This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Design and Optimization of Natural Gas Liquefaction and Recovery Processes for Offshore Floating Liquefied Natural Gas Plants
Sanggyu Lee,† Nguyen Van Duc Long,‡ and Moonyong Lee†,‡
R&D Division, Korea Gas Corporation (KOGAS), Yeonsu-Gu, Incheon, South Korea School of Chemical Engineering, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 712-749, South Korea
S Supporting Information *
ABSTRACT: A natural gas liquefaction and liquid recovery sequence is proposed for top-side offshore floating liquefied natural gas processing. During liquefaction, a single mixed refrigerant is separated into heavy and light key components, separately compressed after the main cryogenic heat exchanger and then mixed again to make a single mixed refrigerant. The proposed liquefaction cycle has a simple, compact structure and is suitable for power-efficient, offshore, floating liquefied natural gas liquefaction. The natural gas liquid recovery process employs space- and energy-efficient dividing wall columns for the integration of depropanization and debutanization. The columns were optimized by response surface methodology. A compact top dividing wall column configuration could reduce total annual costs. A combined process integrating natural gas liquefaction and liquid recovery is finally proposed.
1. INTRODUCTION The primary use of natural gas (NG) is as a fuel; it can also be a source of hydrocarbons for petrochemical feed stocks and a major source of industrially important elemental sulfur.1 Its clean burning and ability to meet stringent environmental requirements have raised the demand for natural gas,2 which is supporting the rapid growth of liquefied natural gas (LNG) production capacity. Much of the world’s gas reserves are in offshore fields,3 though onshore LNG processing is generally favored.4−11 A traditional onshore plant for offshore gas reserves usually includes an offshore platform for dehydration and compression, large pipelines to shore, an onshore liquefaction plant, and a harbor to accommodate purposebuilt LNG carriers.12 Recently, offshore FLNG (floating LNG) or LNG-FPSO (floating, production, shipping and offloading) service is beginning to be explored instead of land-based LNG plants.13 The FLNG plant has several important advantages over the traditional approach for offshore gas fields:12,14 it eliminates the platform, pipelines, and harbor, greatly reducing infrastructure requirements; it can also lessen a facility’s environmental impact, particularly if the potential onshore plant would be located near populated areas; it can be moved to a new location after the depletion of the original gas field. The thermodynamic processing of liquefaction of natural gas has evolved since the 1970s11,15−19 to become more efficient and achieve larger capacity. Liquefaction systems generally comprise series of compressors, coolers, expanders, and heat exchangers. Natural gas is cooled to liquefaction temperature in thermal contact with closed-cycle refrigerants. To reduce the input power for liquefaction, it is crucial to reduce entropy generation through the temperature difference between the hot stream (feed gas and hot refrigerants) and the cold refrigerants in the heat exchangers. Since feed gas is mainly mixed hydrocarbons, its enthalpy varies nonlinearly with temperature during liquefaction. Highefficiency liquefaction requires reduced entropy generation due
© 2012 American Chemical Society
to temperature differences in the heat exchangers. Mixed refrigerant (MR) cycles are effective in reducing the temperature difference and need relatively few auxiliary equipment,18 while pure refrigerant cycles are simple but require a large number of refrigeration stages.11 Liquefaction processes have been developed with various refrigerants and cycles, but only a few are used practically. Operating liquefaction processes are most commonly based on the propane precooled mixed refrigerant (C3MR) cycle20 by APCI. Feed gas is precooled to approximately −33 °C by a multistage propane (C3) Joule-Thomson (JT) cycle and then liquefied and subcooled to −150 °C by MR through a large spiral-wound heat exchanger. An appropriate composition of MR allows the liquefaction and subcooling of feed gas in a single heat exchanger over a wide temperature range, leading to high thermodynamic efficiency with a minimum number of components. However since the C3 cycle has to cool both the feed gas and the MR cycle, the thermal load of the propane cycle becomes very large, limiting C3MR to processes under 5 MTPA (million tons per annum). Liquefaction capacity can be increased by equipping the cold end of C3MR cycle with a nitrogen Brayton cycle. This three-cycle process (AP-XTM) has decreased propane and MR flow rates so as to achieve a capacity of 8 MTPA.16 Another successfully operating liquefaction process is based on Conoco Phillips’ cascade cycle,11 which consists of three JT cycles using pure methane (C1), ethylene (C2), and propane (C3) refrigerants. Each JT cycle has two or three stages of refrigeration to reduce the temperature differences in the heat
Special Issue: APCChE 2012 Received: Revised: Accepted: Published:
December March 11, March 22, March 22,
19, 2011 2012 2012 2012
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ie2029283 | Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2012, 51, 10021−10030
(b) top DWC. Eng. and high. The most unique feature of a FLNG plant is that its production Figure 2. The fed natural gas is required to be cooled to −150 °C at 50 bar and then subcooled to the LNG storage tank by flash expansion at slightly above atmospheric pressure. pressure drop through the main heat exchanger. (c) bottom DWC. simple. 10022 dx.org/10. The LINDE process has three JT cycles. which also incorporates two MR JT cycles. limiting its use to small natural gas liquefaction plants. the process is simple and robust in operation. Other refrigerant have been developed. the Box−Behnken design only has three levels (low. Figure 1) because there is only one Article precooling cycle of C3MR is replaced by a MR JT cycle to remove the bottleneck of the propane compressor. similar to the cascade process. coded as −1. 1 bar.Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research exchangers. Res. 2. Process Simulation Bases. Selection of Basic Cycles for Development. 75%.2.1021/ie2029283 | Ind. 0. 3 °C.28 In RSM. The proposed liquefaction cycle was optimized using the temperature profiles in the cryogenic heat exchanger and the compressor power of each separated compressor. Dividing wall columns (DWCs): (a) conventional DWC.8. Optimization studies rely on statistical approaches.25 However. Detailed specifications used here are as follows: refrigerant temperature after the coolers. This work proposes a new.1. compact. 40 °C. 51.21 The SMR cycle is not efficient. IFP/AXENS developed a new liquefaction process called LIQUEFIN. series of compressors and one main cryogenic heat exchanger to cover the whole range of liquefaction from atmospheric to cryogenic temperature. the main reason for their superior energy efficiency. and powerefficient natural gas liquefaction cycle and natural gas liquid (NGL) recovery sequence for offshore FLNG with the capacity of 2.5MTPA. The pressure of the LNG storage tank is 121 kPa. Figure 1. the adiabatic efficiency of all compressors. The simplest natural gas liquefaction process employs SMR (single mixed refrigerant.27.doi. but employs MRs in all three cycles. +1) and requires a small number of experiments or simulation runs. It is more efficient and easier to arrange and interpret than other methods. pressure ratio of each compressor. Chem.22−24 DWCs allow reversible splits with no part of the separation performed twice. minimum approach temperature in the main heat exchanger. Several analyses of dividing wall columns (DWCs. 10021−10030 . 2012. THE PROPOSED NATURAL GAS LIQUEFACTION PROCESSES 2. Drawbacks include its large size and large amount of equipment. with response surface methodology (RSM) being routinely used in several biotechnological and industrial multivariable processes. In the proposed NGL recovery process. medium. Since no mixtures are used.18 including Shell’s dual mixed refrigerant (DMR) process wherein the propane 2. Figure 2) for ternary separations have shown that they can achieve energy and space savings of up to 30% over conventional direct and indirect distillation sequences. 2−2. feed splitting and a top dividing wall column were employed to maximize energy efficiency and plant compactness. (a) A SMR process and (b) its temperature−heat flow. their design is more complex than conventional arrangements because of the greater number of degrees of freedom26 that interact with each other and need to be optimized simultaneously.
2. The refrigerants comprise nitrogen. The compressor outlet pressures of the MRs are same. Figure 4. After the MCHE.29 Onshore liquefaction plants employ complex. methane. similar to the SMR cycle. constraining throughput and economics. (a) The proposed process (basic type. One of the cycles precools the precooling zone in the heat exchanger. light key) refrigerants in a flash drum. high pressure of MR compressor. ethane. MR flow rate. precooling temperature using HK. they must be optimized independently. Figure 1b shows the temperature−heat flow diagram of the optimized SMR cycle. but the cold component profile is different above dx. to take advantage of both DMR and SMR cycles. A DMR cycle. SMR cycles normally show large gaps between the temperature profiles of the hot and cold components in the precooling zone (−60 to 40 °C) of the heat exchanger because the C3 component of the MR begins vaporizing in the precooling zone. offshore applications require simpler systems due to the challenges of moving processes offshore. 10021−10030 . the DMR cycle was structurally modified into a SMR cycle by separating the single MR into two refrigerant streams. The MRs are then mixed after the compressor and after-cooler. In the proposed cycle. was chosen to be slightly higher than atmospheric pressure for safety. exchanger. In this study. The gap between the hot and cold component temperature profiles in the temperature-heat flow diagram of Cycle-1 (Figure 4b) starts to increase at about −60 °C. The multicomponent refrigerant was also optimized to find the appropriate composition of the MR. Cycle-1) and (b) its temperature−heat flow. because liquefaction consumes much energy. The two MRs generally contain nitrogen. The single MR is separated into two MRs that act separately in the MCHE: HK precools the refrigerants and natural gas. Therefore the proposed cycle could be optimized using inlet pressure levels and the 10023 number of stages of the MR’s compressors. each MR is compressed separately and then mixed again to become single MR. Eng. high-efficiency liquefaction processes30 that use mixed or cascade refrigerants with separate precooling. DMR (Figure 3) has two refrigerant cycles. especially for projects on substantial gas assets. The lowest pressure of the MR. and LK precools LK refrigerant and liquefies natural gas to −150 °C. but their inlet pressures could be different.doi. For efficiency. Mesh searching or Brute force method was employed for optimization. each of which has one series of compressors and refrigerant flows in the heat Article Figure 3.1021/ie2029283 | Ind.3. Chem. C3). in which MR is separated into heavier liquid (HK. Res. methane. However. compactness is very important. and the other cycle liquefies the natural gas to LNG. a dual MR (DMR) liquefaction cycle could be also selected for modified implementation based on the basic structure of the SMR cycle. heavy key) and lighter vapor (LK. For compactness. C2. Optimizing the SMR cycle reduces the gap of the temperature profiles in the liquefaction zone while the precooling zone’s gap widens. The compositions of each cycle are different to achieve the most effective temperature range. The optimal number of stages of the LK and HK compressors in Cycle-1 were respectively 4 and 2. with each separated MR having its own refrigerant role in the main cryogenic heat exchanger (MCHE).Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research capacity is strictly limited by the deck space required for equipment.3 bar). 2012. the inlet pressure of the MR compressor (1. Efficiency is also very important.14 Since liquefaction in a FLNG plant would be implemented and operated on the limited area of the floating structure. Figure 4a outlines the basic type (Cycle-1) of the proposed liquefaction cycle. The objective for optimization is to minimize total compression power. that is. the MR is separated into two different MRs from a vapor−liquid separator. The Proposed Cycle (Cycle-1). inlet pressure of HK MR compressor. SMR liquefaction is selected for the basic structure of the proposed liquefaction cycle.org/10. The minimum approach temperature of the MCHE was constrained to above 3 °C. ethane. and propane. The main optimizing variables were MR composition (N2. C1. 51. and propane as per C3MR.
Comparison of Specific Power for Several Cycles specific power [kw·hr/kg of LNG] SMR cycle cascade C3MR proposed cycle 0.2945 0. The specific power of Cycle-2 after optimization is 0. there is liquid refrigerant at the mixing point of LK and MK after each after-cooler. heavy heavy key) that is heavier than HK. After the compressors are combined. Therefore.4. HHK can be used as a new refrigerant in the proposed cycle. the structure of compressor system becomes a LK compressor with three stages. HHK liquid from a vapor−liquid separator can be mixed with HK liquid. 2. The last stages of both compressors can be combined into one single-stage compressor. Figure 5a outlines Cycle-2.Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Article Figure 6. Figure 5. there are two bending points in the cold component profile. The proposed cycle could achieve high performance. HHK refrigerant is expanded after the vapor−liquid separator 10024 Cycle-1 Cycle-2 Cycle-3 and to precool the natural gas and other refrigerants. decreasing the gap between the hot and cold component temperature profiles in the precooling zone.4760 kWh/kg LNG). another proposed liquefaction cycle. Eng. dx. a single-stage HK compressor. 2012. In Cycle-3. (a) The proposed process (Cycle-2) and (b) its temperature−heat flow. 2. and a single-stage MK (LK + HK) compressor.4760 0. The temperature-heat flow diagram of Cycle-2 (Figure 5b) shows closer hot and cold component temperature profiles in the precooling zone than in Cycle-1 because of the three bending points in the cold component temperature profile. Therefore.5. Therefore. This can lead to improved performance. Res. There is an additional C3 vaporizing point in Cycle-1 because of the higher pressure of HK than LK. The temperature-heat flow diagram of Cycle-3 (Figure 6b) shows only two bending points. Chem. The Proposed Cycle (Cycle-2).3204 0. It generates a new refrigerant liquid (HHK. Cycle-1 requires an LK compressor with four stages and an HK compressor with two stages. Cycle-2 requires three compressors in parallel.1021/ie2029283 | Ind.org/10.4444 0. very efficient compared with the SMR cycle (0.doi. 51. 10021−10030 .3184 percent of specific power 100% 93% 62% 67% 65% 67% this temperature. a vapor−liquid separator is necessary after the mixing point of LK and MK.3106 kWh/kg LNG. The Proposed Cycle (Cycle-3). The specific power of Cycle-1 to liquefy 1 kg of LNG was found to be 0. simplifying the structure (Figure 6a). Table 1. The liquefaction cycle could be optimized using the two bending points.3184 kWh/kg LNG. (a) The proposed process (Cycle-3) and (b) its temperature−heat flow.3106 0. Its high performance is achieved through a complex structure. resulting in some loss of efficiency.3204 kWh/kg LNG. Cycle-3 has an optimized specific power of 0.
4. liquid hydrocarbons recovered from NGL are typically separated into relatively pure ethane (C2). limiting the column height and making the packed-type column designs suitable. 2012. Feed Mixture Conditions nitrogen (% mol fraction) methane (% mol fraction) ethane (% mol fraction) propane (% mol fraction) i-butane (% mol fraction) n-butane (% mol fraction) i-pentane (% mol fraction) n-pentane (% mol fraction) n-hexane (% mol fraction) n-heptane (% mol fraction) total mass flow rate (kg/h) temperature (°C) pressure (bar) 1. the number of products and product tanks should also 10025 be minimized because of the limited space and safety concerns. Table 1 summarizes the performances of the proposed cycles compared with the SMR cycle.doi.30 In addition. Eng. Figure 8. columns should be designed to withstand motion.72 0. showing only a slight degradation of efficiency for the simpler structure. and C4 from gasoline. dx.82 0. Cycle-3 seems to be most suitable for a FLNG plant.8 The similar boiling points of iso. and gasoline (C5+) products. Due to restrictions of column height and the number of product tanks. C3. propane (C3). isobutane (iC4).87 0. followed by further distillation of iC4 from nC4 (Figure 7). normal butane (nC4). For this reason.31 0. An offshore plant must be able to withstand waves. Table 2.54 86. Chem.15 292 418 35 71 3.5.41 0.org/10.1021/ie2029283 | Ind.7. 51.Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Article Figure 7. The separation train of three conventional columns for FLNG. 10021−10030 . The separation train of typical onshore NGL recovery processing.47 2.and normal butane make their separation require many trays with a high reflux ratio. most notably the distillation and separation columns. a deisobutanizer would likely be excluded from an FLNG plant. This is conventionally done by the sequential distillation of C2.31 0. Cycle-2 shows best performance in terms of the specific power. THE PROPOSED NGL RECOVERY PROCESS During onshore processing.39 6. Res.
column diameter. Eng. Simulations were performed using the Aspen HYSYS V7.35 6. Note that the refrigeration used in precooler C0 and condenser C1 are at low temperatures.org/10.00 0.64%.00 Article TDWC 20 packed 1. The sharp separation of methane from C2+ increases energy consumption. reducing reboiler duty and operating costs by 47. temperature. Table 3 lists the conditions and the energy requirements of the columns considered here.4103 1. it can first be divided into two streams: one is cooled before entering the column like a feed. (c) The operating velocity of all columns is near 80% of the flooding velocity.80 Table 5. adjustment of the feed split ratio is important in the optimization (Figure 9). their prices are listed in Table 4. internal type.5 bar (Figure 8). 2012.66 0.11 0.18 0.43% and 9. Res. Effect of feed split ratio on the operating cost of the demethanizer and depropanizer. The feed composition.2.12 0. respectively.1 0. LPG.3933 6. 2. and thus was not considered here. 3. However. 3. A turbo-expander configuration. simulations were performed to quantify energy consumption. The Peng−Robinson equation of state supporting the widest range of operating conditions and the greatest variety of systems was used to predict the simulations’ vapor−liquid equilibria. as commercial LPG can be condensed with cooling water at this pressure.00 improved sequence demethanizer 10 packed 2. Effect of the number of trays on the reboiler duty of the TDWC. Column Hydraulics and Energy Performance of the Proposed Sequence base sequence demethanizer number of idea trays internal type column diameter (m) HETP (m) condenser duty (MW) precooler duty (MW) reboiler duty (MW) compressor duty (MW) 10 packed 2.46 debutanizer 20 packed 1.doi. a depropanizer column is used to recycle light components in the bottom stream of the demethanizer. that is. (b) The maximum allowable height of each column is restricted to that of 20 equivalent ideal trays to limit the motion of wind and waves and to avoid excessive bending moments.40 Table 4.10 0. (d) A deisobutanizer and a deethanizer are excluded due to restrictions of column height and/or the number of inventory tanks.3933 5. and 10026 pressure conditions are listed in Table 2.00 depropanizer 10 packed 0.89 13.82 0. Utilities Cost Data utility refrigeration (low temperature) refrigeration (very low temperature) cooling water steam (low pressure) electricity price ($/GJ) 7.1.9 0. The demethanizer.1 simulator.Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Table 3. Based on the feed conditions and the product specifications. Figure 8). and number of passes. and one is fed into the column’s bottom (dashed line. The 20-tray debutanizer column was designed for use at 8. 51. Coded Levels of Factors levels factor top section (N1) bottom section (N2) feed rectifying section (N3) −1 8 10 1 0 9 11 2 1 10 12 3 Figure 9. energy consumption is increased in condenser C1 in the demethanizer and the reboiler in the depropanizer.00 4. This sequence can eliminate one reboiler in the demethanizer and save energy in precooler C0.34 0. 99% (bottom of debutanizer).2 0. Figure 10.07 12.05 0.1 0.5 0. is not economical for FLNG situation. which is most popular for the demethanizers in onshore LNG plants.1021/ie2029283 | Ind. To determine each column’s maximum flooding. dx.46. The columns were designed with for loads near 80% of the flooding load to prevent flooding. Feed Split. A new NGL recovery process is proposed for FLNG facilities with the following constraints and assumptions: (a) All columns are designed as packed type columns for greater stability against motion.65 2.0 bar. Chem. Therefore.02 14.2.17 0. 10021−10030 .32 Therefore. C5+. rating modes were simulated using each column’s internal specifications. was designed for use at 69. Base Sequence. Instead of precooling the entire feed stream. A feed split ratio of 15% is optimal.08 16. Improvement of Base Sequence. 89% (top of demethanizer). with 10 theoretical trays. 3. (e) The product specifications are as follows: C1.1.4155 2. 98% (top of debutanizer).31 The Lee−Kesler method of enthalpy calculation was employed.00 1.00 2.4243 0.
quadratic. N ) = f (N1. Note that the number of trays in each column must not exceed 20 trays.1021/ie2029283 | Ind. minimizing the number of columns is also very crucial since it directly affects the overall economics and safety in a FLNG plant. Eng. MINITAB software was used for response surfaces fitting. increasing rapidly as the number of trays increases from 19 to 22. and βij are the coefficients of the linear. Chem. polynomial model used in the response surface analysis is as follows: Y = β0 + ∑ βiXi + ∑ βiiXi2 + ∑ ∑ βijXiXj + ε i=1 i=1 i<j k k (2) Multiple response optimization can be undertaken by formulating a constrained optimization problem with one of the responses treated as the objective of a constrained optimization problem and other responses treated as the constraints where the constraints’ boundaries are determined by the process design engineers. Three-dimensional response surface plots of interactions between the main design variables N1. Here. reboiler duty is considered the objective. min(Q . Res. two different cooling sources.26 it was then optimized using response surface methodology. and feed rectifying (N3) sections were optimized. The separation train for FLNG. and interactive terms. N2. In the NGL recovery columns. integrating two columns into one dividing wall column with only one condenser is not efficient. βi. that is. After initially setting the TDWC structure using a shortcut method. simulation run data were fitted to a second-order polynomial model and regression coefficients were obtained. The one remaining parameter in each case is automatically set at its center point dx. Optimization plot by the RSM.Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Article Figure 11. N3.2. The numbers of trays are the constraints and depend on the design engineers. Dividing wall columns (DWCs) would be the best option for achieving both two tasks at once. Three-dimensional response surface plots of the interactions between N1 and N2. Because of the high cost of refrigeration. N1 and N3. For each run. In addition to improving energy efficiency in the columns. Therefore.doi. The objectives of the optimization were the minimization of the total number of trays (N) and the reboiler duty (Q). the internal vapor flows to the prefractionator were varied to meet the required product purity and recovery. After determining the variables’ preliminary ranges through single-factor testing. 3. are employed. a top dividing wall column is considered here to integrate the depropanizer and the debutanizer for improving energy efficiency and reducing the number of columns. and ε is the error term. F V ) (1) Figure 13. and N2 and N3 are plotted with a parameter of each model on each X and Y axis and reboiler duty saving on the Z axes (Figure 11).24. bottom (N2). The optimum reboiler duty saving corresponds to the number of trays (Figure 10).2. Figure 12. Table 5 lists the factors and levels. and the numbers of trays in the top (N1).org/10. Xi are the uncoded or coded values of the variables. The optimization was constrained by the product purities and recoveries. The main design variables of internal vapor flow to the prefractionator (FV). Top Dividing Wall Column (TDWC). 51. Therefore the maximum allowable 20 trays were employed in the design of the TDWC. βii. 10021−10030 . A Box−Behnken design was employed under the response surface methodology to analyze how the variables interacted and to optimize the system in terms of reboiler duty and the number of trays. The DWC parameters were optimized over 15 simulation runs. and N3. β0 is a constant. including one conventional distillation column and one TDWC system. respectively. 2012. water and refrigeration. the separation train includes the demethanizer with feed split strategy and one TDWC. The generalized second-order 10027 where Y is the predicted response. N2.
in good agreement with the predicted value. showing only a slight degradation of efficiency than Cycle-2. energy-efficient. 51. In particular. respectively (Figure 12). compact. A methane-rich overhead stream is formed. 2012. Eng. bottom. investment and operating costs can be reduced along with the space required for the plant. Operating costs were minimized at a feed split ratio of 15%. natural gas is first precooled using refrigeration from the liquefaction process and then introduced into the demethanizer. condensed. 0. which is then cooled.5 m diameter TDWC could reduce energy consumption by 15. By integrating liquefaction and liquid recovery. CONCLUSIONS Several new. In the proposed NGL recovery process. while the debutanizer can condense the top vapor stream under water cooling. and subcooled during liquefaction.42% and 11. A new.79%. This column can be used to integrate two columns.36% in terms of TAC compared with a conventional column sequence. feed splitting could eliminate the demethanizer reboiler and reduce precooling energy.Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Article Figure 14.doi. respectively. This stream is then used to condense the top vapor stream of the depropanizer. All the optimized proposed cycles showed improved performance compared with the conventional SMR process in terms of specific power.79%. The treated 10028 5. Therefore. 4. Res. The proposed TDWC allows more energy-efficient depropanization and debutanization with a single compact column. A portion of HHK refrigerant is expanded after the vapor−liquid separator to reduce the temperature.89%) was predicted to have coded levels of −0. The simulation results show that the TDWC can save up to 35.8192. Cycle-3 was most suitable for a FLNG plant with its simpler structure. compact NGL recovery process was also proposed for offshore FLNG plants by utilizing the DWC.1021/ie2029283 | Ind. The optimized TDWC system (Figure 13) had a simulated saving of 11.org/10. value by the software. the proposed TDWC can reduce energy consumption (refrigeration energy and reboiler and condenser duty) and investment costs (replacing two columns with one and eliminating a reboiler). INTEGRATION OF LIQUEFACTION AND RECOVERY PROCESSES Integrating liquefaction and recovery processes (Figure 14) could make a plant more efficient and save money. Chem. and feed rectifying sections. particularly the depropanizer requires refrigeration. Using a 1. energy-efficient. and −1 corresponding to the numbers of trays in the top. single mixed refrigerant cycles were proposed for offshore FLNG plants. whose condensers are cooled by different coolants. Table 3 lists the conditions and the energy requirements of the TDWC. The greatest reboiler duty saving (11. The duties of condenser (C3) and the reboiler can be reduced by 21. Integration of NGL recovery and NG liquefaction for FLNG processing. dx. 10021−10030 .09% of refrigeration costs compared with a conventional column sequence.8192. The variables’ natural values can be derived from the coded levels.
(7) Long. ISOPE PACOMS. Multiple Effect and Distributive Separation of Isobutane and Normal Butane. TX. K. and Celectric is the cost of electricity.36 TAC = capital cost × i(1 + i)n + Op (1 + i)n − 1 (9) where i is the fractional interest rate per year and n is the number of years. Jpn. updated bare module cost (BMC) = UF × BC × (MPF + MF − 1) (3) ■ ■ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was supported by a grant from the Gas Plant R&D Center funded by the Ministry of Land. C. CCW is the cost of cooling water. 2012. Asia Pac. W.. Deethanizer/Depropanizer Sequences with Thermal and Thermo-mechanical Coupling and Component Distribution. D. Benefit of Integrating NGL Extraction and LNG Liquefaction Technology. Y. Column Sizing. Chem. W. Tel.S.S. 1989. b. J..35 The investment cost for conventional distillation is the total cost of the column and auxiliary equipment such as reboilers and condensers. NOMENCLATURE C1 = methane C2 = ethane C3 = propane C4 = butane C5+ = gasoline B = bottom product flow (kg/h) D = top product flow (kg/h) DWC = dividing wall column F = Feed flow (kg/h) LPG = liquefied petroleum gas TDWC = top dividing wall column V = vapor where UF is the update factor. The Study on Natural Gas Liquefaction Cycle Development. (13) Lee.. The Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index of 575. J. 7. U. Parrish. J. and S are diameter.acs.33. D. 2005.org. 1997. 2010.. U. N. V. J. 1998. c. 8.051. (5) Manley. R. Cryogen. B. Capital Cost. 5. Korea. J. G. and area. Improvement of the Deethanizing and Depropanizing Steps in NGL Recovery Process Using Dividing Wall Column. Park. Qualls. Y. Ethane Recovery System. UF = present cost index base cost index (4) Subscripts and Superscripts BC is bare cost. Busan.: +82-53-810-2512. Fundamentals of Natural Gas Processing..org/10. (3) Sheffield. D. which is affected by the base cost.ac. for vessels. 2012. D.4 was used here for cost updating.Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research Integrating the liquefaction and recovery processes could reduce investment and refrigeration costs and space. Eng. Transportation and Maritime Affairs (MLTM) of the Korean government. A. Configurations and Methods for Improved NGL Recovery. R. Watkins. 51.. 49. L. Chem. Beauty of Simplicity: Phillips Optimized Cascade LNG Liquefaction Process. 4. U. M.. Eng.571. Y.34 Here. R. 1979. Y. 2012. (12) Naklie. d. (11) Andress. (8) Manley. M. Cha. Pat. Offshore LNG ProductionHow to Make it Happen.140.. Conoco Phillips Co. Op = Csteam + CCW + Crefrigeration + Celectric (8) where Cstream is the cost of the steam. equations. Touch Oil and Gas: London. 2006. Mobil’s Floating LNG Plant. Business Brief ing: LNG Review. Chem. respectively. J. Crefrigeration is the cost of refrigeration. 4. V.339. Australia. J. Pat. Improvement of Natural Gas Liquid Recovery Energy Efficiency through Thermally Coupled Distillation Arrangements.806. (4) Long. Pat.S. S. additional dividing wall costs are considered. Lee. Yang. Cho.504. 2006. AIChE Spring National Meeting. (2) Elliot.S. B.. Operating Cost (Op). Perth. November 14−17. 2004. R. 45.851. Taylor and Francis: Boca Raton. D.. Eng. Eng. Pat. 5th topical conference on Natural Gas Utilization (TI) Session 16c-Gas. May 4−7.. ■ S ASSOCIATED CONTENT * Supporting Information Temperature variation plots for the SMR and proposed cycles. 10029 (1) Kidnay.S. Adv. For the DWC. 2005. U. (6) Mak. 12th International Conference & Exhibition on Liquefied Natural Gas. ■ † Article AUTHOR INFORMATION Corresponding Author ■ E-mail: mynlee@yu.. and values of parameters for costing detail. D.020. D. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http:// pubs. Wilkinson. Lee. L. M.kr.. E.552. 91−98. S.: Houston. ⎛ L ⎞α ⎛ D ⎞β BC = BC0 × ⎜ ⎟ × ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ L0 ⎠ ⎝ D0 ⎠ (5) ■ REFERENCES For the heat exchanger. 10021−10030 . C. is S= Q U ΔT (7) where MPF is the material and pressure factor and MF is the module factor (a typical value). Pat. dx. N. length. J. Total Annual Cost (TAC). A. U. Huang S. Res. Hydrocarbon Gas Processing. (Roger) Chen J. 1998. Guthrie’s modular method was applied. 7. Column Cost Correlations a. (9) Campbell. 80% of the flooding velocity was used. ⎛ S ⎞α BC = BC0 × ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ S0 ⎠ (6) The area of the heat exchanger. 1−10.doi. Notes APPENDIX The authors declare no competing financial interest. Operating velocity is normally 70−90% of the flooding velocity. Column diameter was determined by a flooding condition that fixed the upper limit of vapor velocity. Lee. J. S71−S77.1021/ie2029283 | Ind. D. (10) Montgomery. The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers 9th Pacific/Asia Offshore Mechanics Symposium.673. Further studies are recommended to optimize operating conditions and to combine liquefaction and fractionation.
24th World Gas Conference.. (34) Sinnott. Technol. Shaeiwitz. 825−835. T. M. C. U.. 10021−10030 .Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research (14) Kerbers. Y. 51. 119−124. Kim. Process. M. 2009. J. Eng.A. L. Design and Optimization of Fully Thermally Coupled Distillation Columns: Part 1: Preliminary Design and Optimization Methodology. 2005.. B. J. 2002. V. October. Large Capacity Single Train AP-X Hybrid LNG Process. Lee. Closed Loop Process for Liquefying Natural Gas. Analysis. Y. 49. NJ. CRC Press: New York. Shell Development (Australia) Proprietary Limited (Shell): Australia. M. Petrowski. N. Pat. 1005−1010.1021/ie2029283 | Ind. Bronfenbrenner. 49. Comput. Chem.K. 3. Some New Three Level Designs for the Study of Quantitative Variables. A. Stichlmair... E. 1999. K.: Upper Saddle River. S. E.. I. (30) Lee. (32) Turton. McGraw Hill: New York. 76.. Eng. L. D. J. Thong. S. Cryogenic Engineering. Design of Energy-Efficient Petlyuk Systems. MA. W. Eng. (29) Prelude Floating LNG Project.S. M. P. 1977. Y. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River. J. J.. G. R. Segovia-Hernan ́ dez. Rangaiah. Westerberg. Single Mixed Refrigerant. N. 1811−1814. D. Cryogenic Systems.. C. Eng. 2001.. Lee. Trends and Technologies in LNG Carriers and Offshore LNG Facilities. Prentice Hall Inc. Commun. (25) Poth. I. V. M. Chemical Process Design..1. W. J. Brusis.. (35) Biegler. J. Coulson & Richardson’s Chemical Engineering. K. H. Ing. Des. 47−60.... A. Chemical Engineering Design. Systematic Methods of Chemical Process Design. C. (24) Long. Technometrics 1960. 2. R.. 2008. E. Y. 87. Park. 3057−3066. Res. Chung. Retrofitting Conventional Column Systems to Dividing Wall Columns. M. W.. G. (20) Gaumer. 1973. Article 10030 dx. U.org/10. U. Thermodynamic Design of Methane Liquefaction System Based on Reversed−Brayton Cycle. Liu. 1995. 4. (21) Swenson. F. Alcan ́ tara-Á vila. 2005. Synthesis and Design of Chemical Processes. Bailie. Design and Optimization of a Dividing Wall Column for Debottlenecking of the Acetic Acid Purification Process.. GASTECH. Lee. Houston. H. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann: Oxford. 2012. (26) Amminudin. 37. Controllability Analysis of Alternate Schemes to Complex Column Arrangements with Thermal Coupling for the Separation of Ternary Mixtures. Kwon. T. (33) Premkumar. R. Hernan ́ dez.735.658. M. 2008.763. S.. 2010. Pat. Chem. 2008. J. Trans. Eng. Chem. U. L. Grossmann. Behnken. (17) Flynn. Qatar. 32. (23) Herńandez. R. 23.. (28) Long. 455− 475. Lee. R. A Breakthrough for Floating LNG. R. (19) Chang. S. Smith.. J. Jiḿ enez. A. D. IChemE.. Cryogenics 2009. G. N. 2004. Oxford University Press: New York. Jr. N. Chem. J. Aspen Technology: Burlington. January 2009. P. Argentina.. 79 (Part A). Chem. Cryogenic Mixed Refrigerant Processes. Dividing Wall Column Structure Design using Response Surface Methodology. October 5−9. Minimaler Energiebedarf von Trennwandkolonnen. O. R. J. (15) Barron. L. Towler. T. Chem.S. Eng. M. Cho. I. (16) Roberts..033. Hartnell. J. G. Chem. (36) Smith. 2009. G. Y. C. K... D. Offshore Technology Conference.. (18) Venkatarathnam. Commun. Newton. 1997. S. (31) Aspen HYSYS Thermodynamics COM Interface. P. A. Texas. v7...S. Cabrera-Ruiz. (22) Tamayo-Galvan ́ .. G. Combined Cascade and Multicomponent Refrigeration System and Method. (27) Box. 2012. D. May 5−8. 2003. NJ. Res. S. Whiting. B. H. 701−715.. M. 2009. Y. V. Springer: New York.doi. 226−234. 1985.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.