Hydrogen Management Console (HyN DTTM)

Hydrogen Management
Console (HyN●DTTM)
M. Pagano
ERTC – 09-11 November 2009
Why Managing H2
►Deep conversion refineries with and high level of bottom-ofthe-barrel conversion can have an H2 demand up to 2.7%wt
of total crude input
2
Why Managing H2
►Hydrogen plays a capital role both for the environment and
for an effective usage of energy
H2
ROG
►The hydrogen sources have to be studied in their synergies
with hydrogen users to determine the most effective way of
satisfying refinery needs
►The approach will be different for new refineries or for
revamps
3
Grass Root Refineries
►The optimum configuration for a new complex has to satisfy
both the present and the future hydrogen demand
►Possible developments of fuels specifications have to be
examined
►The following goals have to be pursued:
•
•
•
•
High level of H2 Availability
Adequate Flexibility
Lowest CAPEX
Lowest Operating costs
4
Revamping of Existing Refineries
►The issue is to deal with increasing demand of hydrogen while:
• Upgrading of the existing Hydrogen Generation Unit (HGU)
• Adding a new “on purpose” HGU
• Performing an Integrated utilization of the Refinery Off-Gas (ROG)
• Studying and assessing the possible H2 recovery solutions from ROG streams
• Assessing the impact on performances of hydro-processing units caused by H2
make-up with lower purity
►In this respect the approach is twofold:
• Internal optimization of the HGU
• External optimization of the H2 network
5
Why Managing CO2
►A modern high conversion refinery produces:
• 0.33÷0.4 ton CO2 per ton of crude (without residue gasification)
• 0.7 ton CO2 per ton of crude (with residue gasification)
►However, the major sources of CO2 in a refinery are scattered
on the plot plan
►Coupling H2 and utilities production in the HGU or IGCC can
be a way of having a single source for CO2 capture
►The impact of carbon emissions trading scheme on a refinery
is very complex
• Use of LP model can help to asses the impact of changing emissions costs
on the refinery operation and configuration
6
How to Manage CO2
Typically there are
6 options to reduce GHG emissions
Energy efficiency
Switch fuel
Renewable energies
Aforestation/reforestation (not relevant)
Reduce emissions of other gases than CO2
Carbon Capture and Storage
7
H2 & CO2 Management
(Example of Fuel Substitution)
► CO2 Produced by fuel substitution of 1 Ton/h of Hydrogen:
LHV (kcal/kg)
CO2
(ton/h)
Hydrogen
28661
-
Methane
11947
6.60
Ethane
11342
7.41
Propane
11071
7.77
Fuel Oil
9680
9.50
► Whatever is the fuel used to substitute the equivalent energetic content of 1 ton/h of
recovered H2, there is an effect on the overall CO2 emissions, which shall be carefully
evaluated in a CO2 emissions trading scheme (i.e. ETS scenarios)
8
H2 & CO2 Management
(Example of Fuel Substitution)
CO2 emissions per T/h of Hydrogen produced through SR
CO2 INDIRECT FROM UTILITIES
CO2 from Utilities Production/Generation (x1 Ton/h of Hydrogen)
Hp. (CH 4 is used in a CC power plant and for Steam boilers)
steam
power
Natural Gas feedstock
Gcal/h/Ton of hydrogen
-9.7
-6.52
246376.8
0.42
-6.09
TOT.
Related CO2 produced
-1.40 Ton/h
Light Naphtha feedstock
Gcal/h/Ton of hydrogen
-6.12
0.46
-5.67
Related CO2 produced
-1.30 Ton/h
SR OVERALL CO2 BALANCE
CO2 from Production of 1 Ton/h of pure Hydrogen (99.9 %vol.)
CO2 exit CO Shift Reactors
CO2 from FG firing
CO2 from Indirect Utilities Prod./Gen.
Tot =
Natural Gas feedstock
9.17 ton/h of CO2
2.79 ton/h of CO2
-1.40 ton/h of CO2
10.56 ton/h
Light Naphtha feedstock
10.99 ton/h of CO2
3.30 ton/h of CO2
-1.30 ton/h of CO2
13.00 ton/h
9
CO2 Recovery in the H2 plant
(Example of Carbon Capture)
IGCC
MeOH
Coal/TAR
O2
Gasifier
Syngas
Amine
Wash
Refinery
CO
Shift
PSA
GTL/CTL
Ammonia/
Urea
CO2 for sequestration/
Enanched Oil Recovery/Urea production
10
Technip’s Tool for H2 & CO2 Management
►Technip can help refiners to find out the optimum solution
using its group transversal competences and advanced
methodologies:
• Knowledge of the available options for hydrogen production, supply and
recovery
• Suite of tools based on advanced LP modeling, for planning of the all refinery
operations
• Expertise on equipment costs estimate with a scaling accuracy
►These competences are now concentrated in Technip’s
Hydrogen Network Design Tool
11
HyN•DT Hydrogen Network Design Tool
►Interfaces between process simulators and LP are made easy
by the use of HyN•DT
►LP can help in retrieving the optimum configuration with the
following cautions:
• The optimization of H2 usage shall be able to identify the trade-off between H2
purity, pressure and recovery level from ROG
• Before any H2 model optimization, an off-line screening to fix the “reasonable”
hydrogen recovery solutions is preferable
12
HyN•DT versus Hydrogen Pinch Analysis (HPA)
►The HPA, traditionally used, is not sufficient to model the
complexity of the network design
• It only considers flow rates and purities of streams containing hydrogen while
neglecting:
– Pressure of hydrogen rich stream
– Spare capacity on existing compressors
– Safety
– Piping routing
– Operability/Availability
– CAPEX/OPEX
• The result is a mere hydrogen balance closure
13
HyN•DT Work-Flow
Cost Estimate &
Iteration
Cost factors
Refinery
H2
H2 System
CO2 recovery
Modelling
Network
(LP model)
Optimization
Routine
•Process & Utilities units
modelling
•H2 headers identification
•H2/CO2 Balance validation
•Off-gas & purge streams
Info’s gathering
(Environment definition)
•LP Modelling
HGU Preliminary
and/or
Design
•Off-line analysis
Options Screening
•Max Refinery
Operating Margin
•Min pay out time
Configuration
Selection
14
Case Study: Grassroot Refinery in Tatarstan
►HyN•DT has successfully been used to optimize the
hydrogen network of a complex grass root refinery in
Tatarstan for which Technip has performed a detailed
feasibility study
►The Complex will be designed to process 7 million tons per
year of Carbonic Crude (23.4 API°, Sulfur = 3.8 wt %) and it
will have the following features :
• Maximization of Diesel and Jet Kero fuels @ EURO V specifications
• Minimization of residue (i.e. Deep Conversion Scheme/Zero fuel oil Refinery)
• Production of Benzene and Paraxylene
15
Refinery Block Flow Diagram
►The selected process configuration is shown below:
Fuel Gas
SATURATED
GAS PLANT
FG+LPG
Products Slate
C3
PROPANE
i-C4 & nn-C4
BUTANES
H2 Producers
H2 Users
NAPHTHA
HDT
LT
NAPHTHA
Raffinate
HV
NAPHTHA
CCR
Reformate
7 millions t/y
CRUDE
DISTILL.
UNIT
HYDROGEN
UNIT
SULFUR & AMINE
UNIT
SOUR WATER
STRIPPER
DIESEL
HDT
VACUUM
DISTILL.
UNIT
HYDRO
CRACKER
DIESEL
Heavy Aromatics
HCK Residue
FUEL OIL
SULFUR
VACUUM
RESIDUE
SOLVENT
DEASPHALTING
CO SHIFT
DAO
SYNGAS
CLEANING
ASPHALTENES
AIR
O2
SEPARATION
PARAXYLENE
BENZENE
KERO/JET
KERO
HDT
Main Ancillary
Units
AROMATICS
COMPLEX
PETROCHEM.
NAPHTHA
GASIFICATION
COMBINED CYCLE
PLANT
HYDROGEN
POWER
STEAM
Ni, V Ash
16
Hydrogen Purification Options
►The appropriate hydrogen separation technology is crucial
►The three main hydrogen purification technologies available
are:
• PSA – pressure swing absorption
– Small pressure drop across the PSA avoiding excessive recompression duty
• Membrane – selective permeation
– Operate under high pressure drop to deliver moderately pure hydrogen
• Cryogenic separation (cold box)
– The refrigeration required for the process is obtained by Joule-Thomson effect
17
Base Configuration
(Recovery Level = 0%)
FG Network
3.1 t/d
0.2 t/d
1.0 t/d
8.0 t/d
45.2 t/d
67.8%vol.
16.1%vol.
33.9%vol.
81.5%vol.
90.6%vol.
NAPHTHA
HDT
KEROSENE
HDT
DIESEL
HDT
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
24.1 Barg
24.3 Barg
58 Barg
6.4 t/d
2.3 t/d
RFG
Network
Fractionator
H2
HYDROCRACKER
108.2 t/d
HP Separator
155 Barg
17.1 t/d
Cold
Sep.
508.2 t/d
H2 High Purity Network, 99.9% vol
PSA
3.9 t/d
151.9 t/d
157.1 t/d
HGU
CCR
PSA
(H2)
73,352
Nm3/h
(H2)
70,937
Nm3/h
11.3 t/d
FG Network
58.7%vol.
13.1 t/d
AROMATICS
COMPLEX
242.0 t/d
PSA
H2
Network
257,264
Nm3/h
551 t/d
CO SHIFT
HT Reac.
(H2)
ISOMAR TATORAY
33.1 t/d
112,977
Nm3/h
53.3%vol.
18
Case 1: Direct use of HCK Cold Separator Off Gas
(Recovery Level=23.8 %)
FG Network
3.1 t/d
0.2 t/d
1.0 t/d
8.0 t/d
19.4 t/d
67.8%vol.
16.1%vol.
33.9%vol.
81.5%vol.
90.6%vol.
NAPHTHA
HDT
KEROSENE
HDT
DIESEL
HDT
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
24.1 Barg
24.3 Barg
58 Barg
6.4 t/d
Fractionator
H2
HYDROCRACKER
82.4 t/d
HP Separator
155 Barg
Cold
Sep.
25.8 t/d
90.6%vol.
H2
Network
12,046
Nm3/h
508.2 t/d
17.1 t/d
2.3 t/d
RFG
Network
H2 Low Purity Network , 90.6% vol
26 t/d
H2 High Purity Network, 99.9% vol
PSA
3.9 t/d
151.9 t/d
131.3 t/d
HGU
CCR
PSA
(H2)
70,937
Nm3/h
(H2)
61,311
Nm3/h
11.3 t/d
FG Network
58.7%vol.
13.1 t/d
AROMATICS
COMPLEX
242.0 t/d
PSA
H2
Network
245,212
Nm3/h
525 t/d
CO SHIFT
HT Reac.
(H2)
ISOMAR TATORAY
33.1 t/d
112,977
Nm3/h
53.3%vol.
19
Case 2: PSA Option
(Recovery Level = 41.7%)
FG Network
3.1 t/d
0.2 t/d
1.0 t/d
8.0 t/d
6.3 t/d
67.8%vol.
16.1%vol.
33.9%vol.
81.5%vol.
57.6%vol.
NAPHTHA
HDT
KEROSENE
HDT
DIESEL
HDT
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
24.1 Barg
24.3 Barg
58 Barg
6.4 t/d
2.3 t/d
RFG
Network
Fractionator
H2
HYDROCRACKER
63.0 t/d
HP Separator
PSA
Cold
155 Barg Sep.
17.1 t/d
508.2 t/d
38.9 t/d
H2 High Purity Network, 99.9% vol
PSA
3.9 t/d
151.9 t/d
118.2 t/d
HGU
CCR
PSA
(H2)
70,937
Nm3/h
(H2)
55,204
Nm3/h
FG Network
11.3 t/d
58.7%vol.
13.1 t/d
AROMATICS
COMPLEX
H2
Network
257,264
Nm3/h
242.0 t/d
PSA
551 t/d
CO SHIFT
HT Reac.
(H2)
ISOMAR TATORAY
33.1 t/d
112,977
Nm3/h
53.3%vol.
20
Case 3: PSA combined with Membranes
(Recovery Level = 65.8 %)
FG Network
3.1 t/d
0.2 t/d
1.0 t/d
8.0 t/d
6.3 t/d
67.8%vol.
16.1%vol.
33.9%vol.
81.5%vol.
57.6%vol.
H2
Network
NAPHTHA
HDT
KEROSENE
HDT
DIESEL
HDT
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
HP
Separator
24.1 Barg
24.3 Barg
58 Barg
12,046
Nm3/h
6.4 t/d
2.3 t/d
RFG
Network
Fractionator
H2
HYDROCRACKER
37 t/d
HP Separator
Cold
155 Barg Sep.
PSA
7.3 t/d
508.2 t/d
17.1 t/d
38.9 t/d
25.8 t/d
H2
Network
H2 Low Purity Network , 90 % vol
26 t/d
H2 High Purity Network, 99.9% vol
3.9 t/d
151.9 t/d
92.4 t/d
PSA
245,212
Nm3/h
HGU
CCR
PSA
(H2)
70,937
Nm3/h
(H2)
43,143
Nm3/h
FG Network
11.3 t/d
58.7%vol.
525 t/d
13.1 t/d
242.0 t/d
AROMATICS
COMPLEX
PSA
CO SHIFT
HT Reac.
(H2)
ISOMAR TATORAY
33.1 t/d
112,977
Nm3/h
53.3%vol.
21
Impact of Lower Purity Hydrogen
►As preliminary results, the licensor has confirmed that makeup H2 at lower purity (i.e. 90 % vol.) can be used to feed both
Kero and Diesel HDT Units
►On Diesel Unit the impacts are:
• At same pressure profile in the Reaction Loop, the catalyst volume shall be
increase of 10%.
• At same catalyst volume, the reactor outlet pressure shall be increased of 7-8
bar.
►On Kerosene Unit the impacts are quite minimal as the unit is
smaller:
• At same pressure profile in the Reaction Loop, the catalyst volume shall be
increased of 4-5%
• At same catalyst volume, the reactor outlet pressure shall be increased of 2-3
bar
22
Summary Overview
23
Hydrogen Economic Analysis
(Cost factors)
►The H2 network configurations are deeply analysed from the
economical point of view by use of tailored cost factors :
H2 Production Factor
=
CAPEX HGU ∆(Capacity)
Plant Life (years) * H2 recovered
+
H2 Recovery Factor
+ OPEX HGU +
CO2 Credits
CAPEX HDTs ∆(Pressure)
Plant Life (years) * H2 recovered
=
+
+
+
CAPEX H2 Recovery Technology
Plant Life (years) * H2 recovered
H2 Compression Costs
H2 Factors [=] €/(Nm3/h *year)
+
+
CO2 Credits
24
HyN•DT – Economics Results
►The Analysis, conducted for this specific client, has shown a
break even point, around 56% of overall H2 recovery
►Beyond this recovery level the costs associated with the CAPEX
and OPEX for the H2 recovery & purification technologies
CAPEX ESCALATION
exceed the generation costs
25
H2 RECOVERY TRENDS
6,000,000
Recovery of H2 favourable
MM Euro
H2 Production Costs
H2 Recovery Costs
15
CAPEX
10
5.50
5
Production of H2 favourable
5,000,000
19.46
20
2.75
0
CASE 2
CASE 3
4,000,000
PAY OUT TIME
3,000,000
6.0
2,000,000
5.3
5.0
YEARS
Euro/Year
CASE 1
1,000,000
0
0
20
40
60
% of H2 Recovery
80
4.0
2.5
3.0
2.0
POT
1.9
1.0
0.0
CASE 1
CASE 2
CASE 3
25
Conclusions
►The methodological approach to the Hydrogen analysis is
strongly depended by the project typology & environment
constraints
►It is necessary for each project & client environment to reevaluate the H2 economics factors in light of any specific
constraints
►The Technip’s HyN•DT is a flexible tool to optimize new or
existing H2 network with practical solutions allowing to define
a roadmap for the refinery investments
26