ITALY
Riccardo R.C. Laureri Air Products...................................................23
Phone: +39 02 2362500
Mobile: +39 335 6962477 Ariel Corporation .........................................33
E-mail: Riccardo.Laureri@GulfEnergyInfo.com
Catherine Watkins, Publisher Atlas Copco .................................................... 2
Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4421 TURKEY, WESTERN EUROPE
E-mail: Catherine.Watkins@HydrocarbonProcessing.com Hamilton Pearman Elliott Group .................................................... 4
www.GasProcessingNews.com Phone: +33 608 310 575
E-mail: Hamilton.Pearman@GulfEnergyInfo.com Gastech ...........................................................36
SALES OFFICES—NORTH AMERICA UNITED KINGDOM, SCANDINAVIA Global Petroleum Show ............................ 40
EASTERN UNITED STATES, EASTERN CANADA Patrick Djuma
Phone/Fax: +44 20 3409 2243 Gulf Energy Information
Merrie Lynch
E-mail: Patrick.Djuma@GulfEnergyInfo.com
Phone: +1 (617) 357-8190 Energy Web Atlas ...................................6, 7
Mobile: +1 (617) 594-4943 SALES OFFICES—OTHER AREAS
E-mail: Merrie.Lynch@GulfEnergyInfo.com Events—HP Awards ...................................12
CHINA—HONG KONG
GULF COAST, SOUTH TEXAS Iris Yuen Events—WGLC ...........................................47
Austin Milburn Phone: +86 13802701367 (China)
Phone: +1 (713) 525-4626 Phone: +852 69185500 (Hong Kong) GP Circulation ............................................45
E-mail: Austin.Milburn@HydrocarbonProcessing.com E-mail: Iris.Yuen@GulfEnergyInfo.com
GP Webcast–Atlas Copco.......................35
MIDWEST, NORTH TEXAS INDIA
Josh Mayer Manav Kanwar Kobelco Compressors America, Inc. .......31
Phone: +1 (972) 816-6745 Phone: +91-22-2837 7070/71/72
E-mail: Josh.Mayer@HydrocarbonProcessing.com Mobile: +91-98673 67374 Linde Engineering ........................................21
E-mail: India@GulfEnergyInfo.com
WESTERN UNITED STATES, WESTERN CANADA Merichem Company .....................................15
JAPAN
Rick Ayer
Yoshinori Ikeda
OHL Gutermuth
Phone: +1 (949) 366-9089
E-mail: Rick.Ayer@HydrocarbonProcessing.com Pacific Business Inc. Industrial Valves GmbH........................... 27
Phone: +81 (3) 3661-6138
DATA PRODUCTS E-mail: Japan@GulfEnergyInfo.com Redguard........................................................25
J’Nette Davis-Nichols BRAZIL Universal Vortex, Inc. ..................................48
Phone: +1 (713) 520-4426 Evan Sponagle
E-mail: Jnette.Davis-Nichols@GulfEnergyInfo.com Phone: 55 (21) 2512-2741 Zeeco Inc. ....................................................... 10
Mobile: 55 (21) 99925-3398
E-mail: Evan.Sponagle@GulfEnergyInfo.com
This index and procedure for securing additional information are
provided as a service to advertisers and a convenience to our readers.
Gulf Energy Information is not responsible for omissions or errors.

46 MAY/JUNE 2019 | GasProcessingNews.com
 WOMEN’S

October 28-29, 2019 | Houston, Texas | Royal Sonesta | WGLConference.com

INSPIRING

the NEXT GENERATION of

LEADERS
Come and join us on October 28-29, 2019, as we celebrate the 15 Anniversary of the Women’s Global Leadership
th

Conference in Energy (WGLC) in Houston, Texas.

WGLC is the largest women’s event in the energy industry that focuses on discussing the industry’s key
environmental, economic, professional development and human capital issues in one setting.

Register Now at WGLConference.com

2019 WGLC SPONSORS

Platinum Sponsor Gold Sponsor Silver Sponsors

Bronze Sponsor Bronze Sponsor & Conference Young Women’s Preparatory Academy
Bag Sponsor Student Sponsor

For information on sponsorship opportunities, please contact:

Hortensia “Tish” Barroso, Business Development Manager, at Hortensia.Barroso@GulfEnergyInfo.com

Be Inspired. Feel Empowered. Stay Connected.

 VORTEXLNG™ FEED GAS PRECOOLING SYSTEM
ENHANCING THE LIQUEFACTION PROCESS TO INCREASE LNG EFFICIENCY & VIABILITY

Upstream Pressure Regulation

Downstream
Pipeline Gas Station
Pipeline Gas
54 bar, 7°C 7 bar, 7°C
Gas
Preheater
Dryer
LNG Feed

N
Cold Gas

O
54 bar, 7°C

T I
7 bar, -57°C Combined

E
VT Outlet

U F A C
N
Heat Exchanger

I Q I O
7 bar, 9°C

C E L M P T
LNG Feed U U
R E D G Y C O N S 62 %
ENER Y 34% TO
54 bar, -52°C

Cryogenic

B
Vortex
Tube

Hot Gas
7 bar, 34°C

universal-vortex.com +1-609-586-3702
VortexLNG@universal-vortex.com